Thread: Trumpton Board: Hell / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=005658

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
It was inevitable (how has it taken so long?). But, we've definitely reached the point where we need a Hell thread for the new President of the United States.

Just for starters, we have a President who has decided to gag science. He's the EPA to remove facts about climate change, and a total media blackout on the EPA and USDA and a suspension of new work. Obviously he's of the opinion that the American public don't need to know how well their tax-dollars are being spent on world leading science on how we are impacting our environment, what that will mean for our food and water supplies and what we can do about it.

The clock in the town square, never slow, never fast is telling the time. Time to say enough is enough? Before things get so bad that even Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew could put out the fire.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I think we need a board entirely dedicated to the insanity that is the White House today. His anti-science approach is damaging, but will mean that science will have to find other ways to get funding and published.

But it is a dark day for science. And Trump is a low life that pond slime would wipe of its shoes.
 
Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
I think David Tennant needs to rock into DC, find a Trump aide and whisper...

..."don't you think he looks tired?"...
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
I'm beginning to see what the fuckarse admires in Putin.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
There's a lot of side links to stories showing the fight back.

Rogue scientists

[URL= https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/01/24/for-a-few-hours-badlands-national-parks-was-bad-to-the-b one-in-defiance-of-trump/?postshare=2721485301429412&tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.0a77208ce876]Badlands unsilent[/URL]


[URL= https://twitter.com/hashtag/climate?src=hash]Escaping twitter[/URL]

Badlands tweeting
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Don't know what happened there. Sorry.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Well, you could try and again, better, and remember that there's a preview post button from which you can check the operability of your links...
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
I have a friend from law school who works for the National Parks Service's renewable energy program. No dismissal slip yet, but at the rate we are going, I think she has concluded that it may be coming any day. She was particularly sensitive when his people asked for the list of people who had worked on climate change issues, as she would have been on that list.

I appreciated whoever went rogue at the Badlands. I suspect they didn't have 199K twitter followers at the beginning of business on the 24th- almost Yellowstone or Yosemite numbers there.

The one thing I keep telling myself is that the first week is going to be a tsunami, and the blows should slow down some time next month.
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
We had our conservative government slash funding and jobs from our peak scientific organisation. They only invented WiFi so not as if they do anthing useful.


Did George W do similar things?

Perhaps at a lesser level, but I seem to recall [could be wrong], he took a stick to certain agencies.

What are Trump and others actually so afraid of? Is it simply "climate change" that makes science overall suspicious, and environmentalism particular terrible? Would they prefer research in the hands of private enterprise only? I struggle to get in the mindset.

The media blackout is shocking, but not unexpected. But such things seem to work. Sorry to take it back here, it's all I know, but we are no longer told about "on water" matters [refugees arriving by boat or towed back to Indonesia] so "the problem doesn't exist".
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
No more "pussy grabber" to refer to this quarrelsome, disordered liar. It insults both cats and genitalia.

No president turnip's nickname should be president hairball, because he's always barfing hairballs full of lying crap, bile and mucous up, and that thing on his head, what is it? Yes, it is a hairball.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
Robert Burns wrote a familiar poem that could have been addressed to Donald Fart. The last verse goes:

O wad some Power the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
It wad frae mony a blunder free us,
An' foolish notion:


He got close: it was addressed, as the title says, "To a louse".
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
[...] What are Trump and others actually so afraid of? [...] I struggle to get in the mindset.

Now that is one excellent observation! What is the fear that all this is based on? Thanks for this.
 
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :
 
"Give him a chance, he's the president" they said.
"He doesn't mean it. He'll grow to the office" they said.
"You lost, get over it" they said.
"You have to take him seriously, not literally" they said.
"It's a victory for life, and end to Roe" they said.

Fuck.

You.

This week has been a real "where the fuck do we even start?" at school, and it's only Wednesday. Maybe its' because I have so many friends who are artists, scientists, humanities scholars, public defenders, educators, and general do-gooders, but it's been hard to find someone who doesn't feel their jobs and livelihoods are threatened by Cheetohitler's edicts.

Like, the guy comes to power promising to restore jobs, and first thing he does is start cutting 'em. Figure that one out.

So, here's the one that's currently bugging me: threats to the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division. The CRD investigates and prosecutes civil rights cases on behalf of the United States. This includes, among other things, allegations of vote suppression and irregularities.

You know. Actual, state-sponsored vote manipulation. We're having this YUUUUUUGE investigation into MILLIONS voting ILLEGALLY, and we're strangling the office in charge of investigating Very Serious voting issues.

Ditto the Office on Violence Against Women. Axed.

Ditto the Environment and Natural Resources Division. Up in smoke.

Ditto the agencies that fund 40% of legal aid services here in South Texas, helping the working class find jobs, dignity, and justice. Oh, right, they're not the all-important white working class. Screw them. Deport those drug dealers and rapists back to Mexico! Or El Salvador, wherever that is.

I'd like to say that I'm not going to have to worry about running out of work when I get out of school, the way Cheetohitler's going—they'll be enough civil rights abuses to go around—but I'm more than a little worried about there still being a functioning independent court system left to sue the bastards in.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Oh, and: Time to read 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' again, isn't it...
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Oh, and: Time to read 'Nineteen Eighty-Four' again, isn't it...

It's become a bestseller again here in the States. Can't imagine why.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Various:

--Ditto the first part of Ariston's recent post, and much of the rest of it.

--Re 1984: Hopefully, things won't turn out like Starhawk's The Fifth Sacred Thing, or The Handmaid's Tale. (Note: I've only read Starhawk's book, but heard a lot about the others.)
[Paranoid]

--Re what they (Trump et al) are scared of:
Not being able to get wildly richer. They make money from the things that are currently causing/worsening climate change. Afraid of not being in power. Trump probably sees himself as the "strong man" type of leader, given his admiration for Putin and historical examples.

I confess my somewhat rusty fundamentalist end-time feelers are a bit activated, and wondering if someone is trying to kick-start the Book of Revelation. Some people identify Gog and Magog as Russia and China...Not saying it's true, just that the thought occurred.

Does anyone happen to know if Dr. Norman Vincent Peale (whose church little Donald attended) believed in end-times prophecies? I can try to verify that later. I'd always thought of him in terms of his "power of positive thinking". But, during the campaign, there was a clip where he was fiery and nasty.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
We don't need the Revelation to St.John to tell us that the climate change deniers are going to get us all killed if the North Koreans don't do it first.
 
Posted by MaryLouise (# 18697) on :
 
I took George Orwell's 1984 down from the bookshelf this weekend but it is too prescient and chilling to read right now.

This, especially:

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.”
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
[...] What are Trump and others actually so afraid of? [...] I struggle to get in the mindset.

Now that is one excellent observation! What is the fear that all this is based on? Thanks for this.
I suspect, from some recent stuff I have heard (which may or may not be true), it is because he has investments in oil and gas companies. So he wants them to have a free reign, and not be bothered by pesky "you are destroying the world and going to kill us all" people.

Clearly he doesn't care about the next generation. Another reason I feel really sorry for his son.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
This whole "America first" thing is going to have wider impacts on the UN agencies and other countries. Quite what May is going to come away with except a white piece of paper to wave as she gets off the plane, I have no idea.

If you haven't seen it this Bad Lipreading video of the inauguration might cheer you up a bit.
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
Or this one from the Dutch: America first... the Netherlands second

We laugh that we may not weep. [Votive]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Plans are forming for a March for Science. (Hello Giggles)
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Well, you could try and again, better, and remember that there's a preview post button from which you can check the operability of your links...

I had a phone call I had to deal with during that post that stopped me seeing it at once, and when I did see it, I found the links worked, despite the oddity with the display. But I went through the process correctly, as far as I could see. All of them were done the same way.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Elsewhere, someone has seized on the sales of "1984" as to do with Orwell's attack on the liberal elites and political correctness being recognised by the Trumpistas.

This is an otherwise intelligent person with a background in proper laboratory based science.

[brick wall]
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
While we're sharing references in literature that remind us of these interesting present times, I shared W H Auden's 'Epitaph of a Tyrant' on facebook a few days ago, as something that kept going through my head, as I was watching the inauguration.

Here's the full text but the lines that kept banging about my brain-case were these:

When he laughed, respectable Senators burst with laughter,
And when he cried the little children died in the streets.


I can almost believe that Trump would not be too worried if these words could literally be applied to his term in office.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
{Tangent}

Penny--

Tried to PM this to you, but your mailbox is full.

I know the problem with the first link. There's a space and a % in it, IIRC, and the UBB software can't handle those.

Go to http://www.tinyurl.com . Fill in the blanks, and it will give you an alias URL. Either it will assign it, or you can give it whatever name you like. I usually do the latter, and make it clear that it's related to the topic. E.g., "WikiAboutUBB".

I didn't see a problem in the 2nd link, but tinyurl should take care of that, too.

Good luck! Oh, and the first couple of times you use it, paste the new URL in on the UBB thread in Styx *first*, so you can see what it looks like.
 
Posted by Hiro's Leap (# 12470) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Elsewhere, someone has seized on the sales of "1984" as to do with Orwell's attack on the liberal elites and political correctness being recognised by the Trumpistas.

This is an otherwise intelligent person with a background in proper laboratory based science.

[brick wall]

They might not be wrong. Conservatives love Orwell - sure, he was a hard-line socialist, but he called out his own team for cooing over totalitarian Communist regimes, and he made himself pretty unpopular for it.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Elsewhere, someone has seized on the sales of "1984" as to do with Orwell's attack on the liberal elites and political correctness being recognised by the Trumpistas.

This is an otherwise intelligent person with a background in proper laboratory based science.

[brick wall]

They might not be wrong. Conservatives love Orwell - sure, he was a hard-line socialist, but he called out his own team for cooing over totalitarian Communist regimes, and he made himself pretty unpopular for it.
So the theory is that Trump supporters are now all rushing to read a 70-year-old book by a British anti-fascist author? Makes perfect sense, except for three things: the foreigner, the anti-fascism, and the reading.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is a Washington Post link, but it is important. The concept discussed is the dead cat.
How do you change the discussion at the vestry meeting? Throw a dead cat onto the table, and everybody forgets what you were originally talking about. Much of this foofaraw has not (and may never be) turned into action. The PG in Chief can sign orders, but the funding for walls and deportations has to be voted on by Congress, which holds the purse strings.
But while we are distracted by the showy reality-TV stuff, the real damage is being done. Gagging scientists, gutting the safety net.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
I would like to point out that our former prime minister, Stephen Harper (Trump-Lite) tried to gag the government scientific community and enacted many Muslim fearing laws. Many of these laws were overturned by our Supreme Court, and the first thing, almost, that the current government did was to ungag the scientific community.

There are some laws that have remained in place from the previous government which I see as the fact that the current rot poisons life for all. Trumpton is in for a rough ride (as are we)
 
Posted by Hiro's Leap (# 12470) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
So the theory is that Trump supporters are now all rushing to read a 70-year-old book by a British anti-fascist author? Makes perfect sense, except for three things: the foreigner, the anti-fascism, and the reading.

I've come across loads of conservative posters who reference 1984. It isn't anti-fascist, it's anti-totalitarian, and many on the right identify the left-wing as authoritarians with an inglorious history of supporting totalitarian regimes.

Have you read the original preface to Animal Farm? Orwell's criticisms of the left precisely mirror the right's at the moment. For instance...

quote:
At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.
At this moment what is demanded by the prevailing orthodoxy is an uncritical admiration of Soviet Russia. Everyone knows this, nearly everyone acts on it. Any serious criticism of the Soviet régime, any disclosure of facts which the Soviet government would prefer to keep hidden, is next door to unprintable.
[...]
The servility with which the greater part of the English intelligentsia have swallowed and repeated Russian propaganda from 1941 onwards would be quite astounding if it were not that they have behaved similarly on several earlier occasions.
[..]
Stalin is sacrosanct and certain aspects of his policy must not be seriously discussed.
[...]
You could, indeed, publish anti-Russian books, but to do so was to make sure of being ignored or misrepresented by nearly me whole of the highbrow press. Both publicly and privately you were warned that it was ‘not done’. What you said might possibly be true, but it was ‘inopportune’

Replace 'not done' with 'problematic' and this looks very much like the right's complaints about political correctness. You might not agree, but it's not a stretch to see why they like Orwell.

[ 26. January 2017, 14:20: Message edited by: Hiro's Leap ]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Makes perfect sense, except for three things: the foreigner, the anti-fascism, and the reading.

You've forgotten something important. There are always alternatives

Who knows where Orwell was born? All the birth records could have been faked, and he was American. Believing all the evidence about where someone was born ... that's just not the way right thinking people do things.

Animal Farm was "clearly anti-Communist", therefore Orwell was an anti-Communist author. So, that's OK then.

Animal Farm was an animated movie. Someone could produce a picture story version of 1984 for the American public.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Tangent/
GK, thanks, mail now cleared out.
Will copy your post somewhere useful.
 
Posted by irish_lord99 (# 16250) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:


Did George W do similar things?

Perhaps at a lesser level, but I seem to recall [could be wrong], he took a stick to certain agencies.


Never thought I'd say it, but this new guy makes W. look fuckin' awesome.

All presidents slash funding one way or another. I recall the Clinton military cuts, for example.

Of course, each in turn diverted funding elsewhere... Iraq war, Affordable Care Act, etc.

Trumps diversions of funding seem concerned with kicking all the brown people out of the country and not letting others in.

What really worries me is all the people who instigated and profited off of the destruction of the American middle class, who seem to have found a place in his cabinet.

Also, it's going to be interesting to hear all of these conservatives explain the explosion of the national debt in four years.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hiro's Leap:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
So the theory is that Trump supporters are now all rushing to read a 70-year-old book by a British anti-fascist author? Makes perfect sense, except for three things: the foreigner, the anti-fascism, and the reading.

I've come across loads of conservative posters who reference 1984. It isn't anti-fascist, it's anti-totalitarian, and many on the right identify the left-wing as authoritarians with an inglorious history of supporting totalitarian regimes.

Have you read the original preface to Animal Farm? Orwell's criticisms of the left precisely mirror the right's at the moment. For instance...

quote:
At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.
At this moment what is demanded by the prevailing orthodoxy is an uncritical admiration of Soviet Russia. Everyone knows this, nearly everyone acts on it. Any serious criticism of the Soviet régime, any disclosure of facts which the Soviet government would prefer to keep hidden, is next door to unprintable.
[...]
The servility with which the greater part of the English intelligentsia have swallowed and repeated Russian propaganda from 1941 onwards would be quite astounding if it were not that they have behaved similarly on several earlier occasions.
[..]
Stalin is sacrosanct and certain aspects of his policy must not be seriously discussed.
[...]
You could, indeed, publish anti-Russian books, but to do so was to make sure of being ignored or misrepresented by nearly me whole of the highbrow press. Both publicly and privately you were warned that it was ‘not done’. What you said might possibly be true, but it was ‘inopportune’

Replace 'not done' with 'problematic' and this looks very much like the right's complaints about political correctness. You might not agree, but it's not a stretch to see why they like Orwell.

Yeah, but I doubt me an that be particular to the Left. It's always more obvious where it's our opinions that are frowned upon, so naturally those on the Right will see it in the Left and "PC", but you will find the same issues with, for example, Being an atheist in some parts of the US, Being a vegetarian , or, indeed, from personal experience in the Hunt Sabs, not being a vegetarian.

Folk tend to be blind to the stigmatisation of views as unacceptable, because, well, they're unacceptable.
 
Posted by Hiro's Leap (# 12470) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yeah, but I doubt me an that be particular to the Left. It's always more obvious where it's our opinions that are frowned upon, so naturally those on the Right will see it in the Left and "PC"

Hey Karl,

I'm not trying to get into a debate about whether the right's justified or not, just pointing out reasons why they like Orwell.

To be fair, Penny S and Dave W are probably right: a sudden surge in sales at this point is more likely to be from Democrats. But Penny's friend(?) claiming that conservatives are buying the book IME isn't as insane as it might sound.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
I know this is Hell, but I wasn't trying to start an argument either. I was observing an interesting phenomenon.

Most of my lefty friends think that the BBC is biased towards the Tories. The Daily Heil on the other hand complains it's full of lefties and is biased towards the Left generally.

I conclude from this it's probably pretty balanced and unbiased in reality [Biased]

Point is we more easily see when we think we're being silenced. Or even interpret mere disagreement as censure. I've had people tell me they "aren't allowed" to say what they think, but what they mean is that if they say racist things, people point out that those things are racist.

I suspect Orwell's target was subtly different - people knowing (or suspecting) what Stalin's USSR was getting like, but being unwilling to admit it, and getting defensive if anyone else did, as it threatened the self-deception.

[ 26. January 2017, 15:51: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
Also, it's going to be interesting to hear all of these conservatives explain the explosion of the national debt in four years.

Same as they always do, they'll blame someone else.

There is a well established pattern, at least over the last few decades.

Republican President = massive increase in national debt and increase in abortion rates.

Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase) and decrease in abortion rates.

And, people still seem to buy the whole argument that the Republicans are the party for a strong economy, small government and pro-life. People are dumb.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I know this is Hell, but I wasn't trying to start an argument either. I was observing an interesting phenomenon.

Most of my lefty friends think that the BBC is biased towards the Tories. The Daily Heil on the other hand complains it's full of lefties and is biased towards the Left generally.

I conclude from this it's probably pretty balanced and unbiased in reality [Biased]

Or one might conclude that they spend a lot of effort to ensure that their programmes are quote unquote "balanced" even if this means bringing out Nigel Cabbage at every opportunity.

quote:
Point is we more easily see when we think we're being silenced. Or even interpret mere disagreement as censure. I've had people tell me they "aren't allowed" to say what they think, but what they mean is that if they say racist things, people point out that those things are racist.
Things are a lot more complicated than that in the media. There is a lot more going on than the overtly racist stuff.

quote:
I suspect Orwell's target was subtly different - people knowing (or suspecting) what Stalin's USSR was getting like, but being unwilling to admit it, and getting defensive if anyone else did, as it threatened the self-deception.
Orwell was against the political extremes in both directions. Interestingly, it has taken a political escalation of one extreme to realise that the other extends all the way around the back to meet them. There is very little difference today between the neo-Nazis and the Stalinists.
 
Posted by Jamat (# 11621) on :
 
Another side to it
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Some Christians.

The majority see more than one issue, and many feel that Trump's policies spell death for many.

Do read those other links. With an open mind.

Or search yourself.

The effects of rising sealevels, already happening, on low lying regions such as Bangladesh.

The effect of the abandonment of the Affordable Care Act on people who were receiving treatment they can no longer afford.

The effect of withdrawal of funding from NGOs serving women in third world countries, with special attention to female genital mutilation, fistula, prolapse, pregnancy in girls with hips not yet mature enough to bear babies, tropical diseases, HIV transmitted by partners who refuse to use condoms...

The effect of US evangelists urging African countries to introduce capital punishment for gays.

And, the biggie, the effects of abandoning work to limit climate change, which could wipe out life as we know it on this planet, which is the only one we have been given. Not just us, but much of the other life.

Why do we go on?

We aren't just concerned about his misogyny, his racism, his abuse of the disabled, the bereaved, anyone he sees as losers, his groping and leching, and sheer failure to look anything like someone who exhibits the gifts of the Spirit, his sheer and complete nastiness. He could be all that, without threatening everyone's lives, if he applied his intelligence, such as it is, to more than ticking the only box that that narrow group of some Christians are concerned with.

[ 26. January 2017, 18:04: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Ah! Now I understand. To save the unborn, they are willing to send every other institution, the nation itself, to the wall. Good to know!

In the meantime Crooked Don was on TV last night and was startlingly egotistical. Even more than before.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Funny, when Jesus defined what saved the saved, he never mentioned foetuses. Or gays. Or anything to do with sex at all.

Matthew 25:31-46
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Another side to it

That's not another side. That's fucking delusional. I don't know any other way to put it. If US Christians genuinely felt that
quote:
Obama wants to force Christian churches and schools to accept the most radical and most recent version of gender ideology
then they so lack the education and appreciation of the separation of church and state that I'd be frankly surprised if they could find their arse with both hands.
quote:
Can you understand how terrified mothers and fathers are at the prospect that those in power want to actively prevent them from passing their beliefs on to their own children?
I'm sure Clinton was coming for their guns and setting up concentration camps too.
quote:
Christian bakers are under attack. Christian photographers. Christian pastors. Real people are losing real businesses that they had labored for years to build.
Because actual people decided they didn't want to do business with a bigot? Suck it up, snowflake.

To someone who's desperate to cling on to their privilege, giving equal rights to others looks like losing. And that's pretty much where we are. It's not about a Christian's rights. It's about denying other people theirs.

Let's just build a northern wall, and we can quietly drop in a complete embargo on sea and air travel. Sorry for all you normal USAns, but once you broadcast the all clear, we can get things moving again.
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Obama wants to force Christian churches and schools to accept the most radical and most recent version of gender ideology
then they so lack the education and appreciation of the separation of church and state that I'd be frankly surprised if they could find their arse with both hands.

Hmm. What about the "and schools" in there?

Here is an article describing the application of Title IX to a Catholic school because a different Catholic school received federal subsidies for providing lunches to poor kids.

The Obama administration stated that Title IX included treating trans kids exactly like the gender they said they were (so trans girls must be allowed to change in the girls locker room, and so on). This may have been a legal overreach, but it was the policy of his government.

Surely I have to interpret that as saying that the government can force a Catholic school to treat a trans girl as a girl, and that the Catholic school is not allowed to hold the opinion that the trans girl is really a boy?
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
I'm sorry. I didn't realise that "school" meant on one hand "public school run by Christian charity with federal funds" and "place where we can trample on the Church/State divide" on the other.

As you were.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Another side to it

"All us poor Christians being persecuted, because we are not allowed to force our beliefs on others. Oh poor us, how will we cope."

Kindly stick this right up you fat and privileged arsehole. It makes me ashamed to call myself Christian.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
O deep joy. Doomsday is now a little nearer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-38760792

IJ
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jamat:
Another side to it

Being forced into treating people with equality - poor soulz
[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I'm sorry. I didn't realise that "school" meant on one hand "public school run by Christian charity with federal funds" and "place where we can trample on the Church/State divide" on the other.

The point was that the acceptance of a small federal subsidy for a lunch programme in a different school in the diocese was sufficient to contaminate the funding for all schools in the diocese and make them subject to title IX.

It's not entirely obvious to me that that would be true, or that there should be any church/state divide trampling going on if the government provides lunches for poor kids in private schools.

If the government handed each poor child a packed lunch as he left his home in the morning, you wouldn't be complaining that it violated the church/state divide if some of those lunches were consumed in private church schools. But achieving the same result in a more efficient manner by handing out the food in schools is a violation. I don't think that needs to be true.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
I'm not the one insisting on the church/state divide. Here, we have a head of state who's also head of the church.

I think you'll find it was the founding fathers of the USA, almost either Christian or Deist to a man, who insisted on it.

So either you're a wholly private school, or you're not. There's no halfway house, and that's how the law's being interpreted.

To then flip out at what appears to be a perfectly predictable consequence strikes me as absurd. If Catholics don't want their kids getting trans cooties, then they'll have to pony up for the lunches themselves.
 
Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I'm sorry. I didn't realise that "school" meant on one hand "public school run by Christian charity with federal funds" and "place where we can trample on the Church/State divide" on the other.

The point was that the acceptance of a small federal subsidy for a lunch programme in a different school in the diocese was sufficient to contaminate the funding for all schools in the diocese and make them subject to title IX.

It's not entirely obvious to me that that would be true, or that there should be any church/state divide trampling going on if the government provides lunches for poor kids in private schools.

If the government handed each poor child a packed lunch as he left his home in the morning, you wouldn't be complaining that it violated the church/state divide if some of those lunches were consumed in private church schools. But achieving the same result in a more efficient manner by handing out the food in schools is a violation. I don't think that needs to be true.

This is really pretty simple - if a school district (or in this case, a Catholic diocese acting as their own school district) takes federal funding, it has to follow the rules that come with it. Full stop. Don't like the rules? Don't take the money.
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:

So either you're a wholly private school, or you're not. There's no halfway house, and that's how the law's being interpreted.

Let's suppose a government provided free immunizations to children as a public health measure. An efficient way to do that would be to send vaccines to places where lots of children are assembled, such as schools.

If a government provides vaccines to private school pupils, does that stop the school from being private? I'd argue that of course it doesn't. You, it seems, would insist that the private school pony up for its own vaccines.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
The conservative poster I referred to is only a friend in the sense that I shoulld view everyone as such. I would trust him on anything scientific without ethical aspects.

Meanwhile, I am following a recommendation from the presenter on LBC (a phone in radio station) and downloading Sinclair Lewis' book "It Can't Happen Here" from the 30s, because it now has.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
No, because the government isn't giving money to the school so they can buy their own vaccines? And on the off-chance not vaccinate the trans or gay kids?

I don't make the rules. I don't even get to say whether or not I think the rules are stupid. I just get to say "this is what the rules say, and that's not in dispute".

If American Christians want Trump wants to ride roughshod over the separation of church and state, then the unforeseen circumstances will be both tragic and hilarious in turn.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
I'm with LC on this one. We are talking about humanitarian action for vulnerable children here, and it should be made available to them regardless of the context in which they are being schooled. I think that Obama's administration was being heavy-handed, and there were advocates of this policy who were prepared to use the availability of funding to bring schools into line with their New, Enlightened Thinking, despite following rules that would have been perfectly acceptable just a few years earlier. Besides, the discussion on gender-identity practices relating to transgender persons is far from over.

However, this is all small fry compared with the challenges we are facing now.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Obama was being heavy-handed? No comment on the officially-sanctioned discrimination against trans kids in school?

[Disappointed]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase)...

During Bill Clinton's time in office, the US national debt was paid off.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Obama was being heavy-handed? No comment on the officially-sanctioned discrimination against trans kids in school?

[Disappointed]

If a school had decided to let transsexual children use whatever toilet they felt like just 5 - 10 years ago, it may well have faced prosecution. Suddenly, if they don't change their policy to suit the whims of government social welfare departments, they are somehow morally abhorrent.

Just because someone feels like they are of different gender than they physically are, doesn't necessarily make them that in the perception of society around them, and their views shouldn't the only ones that matter. I am sure that you will view me dreadfully intolerant for saying that, but I do ask you to at least tolerate the perspective of the school and consider their reasons for resistance.

But this thread is really dedicated to DT who is in a league of his own, so I don't really want to continue this tangent.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase)...

During Bill Clinton's time in office, the US national debt was paid off.
I don't think it was paid off, but it was substantially reduced in terms of a percentage of GDP thanks to a fiscal surplus and strong economic growth.
 
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Democrat President = reduction in national debt (or, much slower increase)...

During Bill Clinton's time in office, the US national debt was paid off.
Well, it did help that the military was down-sized from Cold War levels during his tenure. However he didn't use the windfall to start a bunch of expensive programs, but instead used it to pay down the debt, which is to his credit.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Obama was being heavy-handed? No comment on the officially-sanctioned discrimination against trans kids in school?

[Disappointed]

If a school had decided to let transsexual children use whatever toilet they felt like just 5 - 10 years ago, it may well have faced prosecution. Suddenly, if they don't change their policy to suit the whims of government social welfare departments, they are somehow morally abhorrent.

Just because someone feels like they are of different gender than they physically are, doesn't necessarily make them that in the perception of society around them, and their views shouldn't the only ones that matter.

Yes they fucking should be. That's the whole problem there - religious bigots thinking they know best and should be able to impose their views.

[ 26. January 2017, 22:16: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
A 13 year old asked me today what country trump will declare war on. I don't know which one. Is he going to start a war.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Probably. With an inadvertent tweet, a heedless trade war (which he started today, with Mexico), or some other idiocy that could have been avoided by a child of ten. Pray, now, that it doesn't involve nukes. You don't want the entire globe to be drawn into our disasters.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
If we're running a sweepstake, I'm putting my money down for a bit in internal repression first.

It'll either be Chicago (I think that's right, unless I'm confusing it with Detroit) with its high murder rate, or the oil pipeline protesters. Marshal law imposed, paramilitary law enforcement, curfews, ID laws, stuff like that.

Who knows, he may even go after people's guns, but it'll be okay because it'll be red, brown and black people's guns.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Makes perfect sense, except for three things: the foreigner, the anti-fascism, and the reading.

You've forgotten something important. There are always alternatives

Who knows where Orwell was born? All the birth records could have been faked, and he was American. Believing all the evidence about where someone was born ... that's just not the way right thinking people do things.

Animal Farm was "clearly anti-Communist", therefore Orwell was an anti-Communist author. So, that's OK then.

Animal Farm was an animated movie. Someone could produce a picture story version of 1984 for the American public.

Oh for fucks sake. I'm quite confident Trump has not inspired his followers to read a book.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If we're running a sweepstake, I'm putting my money down for a bit in internal repression first.

It'll either be Chicago (I think that's right, unless I'm confusing it with Detroit) with its high murder rate, or the oil pipeline protesters. Marshal law imposed, paramilitary law enforcement, curfews, ID laws, stuff like that.

Who knows, he may even go after people's guns, but it'll be okay because it'll be red, brown and black people's guns.

I'm guessing that you mean martial law. Hell of a difference.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Just now in the POST I see that Dishonest Don is calling for the internet to be shut down. Terrorists, you know.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Brenda--

quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Probably. With an inadvertent tweet, a heedless trade war (which he started today, with Mexico), or some other idiocy that could have been avoided by a child of ten. Pray, now, that it doesn't involve nukes. You don't want the entire globe to be drawn into our disasters.

Wednesday night's "Nightline", on ABC, had an interview with him. Good interview. IMHO, the reporter showed great restraint in the way he handled T. He asked important questions, but he didn't needle him.

Anyway, when they were walking through the White House, the reporter asked if there was anything about the job that was keeping him up at night. The nuclear codes? "No," Trump said, I know I'd do the right thing." (close to being a quote) But he's worried about terrorism.

I'm not sure I want to know what he thinks would be the right thing to do about using nukes...
[Paranoid]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Oh for fucks sake. I'm quite confident Trump has not inspired his followers to read a book.

All I know is that sales of 1984 have increased. That doesn't mean the people buying it will actually read it. It can join the small selection of books his followers have on their book shelf, unread, that they say they know what it says and how it supports their political views. Like The Bible.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yes they fucking should be. That's the whole problem there - religious bigots thinking they know best and should be able to impose their views.

Fine. But bigotry can work both ways, that's always good to remember.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
If we're running a sweepstake, I'm putting my money down for a bit in internal repression first.

It'll either be Chicago (I think that's right, unless I'm confusing it with Detroit) with its high murder rate, or the oil pipeline protesters. Marshal law imposed, paramilitary law enforcement, curfews, ID laws, stuff like that.

Who knows, he may even go after people's guns, but it'll be okay because it'll be red, brown and black people's guns.

I'm guessing that you mean martial law. Hell of a difference.
Evil me thinks I can just go back and edit my post so that what you say now makes no sense.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Probably. With an inadvertent tweet, a heedless trade war (which he started today, with Mexico), or some other idiocy that could have been avoided by a child of ten. Pray, now, that it doesn't involve nukes. You don't want the entire globe to be drawn into our disasters.

China I reckon.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Shut down the internet? Who will then read his great thoughts?
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Yes they fucking should be. That's the whole problem there - religious bigots thinking they know best and should be able to impose their views.

Fine. But bigotry can work both ways, that's always good to remember.
The asymmetry between "I am transgender, please treat me as the gender I see myself" and "No you're not. You're wrong." is amply illustrated by the pronouns in use.

It's like the tattoo thread in Purgatory - it's not harming anyone, it's none of your fucking business.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Just now in the POST I see that Dishonest Don is calling for the internet to be shut down. Terrorists, you know.

All except his own Twitter feed?
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I don't make the rules. I don't even get to say whether or not I think the rules are stupid. I just get to say "this is what the rules say, and that's not in dispute".

If American Christians want Trump wants to ride roughshod over the separation of church and state, then the unforeseen circumstances will be both tragic and hilarious in turn.

If having rules that mean religious schools have to do what the federal government says in order to get funding isn't a violation of the separation of church and state then I can't see how not having those rules would count as such.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
I can't get my head around this.

Imagine a Muslim school which has some rule about wearing particular clothing. Imagine a federal edit regulating the wearing those clothes. Is that interference from the state in the religious school?

If yes, then that seems to be saying that church and state are not seperated, that the state can actually tell religious groups that their profession of faith is not acceptable.

If no, that opens the door to religious schools which operate in ways that the federal authorities think is not acceptable.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
it's not harming anyone

Well, that's the question isn't it? Women-only areas (mostly, but not exclusively, toilets) exist to protect women. ISTM that that can only be achieved if there is actually an independent definition of "man" and "woman" (which would include independent confirmation that someone has changed from one to the other if appropriate), otherwise any man who wanted to get in could do so simply by claiming to identify as female.

I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:


I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.

On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common. They are entirely private so they on the gender of the user, reversing the usual practice.

Maybe this practice could be the way to proceed in areas where people may be vulnerable and uncomfortable.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.

But, is anyone (in the case of schools) actually saying it's simply relying on what the person says? If a pupil (or, indeed a teacher) identifies as transgender this will be supported by various professional assessments by psychologists and other experts. And, there's no reason why someone coming to that school identifying as transgender and wishing to use the toilet/changing rooms of the gender they identify with couldn't produce that evidence.

The issue in other situations could be very different. As a general principle someone who has transitioned from male to female should use the ladies (and, vice versa). But, I wouldn't expect them to need to produce all the professional assessments to go to a public toilet in a bar or airport (as examples). Which does open up scope for a bloke dressing up as a woman to get a cheap thrill, or worse. The question, as is so often the case, is one of whether to violate human rights (to take a pee where you're most comfortable) to protect against a low risk of someone being harmed (by a predatory male in the ladies toilets).
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
it's not harming anyone

Well, that's the question isn't it? Women-only areas (mostly, but not exclusively, toilets) exist to protect women. ISTM that that can only be achieved if there is actually an independent definition of "man" and "woman" (which would include independent confirmation that someone has changed from one to the other if appropriate), otherwise any man who wanted to get in could do so simply by claiming to identify as female.

I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.

There was a missing 'if'. My point is it's not for other people to dictate to you your gender identity.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:


I'm not saying that people swapping genders is wrong or shouldn't be allowed, but I am saying that when considering who should have access to gender-specific areas such as toilets there needs to be a way to distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. Simply relying on what the person says cannot possibly do that.

On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common. They are entirely private so they on the gender of the user, reversing the usual practice.

Maybe this practice could be the way to proceed in areas where people may be vulnerable and uncomfortable.

They are also becoming quite common in the UK. Just before Christmas I was in Glasgow for a meeting, and decided to go to the library to do a couple of hours work (rather than drive back here, maybe get half an hour in, before leaving again). As I was leaving headed for the door which had the usual lady and gentleman sign on it expecting it to open on an anteroom or corridor with at least two doors, one ladies and one gents, only to find myself in a large room facing a row of cubicles. I caught sight of some girls to my right, turned to my left thinking "shit, how did I get that wrong?" and hoping to leave quickly before being spotted - then saw boys to my left and realised where I was. Interestingly, there was a definite invisible line in the floor at the door and all the men were on one side, all the women on the other - because none of us wants to do something that will potentially make others uncomfortable if there is an option to do otherwise.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common. They are entirely private so they on the gender of the user, reversing the usual practice.

Maybe this practice could be the way to proceed in areas where people may be vulnerable and uncomfortable.

Don't even need to go that far - several British museums have toilet cubicals off a central lobby. No specific gender needs to be signalled to use specific cubicals.

I appreciate that there may need to be changes to the layout of the standard arrangement, but you'd think it wasn't really beyond the wit of man (err, mankind) to work out a way to do it.

If nothing else, such things may end up reducing the queues in the ladies whilst the mens cubicals are left unused.

[ 27. January 2017, 10:50: Message edited by: mr cheesy ]
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
Shut down the internet? Who will then read his great thoughts?

I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now that

(a) America doesn't own the internet
(b) It's impossible
(c) See (a)
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I'm sure someone will have pointed out by now that

(a) America doesn't own the internet
(b) It's impossible
(c) See (a)

Actually given the scary amount of power held by a tiny number of men, most of which are located in the USA (for example ICANN), it would be scarily easy for a dictator in the White House to bring down the whole thing and scarily difficult for the rest of the infrastructure to reboot elsewhere.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
Or for another Amazon Web Services. Imagine Trump deciding somehow to regulate Amazon, and you've potentially lost a massive amount of the internet, because huge numbers of web services actually run on Amazon services.

I don't think it is going to happen, but people who say it isn't possible don't know what they're talking about.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common.

Yes, unisex toilets would also solve the problem.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
The whole point of the internet is that it's a distributed network. Yes, there are bottlenecks, but if you honestly believe that Trump can shut down the global internet (USA, yes - China? Hell no) I have a bridge you might be interested in.

ISPs aren't even required to register their presence in the US. The US gave up their stake in ICANN in 2014. There's even such a thing as satellite internet now.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The whole point of the internet is that it's a distributed network. Yes, there are bottlenecks, but if you honestly believe that Trump can shut down the global internet (USA, yes - China? Hell no) I have a bridge you might be interested in.

Facts are facts. ICANN is located in the USA and, until recently, was stewarded by the US government.

If one was able to disable ICANN's functions, one might not be able to disable the whole internet but would make it incredibly difficult to find anything.

Yes, the infrastructure could be rebuilt, I'm not saying it is irreversible. But it isn't impossible for a US president to have an enormous impact on the way that the internet works.

quote:
ISPs aren't even required to register their presence in the US. The US gave up their stake in ICANN in 2014. There's even such a thing as satellite internet now.
Nope, it was in October 2016. There are 14 keyholders at ICANN of which 7 have to be present several times a year to sign the root of the entire internet.

In the USA.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
Facts are facts.

Not any more.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The whole point of the internet is that it's a distributed network. Yes, there are bottlenecks, but if you honestly believe that Trump can shut down the global internet (USA, yes - China? Hell no) I have a bridge you might be interested in.

Facts are facts. ICANN is located in the USA and, until recently, was stewarded by the US government.

If one was able to disable ICANN's functions, one might not be able to disable the whole internet but would make it incredibly difficult to find anything.

Yes, the infrastructure could be rebuilt, I'm not saying it is irreversible. But it isn't impossible for a US president to have an enormous impact on the way that the internet works.

quote:
ISPs aren't even required to register their presence in the US. The US gave up their stake in ICANN in 2014. There's even such a thing as satellite internet now.
Nope, it was in October 2016. There are 14 keyholders at ICANN of which 7 have to be present several times a year to sign the root of the entire internet.

In the USA.

Yawn. (Bill to give up stewardship of ICANN was signed in 2014. Ted Cruz notwithstanding)

You realise that this is all software, right? That you can script it to run anywhere? That there's no magical locked vault which the keys have access to? That the vault is virtual, and could be located anywhere? That ICANN will have thought about a back-up server somewhere, and the key holders are probably even now in discussion as to how to protect the internet from a potentially hostile US government?

I'm not saying the WWW wouldn't go down for a while while they rebuilt the DNS list. But the actual constituent parts of the internet often predate and are independent of the WWW. JANET, for example. Other countries have similar networks.

To conclude. Disabling the internet in a foreign country would involve actual attacks on the actual infrastructure, either physically or electronically, requiring concerted effort and expenditure, and would most likely be taken as an act of war by the recipient. There is no 'off' button, and Trump can't conjure one up.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Can he, however, organise denial of access to files which may have been placed in other places, but which originated in the US? As in climate change research, which I suspect may be behind his suggestion.

I expect he could find hackers in Russia or China who would have the skills.
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
Doc Tor:
quote:
Disabling the internet in a foreign country would involve actual attacks on the actual infrastructure, either physically or electronically, requiring concerted effort and expenditure, and would most likely be taken as an act of war by the recipient.
Disabling the Internet in the UK would BE an act of war, according to our own chancellor Philip Hammond.

Of course, if the UK internet is taken down by Mrs May's new best friend they may not be so worried. They'd much rather have us relying on the Daily Heil for all the news they think is fit to print.
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
... any man who wanted to get in could do so simply by claiming to identify as female. .... distinguish people who have genuinely and permanently changed from those who are merely claiming to have done so in order to gain access. ...

Transgender people in face overwhelming hatred, discrimination and violence throughout their lives. Nobody "pretends" to be transgender.

It's possible that somewhere out there, there's a boy who dresses as a girl once in a while because he wants to get on the girls soccer team so he can watch them in the bathroom or the locker room, and he doesn't get called names or beaten up and nobody can stop him. If he exists, it's still no reason to deny justice and respect to trans people.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
I suppose the one good thing about May's love-in with Trump is that it'll mean almost one day in his presidency without some disgusting policy announcement or fevered twitter rage.

On the other hand, maybe he'll make up for it this evening.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It is important to remember that what Trump says or signs does not necessarily hook up to the real world as we know it. If he signs a document decreeing a wall, or registering Muslims, or deporting people, Congress still has to pass legislation to fund the work. Without money, it's just hot air. I classify 'closing down the internet' in this category. He surely has no idea how it works, probably would not know what software is if someone hit him over the head with a Linux manual. He is probably thinking of the Internet as a large tube, easily plugged up with duct tape. (This is how my mother thinks of it; she is 90.)

It is worthwhile to know he is thinking of these things, so that we are not surprised (or not too surprised) by Dishonest Don's horrific actions. But what comes out of his lips are (as Scripture suggests) very equivalent to what comes out of his other orifices.
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
On that particular point I suggest we look at countries like Sweden and the Netherlands where unisex toilets are far more common.

And of course most of us have unisex toilets in our homes. But for high-volume facilities, urinals are significantly more efficient (both in terms of square feet per urinator and time taken for each urinator) than stalls, for people with penises.

I think with respect to schools, people are more concerned about changing rooms than toilets. They worry about toilets from the unlikely point of view of a boy claiming to be a girl in order to ogle / assault vulnerable girls, but a typical school changing-room setup has a class-full of pupils standing around naked changing in and out of swimming costumes, gym kit, or whatever, and they don't want their girls seeing a penis.

So they want to force the person with a penis to change in some private area so it's not on display. The fact that most trans girls do not wander around changing rooms flaunting their penes, and in fact tend to go to some effort to avoid anyone seeing them isn't enough for these people: they want a no penis guarantee.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The edit window has closed, drat it, but here is a link to the actual account. You would not want to miss the nuances of the PG's internet savvy.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
It was mentioned to me that Barney Rubble has not aged well. What do you think of the hands?
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
It was mentioned to me that Barney Rubble has not aged well. What do you think of the hands?

He seems to have lost one finger entirely.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
But what comes out of his lips are (as Scripture suggests) very equivalent to what comes out of his other orifices.

Especially the one in front . . . oh, wait, nothing probably comes out of that one anymore. And I don't mean liquid waste.
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
Extreme vetting

Syrian refugees stopped. Citizens from several countries banned for 90 days.

Any news on what the replacement inscription on the Statue of Liberty will read?

[I'm not having a go at Americans btw; DT still has some way before he reaches the depths of our immigration system...]
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
The statue of liberty was a gift to the USA from France. It has lost its meaning - they should take it back.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
If places T proposes to visit extremely vet *him*...
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
Oh for fucks sake. I'm quite confident Trump has not inspired his followers to read a book.

All I know is that sales of 1984 have increased. That doesn't mean the people buying it will actually read it. It can join the small selection of books his followers have on their book shelf, unread, that they say they know what it says and how it supports their political views. Like The Bible.
This is just too fucking stupid, Alan.

Having won the election, with their dear leader successfully installed in office and the hated opposition swept away, Trump's followers then celebrate by suddenly rushing to buy copies of a book that portrays the ultimate destruction of the human spirit by a totalitarian state?
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
I suspect the buyers are anti-Trump folks, plus people saying "wait a minute...", plus people who never read it and want to know what the fuss is.

I confess I've never read it, except for some quotes. Just how bleak is it? I'm kind of allergic to extremely bleak books, especially if there's no hope. (E.g. "Foucault's Pendulum".)

Thx.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Just how bleak is it?

[Killing me]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
[Razz]

I take it that means it's unremittingly bleak? If so, it stays on my "Uh, no, just no" list.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
[Razz]

I take it that means it's unremittingly bleak? If so, it stays on my "Uh, no, just no" list.

I would call it serious dystopian bleakness, and I didn't find Foucault's Pendulum particularly bad.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
As far as I'm concerned, Trump can Foucault-ff.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
SC--Thanks!

Wes-- [Biased]
 
Posted by Honest Ron Bacardi (# 38) on :
 
If you want to get into the mindset, I wouldn't start with 1984 (which being good literature is always worth reading anyway). Start with Ayn Rand, probably "Atlas Shrugged".

Actually, scrub that. Don't read Ayn Rand. It's boring. Read some summary of her Objectivism by somebody else who has had to plough through the original. North American conservatism will lie gridded out before you.

The question of the modes of dereliction of the opposition to conservatism (cf. Orwell) is an interesting one too, but separate. Probably merits a separate mass hand-wringing, though I suspect covered elsewhere in part already.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
Extreme vetting

Syrian refugees stopped. Citizens from several countries banned for 90 days.

Any news on what the replacement inscription on the Statue of Liberty will read?

[I'm not having a go at Americans btw; DT still has some way before he reaches the depths of our immigration system...]

It has been said that some US universities are advising staff from affected countries (who are legally in the US with appropriate visas) not to leave as they may not be allowed back in.

I've also heard it said (although with less solid verification) that there are some who have already left - for example to go to a conference - who have been prevented from returning to their families.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I heard on the radio that Google has advised staff currently abroad to return at once.

If true, they've just moved off my don't use list.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
It's on BBC news (so it must be true...):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38781420

What will the mad tyrant do next, I wonder?

[Paranoid]

IJ
 
Posted by Hiro's Leap (# 12470) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Just how bleak is it?

[Killing me]
If you only read the first 40% it's fine! It's about a guy who becomes woke and manages to snatch moments of joy in a harsh world - not too different to most YA post-apocalyptic fiction. You might seriously want to stop there if you're having a bad day.

For me, Animal Farm is almost as grim. Both are very powerful books.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
USA creates refugee crisis with invasion of Iraq. president trumpette now says refugees are someone else's problem.

"there's a war in our streets
and we're loading our minds
with the word self-defence
take someone's life for crossing over our fence
that's the freedom" (SOTW)
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
If you want to get into the mindset, I wouldn't start with 1984 (which being good literature is always worth reading anyway). Start with Ayn Rand, probably "Atlas Shrugged".

Actually, scrub that. Don't read Ayn Rand. It's boring. Read some summary of her Objectivism by somebody else who has had to plough through the original. North American conservatism will lie gridded out before you.


I read some of Rand's tomes in my distant youth...not sure I ever finished one, they really are quite mind-bendingly monomaniacal and tedious. AIR, Rand's "objectivist" philosophy was based on reality, and rejected anything that claimed to transcend reality or contradict observed facts. I'm pretty sure she would have been horrified by Trump, but she wasn't entirely consistent in her thinking.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Funny you should mention "war in the streets" as Trump is using imaginary increases in urban crime as part of his justification for his draconian and fascist policies.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Hamaseh Tayari, a UK resident who holds an Iranian passport, has been on holiday in Costa Rica with her boyfriend for the last week. She was due to fly back to Glasgow, where she works as a vet, this morning but was denied entry onto the flight because her flight went via New York and she would need a transit visa, which was revoked....

“I am destroyed. I did not know that I could cry for so long. It feels like the beginning of the end. How this is possible? I am really afraid about what is going on.”

Source

I can't find anything more to say beyond what is already in the link in my sig.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Since Mr Trump and Mrs May are now BFFs perhaps she needs to get him to let UK residents through.

Except, she won't because she's doing all she can to pander to the racists who don't want people like that, foreigners with their strange names and letters after their name, in the UK either.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
How long will it be, I wonder, before Jews and Gipsies are banned from entering The Land Of The Free?

IJ
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Since Mr Trump and Mrs May are now BFFs perhaps she needs to get him to let UK residents through.

Except, she won't because she's doing all she can to pander to the racists who don't want people like that, foreigners with their strange names and letters after their name, in the UK either.

According to the same site May, pressed by journalists, has refused to condemn this latest executive order.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Exactly. What's sauce for Pussygrabber is sauce for Wacky May.

IJ
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Could someone explain how he gets to be leader of the free world if that free world has no choice about him and has to knuckle under what not a majority of his own subjects has chosen? Looks remarkably like dictatorship to me.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
Easy -

1. He's not the leader of the free world.

2. The world isn't being required to "knuckle under" in this instance. It's widely recognized that each country's visa policy is properly its own jurisdiction, regardless of how stupid, misguided, and vindictive that policy may be.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I have read Atlas Shrugged. Don't bother. It is very long and boring.

The US hasn't been the "Land of the Free" since some of the restrictions after 9/11. Trump is not the leader of the Free World - he is the dictator in a large and nuclear equipped country.

Interesting question form the Purg thread - could Trump get a second term? Or are his supporters as appalled by him as his opponents?
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Yes, it is time to drop references to "the free world" too.
 
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on :
 
Reminds me a little bit of one of Colin Forbes' novels......


The Power
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I have read Atlas Shrugged. Don't bother. It is very long and boring.

The US hasn't been the "Land of the Free" since some of the restrictions after 9/11. Trump is not the leader of the Free World - he is the dictator in a large and nuclear equipped country.

Interesting question form the Purg thread - could Trump get a second term? Or are his supporters as appalled by him as his opponents?

Depends if his opponents get up off their arses and VOTE. Always the bane of the left in this country. ("Left" such as it is.)
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I heard someone use the expression today. Or I wouldn't have mentioned it.
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:


Interesting question form the Purg thread - could Trump get a second term? Or are his supporters as appalled by him as his opponents?

Dick Cheney. Dick. Cheney.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It is only one week (seven days!!!!) into the Groper in Chief's term. It is too soon to talk about his second term. [crosses self, avert signs, clutches crucifix]
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
So apparently being only 6/11th of the people killed in the Holocaust is not enough to actually use the word Jew in a statement about Holocaust Remembrance Day.

CNN page here

Nah, they will just be able to keep that alt-right Nazi dude at bay those Republicans.

So what if he's in on national security discussions and the top general isn't. Nothing could possibly go wrong.

Incompetent Fascist Nazi loving ftards.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:


Interesting question form the Purg thread - could Trump get a second term? Or are his supporters as appalled by him as his opponents?

Dick Cheney. Dick. Cheney.
Hmm. Positively surprised. But that was December 2015. The wonderful thing about the sudden election of a pariah is many people's ability to rethink their reality and bring it into line with the new perceptions at the centre of power. So if D.C. were to renew his statement this week, I would be much heartened.

More frighteningly though, it shows that the far right wing of G.W.'s administration is considerably to the left of DT.
 
Posted by RuthW (# 13) on :
 
You might wish to read the thread in Hell with Dick Cheney's name on it.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
Thanks, Ruth. Have in the meantime. [Smile]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
There's a crumb of comfort in the thought that if, before long, Pussygrabber brings about WW3, we'll all be in it together:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frAEmhqdLFs&nohtml5=False

IJ
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
On the same theme, WWIII is almost upon us by popular demand
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Tom Lehrer's retired now, of course (and nearly 90 years old), but, from his Wikipedia entry:

'Despite their topical subjects and references, the popularity of these songs has endured; Lehrer quoted a friend's explanation: "Always predict the worst and you'll be hailed as a prophet."'

IJ
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
Silly strategy - there'd be nobody left to congratulate you. It's better to preach that it will all work out after all in the face of certain doom.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Blessed are the strong, for they will tread the weak underfoot
Blessed are the rich, for they will become richer
Blessed are the perverts, for they will sexually assault
Blessed are those who close borders, for they will create terror which they will exploit for their benefit
Blessed are the bombs, for they will kill the innocent
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Blessed are those who have kin in power, for they shall make out like bandits.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Blessed are the MILLION-PLUS in the UK who have signed a Petition to Prevent Pussygrabber Polluting our fair land by His Presence!

We are going to need an awful lot of Pink Pussy Hats - Brenda, start knitting.....

IJ
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I've signed. And how very dare he lay down the rules for how he is entertained? I want to play the sovereign's private golf course! I don't want any talk about climate change!

Cue HRH: "I am so sorry, Mr President, but the weather has been so wet this year that the course is unplayable, and according to our Meteorological Office, is unlikely to be usable for the foreseeable future."

[ 30. January 2017, 13:21: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Is there a handy link to the petition? I thought I'd get one from a Certain Source, but no.

IJ
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Just search on petition parliament and up will come the "popular" ones running at the moment.

Latest figure is 1.25 million !
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Thanks! All done - the figure is 1,300,000+ now - and I've emailed my MP.

IJ
 
Posted by Doone (# 18470) on :
 
Ditto!
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
An outright ban would be difficult to impose. It would be much better to insist on the 4 month quarantine period for 'at risk' domestic animals arriving from countries with rabies.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
No sane nation wants him to visit. In fact that is the US's only hope, to send him on an extended tour and get him out of our hair.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
So he is just over a week into office. He has had mass protests worldwide, challenges to his dictats internally, a huge petition against him, and worldwide approbation for pretty much everything he has done.

I have to say that very few people can manage to have such a phenomenal negative reaction in such a short time, even given where he was starting from.

And I missed the fact that there are people looking into his impeachment already.

What a vile, worthless, obnoxious, dangerous piece of shit he is. And he STILL thinks it is all going well, which has to be an indication of his delusion or derangement.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
What's needed is a Mexican (or some other convenient national who either does it on their own or as brainwashed to do it by trumpettes) to burn the Reichstag or whatever building trump rules out of. Which would then allow a tidy little invasion. You just know he wants to bomb someone. Impeachment would be nicely deflected by a war.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
And what does he focus on re: protests? The tears of Churck Schumer which he insists are phony.

[Disappointed]

sabine
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
And I missed the fact that there are people looking into his impeachment already.

I believe people started looking into that on November 9.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The anti-State Visit petition is nearly up to 1.5 million as I type this...

...and there are protests underway in 35 cities across the UK, according to the BBC, with one actually on Wacky May's doorstep (or as near as they can get).

Meanwhile, what is happening/has happened to the unfortunates caught up in the travel ban? Are they still languishing in airport Limbo, or have some (at least) been freed?

IJ
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
And what does he focus on re: protests? The tears of Churck Schumer which he insists are phony.

[Disappointed]

sabine

I turned off at that point - he had his "I'm saying something funny" bullying smirk on his face and in his voice.

We need a chorus of teachers to intone "It isn't big, it isn't clever, and it isn't funny," when he does this sort of thing.

[ 30. January 2017, 18:58: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
Yes, I saw that, astonishingly repellent. Bullying smirk is about right. I had a teacher who used to do that, and of course, he had the power.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Not sure if this belongs here or on the Purg thread: the Grauniad says that

quote:
On Holocaust Memorial Day, the White House issued a statement that did not mention Jews or antisemitism – but this was no oversight by the new administration
This is a 'Comment is Free' opinion piece, here, but still.

I find this unbelievably horrible, although not surprising. What else is there in store for us? Everything's being turned on its head. Good grief!

Any thoughts?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Well, either His Ghastly Awfulness will deny the Holocaust, or else start banning Jews....

BTW, the UK petition has just passed the 1.5 million mark!

IJ
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/760A/production/_93881203_c18c4347-4817-4422-98df-2ca1a2dbcb90.jpg

The Demo at Downing Street...

IJ
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Not sure if this belongs here or on the Purg thread: the Grauniad says that

quote:
On Holocaust Memorial Day, the White House issued a statement that did not mention Jews or antisemitism – but this was no oversight by the new administration
This is a 'Comment is Free' opinion piece, here, but still.

I find this unbelievably horrible, although not surprising. What else is there in store for us? Everything's being turned on its head. Good grief!

Any thoughts?

I mean, what do you expect if you've just installed Joseph Goebb..., er, Steve Bannon as your chief strategist? It's the perfect sequel to 9/11. After the disaster-film-turned-reality, we now have the evil dictator making the power of the US of A his own. The White House looks like a chimpanzee tea party at the moment, but there is no reason for complacency. By trying to control or cow the media, they want to set the political agenda. They might try to provoke popular protests and counter-protests as a smokescreen for other legal action. And I am sure that they are prepared to twist the arms of as many congressmen behind their backs as possible in order to gain political support for some very dark legislation. But of course, I might be totally overestimating DT's team, and his presidency will come to a grinding halt in a cloud of dust. At least if the Brexiteers are any gauge in terms of collective IQ, we can be of good cheer that this is what will happen.
 
Posted by Og: Thread Killer (# 3200) on :
 
They used the attack on a Mosque in Quebec by a lone gunman loonie white dude to justify the Islamic ban.

Incompetence and willfully hearing only what they want to. [Mad]
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
So he is just over a week into office. He has had mass protests worldwide, challenges to his dictats internally, a huge petition against him, and worldwide approbation for pretty much everything he has done.

"Approbation" means "approval or praise." I think you mean "opprobrium."
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
For some reason, Claus von Stauffenberg and his friends have been on my mind lately.
 
Posted by Ariston (# 10894) on :
 
You know it's bad when the recruiter for the Department of Justice (you know, the agency every ambitious new lawyer in the country wants to work for, with alumni making up...well, the entire federal judiciary, including the whole Supreme Court) has to try and convince people it won't be total career suicide to come work for DoJ under the Trump Administration.

Technically, said recruiter is sworn to neutrality and to uphold the administration line. However, in the interest of actually getting people into positions where they're needed so that the whole entire mechanism of administering justice in America doesn't shut down, there was some willingness to...deviate slightly...from the official line.

You know, "we've had idiots in charge before, and some of us still remember how we did it then." Or "sooner or later, he's going to realize he needs us to defend him from all the lawsuits he's going to face. If he doesn't, he'll be gone sooner than we thought."

Yes, work for your country, stand up for justice, and hope and pray it's not going to follow you around forever.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
What's needed is a Mexican (or some other convenient national who either does it on their own or as brainwashed to do it by trumpettes) to burn the Reichstag or whatever building trump rules out of. Which would then allow a tidy little invasion. You just know he wants to bomb someone. Impeachment would be nicely deflected by a war.

Uh no.

It would deflect nothing of the sort. We're damn tired of war, and if he starts one, it will only add impetus to the impeachment movement. In fact, I'm pretty sure people would rush the impeachment in order to shut down the war.

Having just read about his latest firing, I am planning to tell my son to pay close attention from this point out, as it will be the first (and hopefully last) chance he gets to watch a real live presidential impeachment from beginning to end. History, baby.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
Impeachment? Don't get ahead of yourself. Trump hasn't yet outlived his usefulness for substantial factions in the GOP. He's still got some mileage there before they need to offload him. And the other frightening thing about him is that he will take every measure he can to squelch opposition.
 
Posted by MaryLouise (# 18697) on :
 
Watching for the legal pushback here on the Breitbart influence. Posted on Twitter just now: an obscure law requires Senate confirmation for a White House aide like Bannon to serve on NSC.

50 U.S. Code § 3021 - National Security Council


They may not be able to put the brakes on Bannon & Trump but perhaps slow things down a little?
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Re Bannon--

I hope the arcane law works. Per a New Yorker article from just after the election:

quote:
“I’m a Leninist,” Steve Bannon told a writer for The Daily Beast, in late 2013. “Lenin wanted to destroy the state, and that’s my goal, too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today’s establishment.”
Great. An anarchist.
[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by MaryLouise:
Watching for the legal pushback here on the Breitbart influence. Posted on Twitter just now: an obscure law requires Senate confirmation for a White House aide like Bannon to serve on NSC.

50 U.S. Code § 3021 - National Security Council


They may not be able to put the brakes on Bannon & Trump but perhaps slow things down a little?

In view of Ariston's post, you wonder if there is going to be much of a judiciary around to enforce it...

Bannon's appointment seems not to have received the media scrutiny it deserves.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Great. An anarchist.
[Roll Eyes]

Leninism isn't really anarchism. The aim is not to break down the state so that it cannot oppress the masses any more (my loose paraphrase of anarchism) but to break down the structures of the state in order to give a unobstructed route for something else. Specifically, in terms of Lenin, the dictatorship of the proletariat.

Bannon isn't interested in breaking the political establishment in the USA for the sake of freedom, he is interested in doing it so that there is space for him to enact his hardline political views from the centre.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Some anarchists, I think, simply. want to destroy everything--and *that's* what Bannon sounds like to me.

Kind of like the masked, black-dressed anarchists who often show up to peaceful protests and wreck them, but worse.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Some anarchists, I think, simply. want to destroy everything--and *that's* what Bannon sounds like to me.

Kind of like the masked, black-dressed anarchists who often show up to peaceful protests and wreck them, but worse.

The masked, black-dressed, bomb-carriers are more accurately referred to by nihilists, especially by the other kind of anarchist, who tend to wear sandals and veganism.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
What worries me is that Bannon is now on the National Security Council. That is maybe the real news behind the smokescreen. Now imagine he starts to use the muscle of the US to stoke rightwing trouble in Europe. There are several European Countries that are vulnerable, and it could easily destabilise the continent. Left to him, he may even enlist the support of Putin to do his part. Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself, but since they say "when America sneezes, Europe gets a cold", what happens to Europe now that the US has gone down with the flu?
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
I found some media coverage of Bannon's appointment.

Granted, it is the Guardian, but [Ultra confused]

The reports into how the immigration EO was implemented make for enlightening reading, too.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Impeachment? Don't get ahead of yourself. Trump hasn't yet outlived his usefulness for substantial factions in the GOP. He's still got some mileage there before they need to offload him. And the other frightening thing about him is that he will take every measure he can to squelch opposition.

I'm wondering how much the GOP is actually pulling the strings, now that we know that GOP leaders were not consulted for the draft of the immigration ban (although some of their junior aides worked secretly with the White House).

The work by the committee staffers took place without the knowledge of House GOP leaders, who themselves had no involvement in writing the order and little awareness of its contents.

sabine
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
In the end (either the end we pray for or the scorched earth), I think we're going to find Steve Bannon was behind everything. Even Trump may be caught off guatd.

sabine
 
Posted by Callan (# 525) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Impeachment? Don't get ahead of yourself. Trump hasn't yet outlived his usefulness for substantial factions in the GOP. He's still got some mileage there before they need to offload him. And the other frightening thing about him is that he will take every measure he can to squelch opposition.

I think the other factor is that the primary process in the States means that Republicans who speak out against Trump will find themselves facing a challenge when they next put themselves forward for their Congressional or Senate seat. Trump will have to be very naughty indeed before Republican Senators and Congresscritters start to grow a spine.
 
Posted by Imaginary Friend (# 186) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og: Thread Killer:
They used the attack on a Mosque in Quebec by a lone gunman loonie white dude to justify the Islamic ban.

With the greatest of respect, let's call this what it is. The man is a terrorist, plain and simple.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Impeachment? Don't get ahead of yourself. Trump hasn't yet outlived his usefulness for substantial factions in the GOP. He's still got some mileage there before they need to offload him.

Maybe so, but he's traveling damn fast. I'm figuring Sept 12 for the first official move in the impeachme t, but lately i've been thinking i ought to move it up.

Would it be evil of us to have an impeachment pool, rather like the celebrity death pool thread?
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
So he is just over a week into office. He has had mass protests worldwide, challenges to his dictats internally, a huge petition against him, and worldwide approbation for pretty much everything he has done.

"Approbation" means "approval or praise." I think you mean "opprobrium."
You are right. I will stick to words of one sylab....syl...part.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Would it be evil of us to have an impeachment pool, rather like the celebrity death pool thread?

No more evil than most other things. I think you should start one.
 
Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :
 
Wouldn't the trouble with impeachment be that you'd be landed with the vice-president, who's allegedly even worse than Trump?*

The phrase "coup d'etat" has been appearing in my Facebook feed. I don't know much about that sort of thing - perhaps someone would enlighten me - but would a coup get rid of both of them and/or force a second election, or would it have to involve military forces, which presumably wouldn't help matters at all?

* assuming such a condition exists
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Piglet:
Wouldn't the trouble with impeachment be that you'd be landed with the vice-president, who's allegedly even worse than Trump?*

In the early 70s (Nixon's second term) fear of Spiro Agnew as President probably safeguarded Nixon from impeachment -- until the Agnew problem was solved when he was forced to resign.

There's always hope...
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Trump is very ill, however you want to categorize it. Pence, while nasty, seems to be relatively sane--so it *might* be possible to work with him, box him in, etc.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Trump is very ill, however you want to categorize it. Pence, while nasty, seems to be relatively sane--so it *might* be possible to work with him, box him in, etc.

No. Pence is worse. He has God on his side. And as St Bob of Dylan said, with God on your side you neither need ask questions nor count the dead.
 
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Impeachment? Don't get ahead of yourself. Trump hasn't yet outlived his usefulness for substantial factions in the GOP. He's still got some mileage there before they need to offload him. And the other frightening thing about him is that he will take every measure he can to squelch opposition.

Furthermore, there are good reasons to keep Trump in position for as long as possible from their point of view, so long as some reasonable percentage of their wish list gets implemented.

Anything 'less good' is likely to hit the poor/brown/gay/whatever rather than the Republican establishment, and they can ride out the consequences until they sweep back in. Reversing the most flagrant of Trumps abuses means that they then have less pressure to reverse the rest, and they have perfect plausible deniability in the meantime.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Trump is very ill, however you want to categorize it. Pence, while nasty, seems to be relatively sane--so it *might* be possible to work with him, box him in, etc.

No. Pence is worse. He has God on his side. And as St Bob of Dylan said, with God on your side you neither need ask questions nor count the dead.
Meh. I think Trump thinks he IS God. He certainly demands worship. AND obedience.

As for Pence, he appears to have at least some rudimentary understanding that other people actually exist, and could conceivably affect his intentions, personal welfare, and happiness. Which means that there are ways to bridle him, unsatisfactory and rough as those may be.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
If Trump is chucked out, Pence might learn a lesson that he needs to act more responsibly.

But what I have heard suggests he is pretty bad. So there might have to be a second impeachment. Which should throw the country into a constitutional crisis, not least if the electoral process has produced a pairing that is so non-viable.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
If Trump is chucked out, Pence might learn a lesson that he needs to act more responsibly.

But what I have heard suggests he is pretty bad. So there might have to be a second impeachment. Which should throw the country into a constitutional crisis, not least if the electoral process has produced a pairing that is so non-viable.

We got rid of Agnew and Nixon without a constitutional crisis. We can do it again.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
I don't want to sound at all like I'm supporting Trumps ridiculous anti-refugee policy, but can someone explain why Australia is the bad guy in the current spat?

Australia set up offshore immigration centres and Australia appears to be trying to farm out those poor people to other countries. Why should the USA bail them out? Hasn't Australia got enough space for refugees?
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
There is, unfortunately, room for more than one bad guy among the nations of the world. Trump is just the latest to lead the pack.

The policies of the Australian government in regard to refugees over the last few years has been outrageous and abysmal, and has been condemned by many within Australia.

The UK government has hardly been an outstanding beacon of open welcome to people in desperate need, with the numbers of Syrian refugees accepted being far below what (I think) it could and should be. And, the triumph of the fascists in UKIP and the Tory party have fuelled an atmosphere where many feel unwelcome here.

Under succesive US administrations there has been barely a trickle of refugees let into the country, and then after two years or more of being treated like a criminal suspect in holding camps elsewhere in the world.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
If Trump is chucked out, Pence might learn a lesson that he needs to act more responsibly.

But what I have heard suggests he is pretty bad. So there might have to be a second impeachment. Which should throw the country into a constitutional crisis, not least if the electoral process has produced a pairing that is so non-viable.

We got rid of Agnew and Nixon without a constitutional crisis. We can do it again.
IIRC, courageous journalism played a part. Members of both Houses may have had more integrity too.
 
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Meh. I think Trump thinks he IS God. He certainly demands worship. AND obedience.

A self-made man who worships his creator.

(I'm not sure he is self-made, but he thinks he is).
 
Posted by mdijon (# 8520) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Imaginary Friend:
With the greatest of respect, let's call this what it is. The man is a terrorist, plain and simple.

And a terrorist for president. He's certainly spreading the terror.

[ 02. February 2017, 11:51: Message edited by: mdijon ]
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
If Trump is chucked out, Pence might learn a lesson that he needs to act more responsibly.

But what I have heard suggests he is pretty bad. So there might have to be a second impeachment. Which should throw the country into a constitutional crisis, not least if the electoral process has produced a pairing that is so non-viable.

The problem is, near as I can tell, Pence's sins are not constitutional in nature but rather ideological. And his ideology is shared with the people who would be doing the impeaching. Trump is breaking laws and trammeling the constitution. Pence would break gays and trammel women. The former is impeachable. The latter, less so.
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
You couldn't make this stuff up
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
I've heard preachers make opening remarks like that before. He's playing to the gallery, generating faux outrage, and doing who knows what sneakily elsewhere.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Unfunding Berkeley. Though not exactly sneakily. Can someone keep the Black Bloc out of things?

[ 02. February 2017, 18:33: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 
Posted by Patdys (# 9397) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I don't want to sound at all like I'm supporting Trumps ridiculous anti-refugee policy, but can someone explain why Australia isn't the bad guy in the current spat?

Australia set up offshore immigration centres and Australia appears to be trying to farm out those poor people to other countries. Why should the USA bail them out? Hasn't Australia got enough space for refugees?

There is enough shame to go round.
(I adjusted your 'is' to 'isn't' because I think that is what you meant.)
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I don't want to sound at all like I'm supporting Trumps ridiculous anti-refugee policy, but can someone explain why Australia is the bad guy in the current spat?

Australia set up offshore immigration centres and Australia appears to be trying to farm out those poor people to other countries. Why should the USA bail them out? Hasn't Australia got enough space for refugees?

We only ban people based on method of transport. Not on country of origin. So... we're slightly less awful, or something.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
The Australian government simply bans anyone who needs to cross water to get to Australia. Which is ... well, everyone.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
No no. Come by plane and it's all fine.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Can you hijack a plane? Or do the potential refugees have to make one out of balsa wood and string?
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
I have to acknowledge that Drumpf put a smile on my face that will take me to the end of Black History Month. Since he's an entertainer, he does know when it's time for some comic relief:

quote:
Frederick Douglass is an example of somebody who’s done an amazing job and is being recognized more and more, I noticed.
The amazing Frederick Douglass
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Can you hijack a plane? Or do the potential refugees have to make one out of balsa wood and string?

I think the expectation is that you just buy a ticket, but you raise some interesting possibilities.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Nice quote by Douglass from the article

quote:
"I hope and trust all will come out right in the end, but the immediate future looks dark and troubled. I cannot shut my eyes to the ugly facts before me."
One of these ugly fact is the extraordinary ugliness of Trump's behaviour. The latest illustration was at the National Prayer Breakfast. Unbelievably crass, completely inappropriate, egotistical, embarrassing. He simply cannot be hearing what he is saying.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
He is going to bomb Iran. Not an if, but a when. Pretext is their missle test. Reason will be something slightly stupider than his daily stupidity and the rumblings of a palace coup. And the rally to the flag will play in his favour.

[ 03. February 2017, 02:22: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Further on military topics:

"Military Convoy Flying Trump Flag Belonged to SEAL Unit." (ABC News)

It seems a military convoy in Kentucky decided it would be a good idea to fly a Trump flag from the lead vehicle. Don't know if that flag was already a thing, or if they made it themselves.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Barnabas--

quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
One of these ugly fact is the extraordinary ugliness of Trump's behaviour. The latest illustration was at the National Prayer Breakfast. Unbelievably crass, completely inappropriate, egotistical, embarrassing. He simply cannot be hearing what he is saying.

ISTM that implies that he would hear something wrong, if he could hear it.

I think he's saying what he thinks is true, at the time, what makes sense. IMHO, he'd have to be in hailing distance of mental health to have any idea of the wrongness. When he's at all aware of a difference between his perceptions and those of other people, the problem is with them.

For whatever reasons (background, brain damage, mental illness...), he's not playing with a full deck. And IMHO expecting him to doesn't help.

FWIW.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Further on military topics:

"Military Convoy Flying Trump Flag Belonged to SEAL Unit." (ABC News)

It seems a military convoy in Kentucky decided it would be a good idea to fly a Trump flag from the lead vehicle. Don't know if that flag was already a thing, or if they made it themselves.

The sad thing is he doesn't appear to care about them beyond how he thinks it will garner him attention, thinks he knows more than they do regarding combat, strategy, etc and is highly likely to get more of them killed for no good reason.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Meanwhile, back on T's phone:

"President Trump Warns Mexico He Might Send U.S. Troops to Take Care of 'Bad Hombres'." (AP, via Time)

Both sides are now denying it was any kind of threat. But the report is from the AP, so it's likely to be accurate.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
He is going to bomb Iran. Not an if, but a when.

Crass stupidity. The region is a real mess - Syria is simple anarchy, Iraq is struggling to recover from "regime change" with no real government, Saudi Arabia actively promotes radical Islam that feeds ISIS-like terrorists and is bombing the hell out of Yemen. Iran, on the other hand, is politically stable, religiously moderate even liberal, relatively pro-Western. Just the sort of nation we should be working with to try and bring some sort of stability to the region. Instead the nut jobs in the current US administration decide they want to start another stupid war in the region, to replace a relatively progressive, stable and friendly government with an anarchic hotch-potch of warlords and create another breeding ground for radical Islamic terrorists.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
So long as the West can ring fence the Mid East oil fields I honestly believe it barely gives a rats arse about the ordered chaos and honour among thieves merrily going on outside of these zones.

The Iraq 03 military intervention was an experiment to win the hearts and minds of the general population, it failed and won't be repeated.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Trump's words cannot be trusted to be any more than what he's thinking or feeling at the moment. There was going to be an executive order last week about voter fraud, but this week it's "not a priority" according to White House spokesperson.

The Executive Orders, tweets, explosive comments in private or in public appear to be feeding material for his supporters that "he's doing what he said he would do". And it may be that they are the way his cabinet are seeking to control him. "Let him sound off, we'll pick up the pieces. After all, he has a short attention span and likes watching TV."
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
The whole situation is beginning to remind me of survival in the court of a mad king.

One of my favourite stories is about a jester who has managed to outlive many ministers in the court of a mad king, but in the end, he is forced to agree that he will teach his master's horse to talk. His wife says he's gone completely mad. "Maybe" he observes" but I did tell the king it would take six months. A lot can happen in six months. The king may die. I may die, the horse may die. Or, unlikely as it seems, maybe the horse will talk ...".
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Didn’t Trump promise he was going to give up his twitter account after he became President?

I know the man’s an inveterate liar, but I guess it’s evidence of how successfully he gaslights the world that I now have no idea whether he said was going to do it and didn’t, or whether I imagined it.

On Trump being a big fan of the sterling work being accomplished by Frederick Douglass: next time the 13th falls on a Friday is in October. Just saying.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
The Iraq 03 military intervention was an experiment to win the hearts and minds of the general population, it failed and won't be repeated.

You're repeating the great deception. The hearts and minds things in absolutely NOT what that was about. That was about political advantage and profit for Bush and friends. trump is more honest about such things. They are children of a common mother.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:


One of these ugly fact is the extraordinary ugliness of Trump's behaviour. The latest illustration was at the National Prayer Breakfast. Unbelievably crass, completely inappropriate, egotistical, embarrassing. He simply cannot be hearing what he is saying.

How many religious leaders have taken him to task for this? I know he created an awkward reaction at the Prayer Breakfast, but why the seeming silence on the part of religious leaders?

Just now tried to google for responses. Got to page 5 and all the headlines referred to the speech itself or to Arnold Schwarzenegger's response.

And yes, I know there are conservative Christians who somehow see no problem with Trump's POV and the gospel, but I was hoping that others might say something.

Am I not looking in the right places/

sabine

[ 03. February 2017, 15:13: Message edited by: sabine ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I fear the church has completely sold out to Caesar.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Which Constantine bought with a sword, thereby founding catholocism on a violation. It's a fine tradition.
 
Posted by Og, King of Bashan (# 9562) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:


One of these ugly fact is the extraordinary ugliness of Trump's behaviour. The latest illustration was at the National Prayer Breakfast. Unbelievably crass, completely inappropriate, egotistical, embarrassing. He simply cannot be hearing what he is saying.

How many religious leaders have taken him to task for this? I know he created an awkward reaction at the Prayer Breakfast, but why the seeming silence on the part of religious leaders?
Of all of the things that the Trump administration has done in the past two weeks that deserve a response from religious leaders, this one ranks pretty low.

I am a big advocate of the idea that there is enough righteous anger to go around in the Kingdom of God, and I get really annoyed by all of the folks in the media and on my facebook feed (seemingly mostly white men) telling people not to be "distracted" by their honest concerns over the latest outrage because it is keeping you from seeing what is really going on. So forgive me if I am being hypocritical here. But I find the remarks at the prayer breakfast more deserving of ridicule than outrage.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
I find the remarks at the prayer breakfast more deserving of ridicule than outrage.

Indeed, he's a sad, pathetic person for whom all situations seem to be a context to brag about himself and vow to take down [insert whatever pops into his head].

At the same time, I'd like to see some religious leaders (Pope Francis excepted, he's already spoken on immigration) step up and offer a counter message . . .

. . .like, for instance, the gospel--not the America First gospel or the "we can hate as religious liberty" gospel or the "only white men with money can make the rules" gospel, but you know. . .

. . .the gospel where love is the foundation of the two great commandments and the Good Samaritan didn't pass by the stranger at the side of the road, and the Sermon on the Mount actually matters.

Call me naive (someone on this thread probably will, it's hell [Smile] ) but I'm still waiting for religious leaders to grab the mic, speak prophetically, and then drop it.

Or maybe it's happening and I'm just waiting for something like that to get as much coverage as Trump's craziness.

sabine
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
As far as I can tell, Franklin Graham, probably the best known and most widely respected ConEvo US preacher loves the Trump.

Who else is left? And surely, if any speak out against Trump's policies, they're not part of the fold anyway.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
Rev. William Barber of the Moral Mondays movement has spoken out (he was in my city just recently) but doesn't get much press.

sabine
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The head of the Baptist church (I forget his name) has spoken out. Disappointingly, my own rector confined his sermon last Sunday solely to the scripture lesson.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
As far as I can tell, Franklin Graham, probably the best known and most widely respected ConEvo US preacher loves the Trump.

Who else is left? And surely, if any speak out against Trump's policies, they're not part of the fold anyway.

I think that is the problem. So many of the religious leaders have already sold out to Trumpism. That is to the shame of the US Church.

It is to the shame of the UK church that our leaders have not spoken out at either the US or the UK shenanigans.

In fact, the church has, in these last year or so, been disgracefully silent.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Franklin Graham is respected? Never before his trumpig support and absolutely not after.I can guarantee that his bible has no religious content in it, no, none at all.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
np--

He is respected, by many people. Largely, I think, because he's taken over for his very-respected dad, Rev. Billy Graham. Also because some people agree with him.

I have a lot of respect for BG, not so much for FG.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
I would have listed Bell, Claibourne, Wallis, Held Evans, Bolz-Weber, Campolo and Jimmy Carter as influential US voices in the public sphere. But they're all - most of the time - people I already agree with, and not really conservatives.

Have any ConEvo leaders stepped up to the plate, or have they all drank the KoolAid?

eta: Rick Warren? Has he said anything?

[ 03. February 2017, 20:40: Message edited by: Doc Tor ]
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I would have listed Bell, Claibourne, Wallis, Held Evans, Bolz-Weber, Campolo and Jimmy Carter as influential US voices in the public sphere. But they're all - most of the time - people I already agree with, and not really conservatives.

Have any ConEvo leaders stepped up to the plate, or have they all drank the KoolAid?

eta: Rick Warren? Has he said anything?

Jimmy Carter above all others. Remember when Bill Clinton was campaigning and visited Jimmy Carter on a Habitat for Humanity building site with a hammer in his hands, building a house? My kind of Christian.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
I would have listed Bell, Claibourne, Wallis, Held Evans, Bolz-Weber, Campolo and Jimmy Carter as influential US voices in the public sphere. But they're all - most of the time - people I already agree with, and not really conservatives.

Have any ConEvo leaders stepped up to the plate, or have they all drank the KoolAid?

eta: Rick Warren? Has he said anything?

I suspect people are speaking out, but unless those people do something of a razzle dazzle, they just don't get coverage.

sabine
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Og, King of Bashan:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:


One of these ugly fact is the extraordinary ugliness of Trump's behaviour. The latest illustration was at the National Prayer Breakfast. Unbelievably crass, completely inappropriate, egotistical, embarrassing. He simply cannot be hearing what he is saying.

How many religious leaders have taken him to task for this? I know he created an awkward reaction at the Prayer Breakfast, but why the seeming silence on the part of religious leaders?
Of all of the things that the Trump administration has done in the past two weeks that deserve a response from religious leaders, this one ranks pretty low.

... But I find the remarks at the prayer breakfast more deserving of ridicule than outrage.

My thoughts exactly.

I have actually been encouraged by the number of evangelical leaders who have spoken out against Trump, both right before the election and even more so after the Muslim ban last weekend. Not Jerry Fallwell Jr or Franklin Graham, of course, but that would be more along the lines of the talking horse (or Balaam's a**) mentioned above.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Has anyone mentioned the Bowling Green Massacre? There's definitely a Gish Gallop of immense proportions going on. The Republican faithful will dutifully believe whatever they are spoon fed, because only the liberal media are calling the Trumpistas on their heinous fabrications. Inventing a non-existent massacre to justify discrimination against Muslims is jaw-droppingly evil, and I wonder if it isn't time for the oh-so-open-minded to begin to see the parallels with Nazi Germany.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The head of the Baptist church (I forget his name) has spoken out. Disappointingly, my own rector confined his sermon last Sunday solely to the scripture lesson.

Russell Moore-- not just the head of a Baptist conference, but the freakin' Southern Baptists. Moore actually has been pretty outspoken in a lot of cool ways in the last year or so.


quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Franklin Graham is respected? Never before his trumpig support and absolutely not after.I can guarantee that his bible has no religious content in it, no, none at all.

Yeah, as much as Billy continues to be rightly admired in evangelical circles, Franklin is close to irrelevant-- which of course only makes him shout all the louder I gotta wonder about all the int'l workers on his payroll though, trying to do work (whether evangelistic or humanitarian) in the Middle East, when the Boss keeps spouting out his latest xenophobic anti-Muslim rhetoric/ conspiracy theory. That's gotta make your job super-fun.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Has anyone mentioned the Bowling Green Massacre? There's definitely a Gish Gallop of immense proportions going on. The Republican faithful will dutifully believe whatever they are spoon fed, because only the liberal media are calling the Trumpistas on their heinous fabrications. Inventing a non-existent massacre to justify discrimination against Muslims is jaw-droppingly evil, and I wonder if it isn't time for the oh-so-open-minded to begin to see the parallels with Nazi Germany.

In the best response ever, there is now a
Bowling Green Massacre Victims Fund. Donations are directed to the ACLU.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Various:

--Ditto the first part of Ariston's recent post, and much of the rest of it.

--Re 1984: Hopefully, things won't turn out like Starhawk's The Fifth Sacred Thing, or The Handmaid's Tale. (Note: I've only read Starhawk's book, but heard a lot about the others.)
[Paranoid]

...


The Handmaid's Tale is an excellent book, not just an excellent feminist book. It is well worth a read, and the film is well worth a look.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
I saw on the National (CBC nightly national TV news) seemingly normal people talking about giving trump a chance, and their agreement with his policies and ideas. I could only ask such people questions. About how they became so fearful.

Because fear has to underlie hatred. Unless it is simply evil. Which this Franklin Graham animal is with calculated statements such as "We're not attacking Islam but Islam has attacked us. The God of Islam is not the same God. He's not the son of God of the Christian or Judeo-Christian faith. It's a different God and I believe it is a very evil and wicked religion." (no link required, just search for 'very evil and wicked religion' and this hatred-filled degenerate evil man's name).

This is precisely the sort of disgusting behaviour that we have to call out for what it is, underscored for Canadians by the shootings this week in a mosque in Quebec by a homegrown racist terrorist.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
cliffdweller--

ROTFL re the fund. Perfect! Thx for sharing that.

So I wonder when Kellyanne Conway will decide she's had enough, and quit? She's in wayyy over her head. I hope she's got some money and some place she can hide out, because she will be hounded.
 
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
Naw, she'll land a job on FOX News, home of the alternative facts. No prob. [Devil]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Because fear has to underlie hatred.

“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Has anyone mentioned the Bowling Green Massacre? There's definitely a Gish Gallop of immense proportions going on.

This article could be instructive. I see no reason to doubt what the author says.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I think some of the Trump team could have new jobs writing fiction. They are incredibly good at making things up and being totally convincing about them.
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
Trump himself is quite clearly suffering from some form of mental ill-health, and therefore has some excuse for the constant stream of phantasmagorical bullshit that pours from his strangely-tinted visage.

The people around Trump, though, are just evil, pure and simple.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
I understand that there are t-shirts declaring "Je suis Bowling Green."
[Big Grin]
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Whenever I hear 'Bowling Green' I get an earworm of Sidney Poitier singing the song from The Defiant Ones.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Has anyone mentioned the Bowling Green Massacre? There's definitely a Gish Gallop of immense proportions going on.

This article could be instructive. I see no reason to doubt what the author says.
After three months it's possible to laugh again.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
Here is the 'historical marker" for the Bowling Green massacre

sabine
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
Here is the 'historical marker" for the Bowling Green massacre

sabine

[Killing me]
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
An important distinction is now clarified - judge: agrees with Trump. So-called judge (i.e. Not a valid one): disagrees with Trump.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
An important distinction is now clarified - judge: agrees with Trump. So-called judge (i.e. Not a valid one): disagrees with Trump.

disagrees with Trump:
unemployed judge.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
An important distinction is now clarified - judge: agrees with Trump. So-called judge (i.e. Not a valid one): disagrees with Trump.

disagrees with Trump:
unemployed judge.

Although this is a travesty, the Attorney General is not a judge.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
A question which has arisen more than once: Is the PG in Chief really a liar? Or is it that he actually cannot distinguish truth from what he wishes were so?
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
When you run a company, no-one has to explain separation of powers to you.

The man thinks he's been elected CEO of America.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
What a relief it is to be able to enjoy the news again. Impotent, but with globally embarrassing hair. He must be pissed to have a urologist go public with this.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
Interesting. I wonder what exactly is meant by "ejaculatory and orgasmic dysfunction." Does that mean he's going unexpectedly to come in his underpants when he next addresses Congress? If so, perhaps he should look into disposable underwear. Just imagine -- the company in question could advertise "Disposable undergarments by appointment to His Majesty the Presidential Pretender of the United States."

Also, the sentence "Whether this medication is safe for individuals holding political office has not been studied" has got to be the understatement of the year.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
Seriously? Do we HAVE to trawl through anything and everything for explanations and justifications of why Trump acts like an arsehole?

Maybe he's just, you know, a horrible person?

This is nothing more than junk science.

[ 05. February 2017, 11:49: Message edited by: orfeo ]
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Seriously? Do we HAVE to trawl through anything and everything for explanations and justifications of why Trump acts like an arsehole?

Maybe he's just, you know, a horrible person?

This is nothing more than junk science.

I am sort of with you in this. there is a lot of "Is Trump mentally ill" stuff, and it is near offensive. He may have health problems and issues. But he is responsible for his action, his actions are vile, and the evidence is that he is just an obnoxious and despicable person. He has no excuses.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
My wife and I joined a small anti-Trump demonstration in our town yesterday. Perhaps 150 came along. All right, I'm sure that Trump won't have noticed - but (and I say this as a person who rarely joins in such actions) it felt necessary to do and say somethingh, even if only to salve our consciences.

An account was placed on our local paper's website, and what's amazing is the amount of vitriol that has unleashed (and on a moderated site, too - this isn't Facebook). Comments such as "a rag tag bunch of losers who think they can change the policy of a country 3000 miles away", "dumb liberals", "jumping on the bandwagon" and "deluded individuals who leach of the public purse" (?) are just the start, allied to a generalised comment that we never protest about hings in Britain, which simply isn't true.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Nasty, but don't fret too much about it, BT. At least you did something - and that sort of vitriol is ejaculated by the same fuckwits over anything that rattles their cage. Pity they don't go out and get a life.

[Disappointed]

IJ
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Seriously? Do we HAVE to trawl through anything and everything for explanations and justifications of why Trump acts like an arsehole?

Maybe he's just, you know, a horrible person?

This is nothing more than junk science.

I am sort of with you in this. there is a lot of "Is Trump mentally ill" stuff, and it is near offensive. He may have health problems and issues. But he is responsible for his action, his actions are vile, and the evidence is that he is just an obnoxious and despicable person. He has no excuses.
Yup, a full portion of nasty, with stupid and selfish on the side*. Morally deficient perhaps but I'd hesitate to seek an organic excuse for him.

*nb, every country has nasty, stupid and selfish people but it is rare for one to become head of state.
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
I've noticed the same vitriol towards retainers.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Nasty, but don't fret too much about it, BT.

I'm not! - but I found the responses sad (although there were a couple in support, too).
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Remainers even. Bloody autocorrect
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
My wife and I joined a small anti-Trump demonstration in our town yesterday. Perhaps 150 came along. All right, I'm sure that Trump won't have noticed - but (and I say this as a person who rarely joins in such actions) it felt necessary to do and say somethingh, even if only to salve our consciences.

This is just one of many posts here on the Ship that make me so grateful to all of you who don't live in the U.S. (England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere), but who are supportive of us who are in the States, and who don't assume all Americans are in favor of the PG in the White House. Thank you.
[Overused]

(If that's too mushy for Hell, tough.)
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
This is just one of many posts here on the Ship that make me so grateful to all of you who don't live in the U.S. (England, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and elsewhere), but who are supportive of us who are in the States, and who don't assume all Americans are in favor of the PG in the White House. Thank you.
[Overused]


I know it is so easy to blame "all Americans" for Trump, but the ship has shown me the importance of not tarring everyone with the same brush. There are so many US shipmates who are clearly sane and sensible.

Thank you for continuing to remind us that you exist. That not all Americans are like the worst.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Gosh, Hell has become polite!

(Although I echo the sentiments).
 
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on :
 
I have always appreciated the contributions of our American friends - long may it continue
Trump is nasty because he's an obnoxious person, and would be whether he were American, Welsh Scottish English or whatever. He is not obnoxious because he is American and heaven knows there are enough obnoxious people this side of the pond which are enough to stop us getting self-righteous!
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Gosh, Hell has become polite!

(Although I echo the sentiments).

I think there is a temptation here to shout and scream about "Bloody Americans" and suchlike. It is always worth a moment to remember that there are many in the US who are as anti-Trump, as appalled by it.

Otherwise, we have to just continue being astounded at a US president who makes the lady who voted for Brexit because she saw a straight banana seem like a sensible and rational person.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Gosh, Hell has become polite!

(Although I echo the sentiments).

Balls! Fuck! Nigger!

Happy now?
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Much as I dislike all that, it seems far more appropriate!
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
If a million marching women in pussy hats does not convince you that there are Americans who don't like the PG in Chief, it is hopeless of endeavor. I am busily knitting hats for all my acquaintance.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Much as I dislike all that, it seems far more appropriate!

Clearly my attempts over the years to explain how Hell works have failed utterly.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I think there is a temptation here to shout and scream about "Bloody Americans" and suchlike. It is always worth a moment to remember that there are many in the US who are as anti-Trump, as appalled by it.

That's why I use words like "the current US administration" to identify who I'm screaming about. I know that the actions of Trump and his cronies are not supported by the majority of American citizens - much less all of them.

I'll also refer to our own bunch of lunatics claiming to be working on our behalf as "the current UK government", because their actions are not supported by the majority of the UK electorate.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
orfeo--

quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Seriously? Do we HAVE to trawl through anything and everything for explanations and justifications of why Trump acts like an arsehole?

Maybe he's just, you know, a horrible person?

Hmmm...I'm not sure that anyone is *just* a horrible person. There are always reasons, causes, and factors for the way they are. The reasons might not make sense to you, but IMHO they're there.

And, sometimes, I'm not altogether how much free will anyone has.

quote:
This is nothing more than junk science.
Junk *diagnosis* from this doctor-author, maybe, because he hasn't treated Trump personally. But Alopecia has known psychological side-effects, which have been studied, and the doctor gives links to more info. I haven't read the article/statement from Trump's own doctor, but I gather that sparked this one.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
The drug is called Propecia.

And yes, it has known, uncommon, side effects. The junk consists of reasoning backwards that Trump must be one of the people that has these side effects, because we "know" he has psychological problems and hey presto, here's an explanation for them.

And yes, I'm sure there are reasons for his being a horrible person. I'm sure his upbringing contributed. I'm sure his apparent desperate need for validation drives much of his behaviour. What shits me is the attempt to medicalise it.

[ 05. February 2017, 22:49: Message edited by: orfeo ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
orfeo--

Thanks re Propecia. Honestly, that's what I meant to type, but my brain reached into the wrong box and I didn't notice it.

Maybe you haven't seen his debates with Hillary. He was very clearly unhinged. There've been many other things, since then, that make it clear that *something* is wrong. I'm not sure that he's capable of behaving much differently than he does.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Over at the Council of Bishops of the African Methodist Church they're \declaring an official resistance. They cite a host of decisions and actions by the Trump administration, described by the bishops as “clearly demonic acts.”
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
On a completely serious note, Twitter has Bridget Trump's Diary. A mash-up. Which is ridiculous. Great.

example:
quote:
Said 'You're Fired' to Attorney Gen. Sally Yates! Hurrah! Am top POTUS Nigey sent me thumbs up Rest of UK being a bit of a bitch actually
etc

[ 06. February 2017, 02:39: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
[...] What shits me is the attempt to medicalise it.

Certainly doesn't explain his oral silver spoon upbringing. Plus if he takes the stuff - in his case, just seems to add to his vanity, doesn't it?
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Maybe you haven't seen his debates with Hillary. He was very clearly unhinged. There've been many other things, since then, that make it clear that *something* is wrong. I'm not sure that he's capable of behaving much differently than he does.

I agree that *something* is wrong. But I also agree with orfeo that that *something* doesn't have to be medical. It's perfectly likely that the thing that's wrong with Trump is simply that he's a colossal shitrag with all the charm and grace of a leaking colostomy bag, the lovable personality of a wet fart, and a lack of care for the wellbeing of the rest of humanity that would make Skynet say "whoa, too far dude".
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Trump's problem appears to be that no one ever told him 'no'. That will, inevitably, produce pathologies and aberrant behaviours, but at its root cause is simply he's always got what he wanted, and could use his cheque book to get out of trouble.

Now, he can't. His first resort is going to be bullying and sacking, but his second will be to surround himself with people who'll never tell him no.

Thwart him often enough, he'll either give up or break the constitution, depending on how badly he wants it.
 
Posted by irish_lord99 (# 16250) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
...the lovable personality of a wet fart...

You're quite generous here... wet farts are funny in retrospect.
 
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :
 
quote:
Thwart him often enough, he'll either give up or break the constitution
...or start a war and claim emergency powers.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
Seriously? Do we HAVE to trawl through anything and everything for explanations and justifications of why Trump acts like an arsehole?

Maybe he's just, you know, a horrible person?

Being a horrible person is not a disqualification for being president. Chemically induced mental aberration might be.

Of course, none of that abrogates that enough people voted for him to get elected.

quote:

This is nothing more than junk science.

Not technically. The side effects, though not present in every user, are fairly well documented.
It isn't junk science, but probable mis-attribution. More pedantic than disagreeing with your position.

/tangent
Never understood the idea of taking a medication for hair loss that has the potential side effects propecia does. Like buying a Ferrari with no motor.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
It's interesting to see some people linking Trump with the dark triad stuff, (narcissism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism), I was amused to see Alastair Campbell banging this drum on TV.

It is pseudo-science, since you can't diagnose someone at a distance, although I suppose it's fair enough to use it as an insult, like calling somebody mad.

[ 06. February 2017, 16:21: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Pseudo-science is also the wrong term. It isn't the theory that is in question, but the application.

Trump isn't fit to serve tea, much less as a president.
Doesn't matter so much why.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
...the lovable personality of a wet fart...

You're quite generous here... wet farts are funny in retrospect.
And are also relatively healthy, insofar, as passing wind is natural and needful. Trump is neither, so far as I can see.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It is pseudo-science, since you can't diagnose someone at a distance, although I suppose it's fair enough to use it as an insult, like calling somebody mad.

There's a long and interesting history of such from Wikipedia listing, particularly re famous people. Apparently 4000 or so are available since 1910.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
It is pseudo-science, since you can't diagnose someone at a distance, although I suppose it's fair enough to use it as an insult, like calling somebody mad.

There's a long and interesting history of such from Wikipedia listing, particularly re famous people. Apparently 4000 or so are available since 1910.
Yes, good point. I've been reading some biographies of Sylvia Plath and they vary between respectful (she had certain issues), and half-baked nonsense (she was a schizophrenic). Generally, this is done with the dead, since they can't sue.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I've been reading some biographies of Sylvia Plath and they vary between respectful (she had certain issues), and half-baked nonsense (she was a schizophrenic). Generally, this is done with the dead, since they can't sue.

Or defend themselves.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
Trump's problem appears to be that no one ever told him 'no'. That will, inevitably, produce pathologies and aberrant behaviours, but at its root cause is simply he's always got what he wanted, and could use his cheque book to get out of trouble.

Now, he can't. His first resort is going to be bullying and sacking, but his second will be to surround himself with people who'll never tell him no.

Thwart him often enough, he'll either give up or break the constitution, depending on how badly he wants it.

He suffers from Affluenza.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Yes. He expects special treatment because he's rich. The law doesn't apply to him. The usual rules of the market don't apply to him. Common decency is for the common folk, but not him.

And Bercow has just flipped him the middle finger too. If May tries to replace him now, it'll look intensely vindictive.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Has anyone linked EverySecondCounts? The best is the original, the Netherlands, though Germany is close.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
lb--

LOL. Thanks for the link. I'm working my way through. Just saw the Swiss one. More edgy than I expected!
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
No 'UK Second' video yet?
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
It's a government project, so it will be thrown together at the last minute after everyone else has done theirs. Boris Johnson has pencilled in the date for shooting it. They're still arguing over which department should be responsible for writing the script - at the moment it's a three-way fight between the FO, the Department for Brexit and the Department for International Trade, but insiders have not yet ruled out the possibility of the creation of a Ministry for Truth.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Is the Moroccan one actually Moroccan? It seems a bit two-pronged to me.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
People have seen Melissa McCarthy's turn on Saturday Night Live, yes? A bravura performance in the role of the miserable Sean Spicer, press secretary to Li'l Donny. Spicer was so foolish as to comment, complaining that the skit was 'mean.' (emoticon: small violin playing) This man should not be in public relations; everybody knows that you DO NOT comment on this kind of thing except with a laugh.

Now, in further luscious developments, his boss weighs in. What bothers the PGinChief is not the LOL skewering. It is that his press secretary was played by a female.

This has encouraged Lyin' Don's perennial nemesis Rosie O'Donnell to weigh in with an offer to play consigliere Steve Bannon. Up until this point the neo-Nazi Mr. Bannon has been played on SNL by a man in a hooded Death suit, which is of course funny but limited, comedically speaking. I consider that Rosie was born to play this role, as Tina Fey was ordained by Heaven to be Sarah Palin, and I hope that the SNL people move on it.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
People have seen Melissa McCarthy's turn on Saturday Night Live, yes? A bravura performance in the role of the miserable Sean Spicer, press secretary to Li'l Donny. Spicer was so foolish as to comment, complaining that the skit was 'mean.'

Actually not what happened. He commented that McCarthy's performance was funny, but needed a little work. The 'mean' was a reference to Baldwin's current portrayals of Trump. Even then, he said Baldwin had been funny, but had now descended to mean.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
It's a government project, so it will be thrown together at the last minute after everyone else has done theirs. Boris Johnson has pencilled in the date for shooting it. They're still arguing over which department should be responsible for writing the script - at the moment it's a three-way fight between the FO, the Department for Brexit and the Department for International Trade, but insiders have not yet ruled out the possibility of the creation of a Ministry for Truth.

Amusing, however none of them are government sponsored. They are all late-night shows doing parody.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Shhhh. Don't let on. We're all waiting for Mrs May to commission one without realising that.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
For the UK, I rather favour the Circumlocution Office, headed by Lord Decimus Tite Barnacle, as depicted by the prescient Mr. Dickens in Little Dorrit.

https://www.panarchy.org/dickens/circumlocution.html

It is, of course, alive and well, if disguised under other nomenclature...

IJ
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
lilbuddha:
quote:
Amusing, however none of them are government sponsored. They are all late-night shows doing parody.
Yes, I knew that. My point being that *our* government is the only one that actually might do something like that for real. You might have got a hint from the comment about the Ministry of Truth...
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
As a Canadian, I would personally like to thank President Trump for considering Sarah Palin as Ambassador to Canada. Response has be underwhelming "As enduring as a empty tin can in a landfill" is one of the more favourable comments.

I hope the Governor General (a Harperite appointee) refuses to accept her credentials.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Pete--

I'm surprised he's not sending her to Russia. After all, she used to be able to see it from her old house.

What might happen if Canada refused her credentials? How often is that done?

Thx.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Pete--

I'm surprised he's not sending her to Russia. After all, she used to be able to see it from her old house.

What might happen if Canada refused her credentials? How often is that done?

Thx.

I believe it can be done, but it rarely happens. The Gee acts on the advice of the Government and I doubt that JT's government want to upset US before the NAFTA talks. Unless the government grew a set of moral standards. And even in 2016, that is highly unlikely.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
Now this is satire I can get behind!
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Wonderful - and so true.....

[Killing me]

IJ
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
You have to think of this as Canada taking one for its southern neighbor. We've been trying to get rid of her for years.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
You have to think of this as Canada taking one for its southern neighbor. We've been trying to get rid of her for years.

But couldn't we send her to a country we don't particularly like?
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
trump lies again, says media covers up terrorist attacks. The headline has it as speculation, but the guy knows it isn't true. Pathological. There's usually a wall somewhere. Where people get lined up.

Re the eventual trump Musical (you know there's going to be one. It'll be Great!): I wonder what the trump - Palin song and dance number will be like. Maybe a heavy metal version of Tea for Two?
Kinds the opposite of everything good about it. Like this: How to make a heavy metal cup of tea
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
You have to think of this as Canada taking one for its southern neighbor. We've been trying to get rid of her for years.

But couldn't we send her to a country we don't particularly like?
Actually Canada is the best choice. She can do no harm there, right? They're too nice to be provoked into invasion, and they have no nukes. Alas that she cannot take Betsy DeVos with her.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
trump lies again, says media covers up terrorist attacks.

And, as has been reported repeatedly over the last few days the list of terrorist attacks that have been under reported is, ermm, interesting. Including crimes that were not terrorist related - producing the perfectly reasonable anger of the mother of a murdered daughter saying that the murder of her daughter shouldn't be used for political capital in another country. Including events like the Paris, Brussels and Nice attacks which literally filled newspapers and TV news for weeks.

But, someone who positively recalls seeing thousands of Muslims celebrating the 9/11 attacks (and, is the only person who saw that) might easily miss hours of TV news and column-miles of newsprint following the murder of 130 people in Paris. Personally, I think it shows someone living in their own little universe oblivious to the events going on around them.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Polonium is a heavy metal, isn't it?

Also the American guy who had his throat cut at at Leytonstone has objected to being on the list - he says the police reckon it was not terrorism as the attacker had been receiving treatment for a mental condition shortly before.

[ 09. February 2017, 22:02: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Can we combine this thread with the circimcism thread? Somehow we need to get trump off of Fox*, or that Fox off trumpecker's head.


Fox = a sorry excuse for an Amertrumpski TVnews channel
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Jane--

quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
lilbuddha:
quote:
Amusing, however none of them are government sponsored. They are all late-night shows doing parody.
Yes, I knew that. My point being that *our* government is the only one that actually might do something like that for real. You might have got a hint from the comment about the Ministry of Truth...
Will it have a fish-slapping dance? Please please please please?
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
The Ministry of Truth works on the motto "Ignorance is Strength". Don't confuse it with the Ministry of Silly Walks - that's what they want you to do, along with believing 2+2=5.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The great political cartoonist Oliphant has been retired for some years now, but current events have drawn him back to his pen. So there's a silver lining to the heavy clouds around us.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
[Eek!]

Scary stuff - because believable...

IJ
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The great political cartoonist Oliphant has been retired for some years now, but current events have drawn him back to his pen. So there's a silver lining to the heavy clouds around us.

I found the previous page more illuminating - some of the less-well-publicised ones are actually quite far-reaching.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
A general summary of the catastrphes of the last few days. I think this conclusively proves that Li'l Donny is hand in hand with Putin. Otherwise the Russians would, like Kim Jong Un, already have moved to take advantage of our disarray.
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
America and 45 have shown some sense at last: Sarah Palin will not be Ambassador to Canada.

That being said, I hope 45 will be "In like Flynn"
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
For St. Valentine's Day one of your classic romantic quizzes: Which White House staffer is your Muse? Deliciously mean.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Re Brenda Clough's "catastrophes" link.

The levels of incompetence are breathtaking. But I suppose that's good on one level. It's getting in the way of at least some of the bad things the administration wants to do because it thinks they are good. It would be quite good if they stayed incompetent, rather than learned how to be more effective.

The world is a complicated place. And the most powerful country in the world is being led by a man impatient with detail and suffering from some kind of chronic attention deficit disorder. That would be OK if his staff knew how to control his dangerous excesses. But clearly they don't.

[ 15. February 2017, 08:54: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Perhaps the incompetance is deliberate - a careful strategy to be seen doing what Trump dictates, but to make sure none of the stupid ideas actually manage to happen.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
You are not the first to think this. This should be a free click. The PGinC administration as the plot of Moby Dick. The happier scenario is one in which the captain "periodically shows up on deck to shake his fist at the moon and order a summary flogging, but for the most part he stays in his cabin emitting strange barks while competent mates and petty officers sail the NSC."
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
An opinion piece with a little hope attached.

By some oddball called Simon Jenkins [Razz]
 
Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
An opinion piece with a little hope attached.

By some oddball called Simon Jenkins [Razz]

But not our Simon Jenkins.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
An opinion piece with a little hope attached.

By some oddball called Simon Jenkins [Razz]

But not our Simon Jenkins.
Ahhh - I was confused 🤔🤔
 
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
Over at Huffington Post, I saw an article listing four possible paths to impeachment. Some people think the Republican party will never be willing to impeach him, but my own opinion is that if they can't get him to go along with their platform, they will be happy to have Pence in his place. While I really don't want Pence in the White House, the nation might be safer in some ways with Pence than with Trump.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I have been following the Trump Press Conference on twitter, and the general opinion is he has done himself no favours.

Anyone watch it? And thoughts? I really couldn't face it.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It will take more than that. It is not necessarily bad from their POV that legislation cannot move. For instance in the case of health care reform they have literally promised what cannot be done. Or consider that wall between Mexico and the US. To have a convenient PG to blame when nothing happens is all to the good.

What it will take to get the GOP Congress to move is something so egregious that even their constituents call for something to be done. Something even more inefficient, even more treasonous, something that cannot be denied. We haven't got there yet. Next week, maybe next month.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I have been following the Trump Press Conference on twitter, and the general opinion is he has done himself no favours.

Anyone watch it? And thoughts? I really couldn't face it.

He was incoherent. It was a meltdown, IMO.

Afterwards, George Stephanopoulos said something to the effect of "You have just gotten a glimpse inside the mind of Donald Trump." Other commentators said it was the most bizarre press conference they'd ever seen.

sabine
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I have been following the Trump Press Conference on twitter, and the general opinion is he has done himself no favours.

Anyone watch it? And thoughts? I really couldn't face it.

Full transcript here.

Go and look on Free Republic if you want to find a bunch of people praying for him and saying how brilliant it was. He is still playing to his constituency.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Reaction to the Press conference. There is a madman in the White House.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Uh, there was doubt?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I'm serious. I mean he is a 25th Amendment nutcase. Completely potty.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It's still not sufficient for the GOP to initiate proceedings to pry him out. We need a real calamity first. I only pray it's not a radioactive mushroom cloud.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Barnabas--

I'm serious, too. Several Shipmates figured out that, or something similar, last fall. We were trying to understand the man, and have some compassion for someone so obviously and deeply impaired. We've kept saying it, on and off.

We've generally been told "don't judge him; you're being partisan; you're spoilsports; he's a great businessman, so obviously his brain is working; he can't possibly be that bad; you're sore losers; he won the election, so don't try to stop him from being inaugurated; if he does something impeachable, get rid of him then; oh, it's all just political rhetoric, he doesn't mean it and he'll never do it; he's just playing to his base".

And what's especially made me do a slow burn for months is that those dismissive comments came mostly from non-American Shipmates who fancied themselves experts on America, Americans, American society, American law, and American politics.

I've raised this, over and over. Mostly didn't do any good. People were dismissive and defensive.

In Purg, it's gotten to the point where it seems non-American Shipmates mostly just want to talk to each other.

Barnabas, this isn't just about you. This post is for all the people mentioned.

And if American Shipmates had acted the same way about someone else's country, we would've had our heads handed to us in a pond war to end all pond wars.

So...re a sudden realization that "there's a madman in the White House"...

!Duh!
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:

We've generally been told "don't judge him; you're being partisan; you're spoilsports; he's a great businessman, so obviously his brain is working; he can't possibly be that bad; you're sore losers; he won the election, so don't try to stop him from being inaugurated; if he does something impeachable, get rid of him then; oh, it's all just political rhetoric, he doesn't mean it and he'll never do it; he's just playing to his base".

Your perception of this is different than mine. Outside of the suspect usuals, I didn't perceive things occurring the same way as you do. I am not saying you are wrong, just that I don't see it the same.

quote:

In Purg, it's gotten to the point where it seems non-American Shipmates mostly just want to talk to each other.

I do not see this at all.


quote:

And if American Shipmates had acted the same way about someone else's country, we would've had our heads handed to us in a pond war to end all pond wars.

I don't think this is completely accurate.
Trump isn't your problem, he is all of ours. Brexit will affect America as well as Europe. Politics from any major world player affects the rest and is subject to discussion. Yes, there are pond issues sometimes, but that gets quashed fairly quickly, IMO.


Not saying I am correct and you are not, but that I see it differently.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
lilBuddha--

Thanks for the careful way you worded that. [Smile] Not going to respond at this point. I need to kick back and relax.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
The question was specifically about the news conference.

Here is a UK media view.

This persuasive new evidence of insanity in the US President is not just a US problem. Whether or not it is a confirmation of earlier judgment s because of his behaviour as a candidate.

I agree with the comments of the US Senator as reported in that article. At the very least, the man is in urgent need of a therapist.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
He said himself that he enjoyed it.

I think he craves attention - and the more he gets the more his craving grows.

What he says to get that attention is entirely secondary, he gives it little thought (and cares even less)

All we can think now is 'how much longer can this charade go on'??
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I don’t think he’s clinically insane. That’s offensive to the genuinely mentally ill.

I do think he’s utterly incompetent, deluded and out of his depth. And above all, that press conference leaves no doubt in my mind that he was in cahoots with the Russians before the election. I am mainly wondering how long it will take for him to get found out.
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
lilbuddha:
quote:
Trump isn't your problem, he is all of ours. Brexit will affect America as well as Europe. Politics from any major world player affects the rest and is subject to discussion.
I doubt the UK will be a major world player for much longer, the way we're going. I actually think the Conservatives are more dangerous (to the country they're governing) than Trump. The Trumpton crew are wasting a lot of time and energy on fighting scandals and don't seem to have many competent people. Mayhem & Co. have a plan (a stupid plan, but it's a plan) and are steamrollering their way over the opposition, ably assisted by the gutter press.

I understand there is some debate over whether he's genuinely mentally ill or just an arsehole: see here , the relevant quote being "Trump causes severe distress rather than experiencing it and has been richly rewarded... for his grandiosity, self-absorption and lack of empathy."

[ 17. February 2017, 08:08: Message edited by: Jane R ]
 
Posted by Sarasa (# 12271) on :
 
I agree Jane R about what is happening in the UK and am rather in despair as to how to stop it (my MP appears to have gone AWOL on the topic). Back to Trump, I watched the (edited) news conference on the BBC Ten O'Clock news. The theme , well at least the theme the BBC were going with, was the 'trust me, everything you hear is fake news' one. If I was a Trump supporter I guess I'd buy into that. What is it going to take for his fan base to realise that not every newspaper and TV company in the Country is in a conspiracy against him. Talking of which, are there any mainstream papers still giving him the benefit of the doubt? If it was the UK I could imagine The Mail, Express and Sun would have supported him at first, but I think even they might have jumped ship by now.
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
I have the same problem with Trump as I do with BoJo and Nigel Farrago - he is so obviously untrustworthy I can't believe anyone falls for it. But people obviously do.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
I don’t think he’s clinically insane. That’s offensive to the genuinely mentally ill.

That's what I thought before the press conference.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I am not surprised the BBC went with that angle. Trump was unforgivably rude to their journalist.

Anyone sending a little card for the ides of Trump? I am looking for one with a picture of the Eiffel Tower and the Parisian statue of Liberty (same as the one in New York but smaller). I am going to write "Dear Mr President, we want our statue back. -France".

[x-post with Barnabas]

[ 17. February 2017, 09:14: Message edited by: la vie en rouge ]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
My previous "fiery and mad" link was to an ITV article, and not from the BBC.


Here is the BBC link.

And here is Anthony Zurcher's more detailed observation, which makes no comment on his mental state. Other than Trump's own assertion that he would be portrayed as "ranting and raving", which Zurcher does not say.

I think he was ranting and raving for a significant proportion of that 76 minute press conference. YMMV.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sarasa:
I agree Jane R about what is happening in the UK and am rather in despair as to how to stop it (my MP appears to have gone AWOL on the topic). Back to Trump, I watched the (edited) news conference on the BBC Ten O'Clock news. The theme , well at least the theme the BBC were going with, was the 'trust me, everything you hear is fake news' one. If I was a Trump supporter I guess I'd buy into that. What is it going to take for his fan base to realise that not every newspaper and TV company in the Country is in a conspiracy against him.

This is the real question.

I went on his Facebook page - his supporters are ardent, completely with him and repeating everything he says.

What this says about them I don't know. Do they see the same man I see? This press conference wasn't hidden, it was out there for all to see his bullying, erratic ways. How can they possibly think he says any of it in good faith?

I get more perplexed by the day. Some of his supporters are intelligent, ordinary people - yes?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

I went on his Facebook page - his supporters are ardent, completely with him and repeating everything he says.

What this says about them I don't know. Do they see the same man I see? This press conference wasn't hidden, it was out there for all to see his bullying, erratic ways. How can they possibly think he says any of it in good faith?

I get more perplexed by the day. Some of his supporters are intelligent, ordinary people - yes?

It's just hard for any of us to admit, publicly, that we have been wrong. Particularly when it comes to trusting someone else. Trusting Trump was a desperate move by a large number of frustrated and increasingly angry people, fed up with both "Washington" and "mainstream media". You can understand that. I think they have been conned, but they are the ones who have to realise that.

If a backlash comes from Trump's supporters, and it might in due course, I shudder to think about how that anger and disappointment will erupt.

There comes a point however when defence ceases to be sustainable. I saw this phenomenon amongst Nixon supporters during Watergate.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Anyone sending a little card for the ides of Trump? I am looking for one with a picture of the Eiffel Tower and the Parisian statue of Liberty (same as the one in New York but smaller). I am going to write "Dear Mr President, we want our statue back. -France".

I'm sending 200 postcards, but postage is less expensive since I'm within the U.S. Thank you for supporting this effort -- and I love your idea!
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
I was able to watch most of the press conference as I was at home for lunch. It was jaw-dropping - one of the most bizarre spectacles of public life I have ever witnessed. It was how I imagine a Mussolini press conference.

Step #1: Someone must explain to Trump that the campaign is over. That this is not a "reality" TV exercise. This is for real. People will not be fired - they will die.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
I was able to watch most of the press conference as I was at home for lunch. It was jaw-dropping - one of the most bizarre spectacles of public life I have ever witnessed. It was how I imagine a Mussolini press conference.

It is easy to look at Mussolini as a strutting popinjay from an English speaking perspective. But he was not only a real motivator, he is the prototype of modern dictatorship. He was a real piece of work, but he was competent.
quote:

Step #1: Someone must explain to Trump that the campaign is over. That this is not a "reality" TV exercise. This is for real. People will not be fired - they will die.

He doesn't care. As long as there are a few to polish his knob, he's happy.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Well, I am doing my part. I have been knitting pussyhats like the wind. And because this weekend is notably springlike and clement in the region, and yet there are no protest marches scheduled (that I know of), I am going to give the president a pussyhat. It is carefully and safely enclosed in a zip-loc bag, so the security people may feel calm about it.
The note enclosed (handwritten with a Sharpie) says: Dear Mr. President, I know you are sad because everyone else had a pussyhat and you did not. So I made you one. If you wear it you will feel better. Sincerely.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Well, I am doing my part. I have been knitting pussyhats like the wind. And because this weekend is notably springlike and clement in the region, and yet there are no protest marches scheduled (that I know of), I am going to give the president a pussyhat. It is carefully and safely enclosed in a zip-loc bag, so the security people may feel calm about it.
The note enclosed (handwritten with a Sharpie) says: Dear Mr. President, I know you are sad because everyone else had a pussyhat and you did not. So I made you one. If you wear it you will feel better. Sincerely.

I've been meaning to ask if you'd done that yet. Please let us know what reaction you get!
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:

I understand there is some debate over whether he's genuinely mentally ill or just an arsehole: see here , the relevant quote being "Trump causes severe distress rather than experiencing it and has been richly rewarded... for his grandiosity, self-absorption and lack of empathy."

I did see that, and thought it was very interesting. The writer knows what he is talking about (he wrote the diagnostic criteria for narcissism, so seems like the perfect person to comment on Trump).

And I would agree that suggestions of mental health are mistaken. It is like when people commit atrocities the question is always "were they mentally ill?" In Trumps case, from what I have seen, the indications are not there. He cannot be excused by illness - he is a callous, manipulative, unpleasant person; narcissistic, yes, but that is just his obnoxious self.

We are too quick, sometimes, to assign to mental health problems things that can easily be explained by the fact that people are shit.
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
I would question the idea that Trump is not in distress. He seems to me to be someone who is in turmoil, driven by things he doesn't understand. The only thing that seems to calm him is another fix of adulation & unquestioning obedience (I notice he's holding a campaign rally in Florida tomorrow, although the campaign ended over 2 months ago.) That and endless hours of TV.

How long before he bans "dishonest" reporters from press conferences so he can get his fix in the press room?
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I am in hopes a pussyhat would help. (I once wrote a short story, in which knitting did.) I plan to drive up to the White House and simply hand it to the gate guard. They're used to this; people give (or mail) things to the president all the time. You can see the stuff, years later, in the Presidential Libraries: crocheted afghans, portraits rendered in glued-on dried macaroni, crayon pictures. Everything (except for food items, which are destroyed) is carefully archived for history.
The odds are very very long, of course, that the president will ever see any of it. So I do not expect the PGinC to show up on TV wearing a pink hat (although it would be a very clever thing for him to do). I do expect the hat to linger in a box in the Smithsonian for all time. I made it out of acrylic, so it will endure.
 
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
Re: the comment about Mussolini. It remains to be seen whether Trump will make the trains run on time.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:

We are too quick, sometimes, to assign to mental health problems things that can easily be explained by the fact that people are shit.

Maybe. He certainly fits a part of the narcissistic personality disorder pattern. And I thought I spotted some deterioration in that bizarre news conference.

But I agree in general that not all failings can be attributed to mental illness.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Re: the comment about Mussolini. It remains to be seen whether Trump will make the trains run on time.

Trains are an environmentally friendly means of travel. So, he'll prefer to make sure they're so unreliable that people will prefer to fly or drive ... don't let those Chinese dictate global policy to sell their demonic wind turbines and solar panels.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:

We are too quick, sometimes, to assign to mental health problems things that can easily be explained by the fact that people are shit.

Maybe. He certainly fits a part of the narcissistic personality disorder pattern. And I thought I spotted some deterioration in that bizarre news conference.

But I agree in general that not all failings can be attributed to mental illness.

One can be mentally ill and an arsehole.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
Ok. Ok. I think I've finally got it all worked out.

It's an evil ploy of NBC or CBC or CNN, doesn't matter, one of those fake-news outlets. Somewhere they got the same girls who were in action a bit earlier this week at Kuala Lumpur airport doing a job on KJU's brother to sedate Trump and swap him with Alec Baldwin, who is now doing all the press conferences, while meanwhile it is Trump who is under hypnosis and has to work on Saturday Night Live.

Believing all this makes a whole lot more sense than believing that the man in the news conference was really the dignified president of the US of A.
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
From his Twitter: "...media are the enemy of the American people." Enemy of the people? This is happening more quickly than I had anticipated.
 
Posted by Sarasa (# 12271) on :
 
Brenda Clough said:
quote:
I am in hopes a pussyhat would help. (I once wrote a short story, in which knitting did.)
Hmmm I once wrote a story in which knitting helped fullfil the wishes of a murderous nun, but I'm sure you mean nothing but the best for Donald.

The whole 'the media is lying' thing is worringing. Would Trump have any powers to curtail the freedom of the press in the way Erdogan has done in Turkey, or would that final be a step too far?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
From his Twitter: "...media are the enemy of the American people." Enemy of the people? This is happening more quickly than I had anticipated.

You may be interested in this article.

From which the following quote shows something important.

quote:
As the scandal surrounding his campaign's ties to Russia grows, Trump wants the public to think it's all the doing of the dishonest media. But journalists are not letting up, and the vast majority of Americans are not going to fall for Trump's tactics for very long. Even on the generally-supportive Fox News channel, the brave Shepard Smith called him out. "It's absolutely crazy," Smith said. "He keeps repeating ridiculous throwaway lines that are not true at all and sort of avoiding this issue of Russia as if we're some kind of fools for asking the question."
At the risk of "Godwinning" the discussion, the USA is not Germany in the early 1930s. Trump is rallying the faithful; doesn't seem too see much point in reaching out to the 60% or so of the population who think he is doing a lousy job.

He'll lose in the end, though it may be a pretty nasty journey to get to the loss.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
The Beeb has suggested that his audience does not watch CNN or read the papers he does not like, so are primed to believe his claim that they lie.

Meanwhile, I am haunted by a reversed image of the return of Toad to Toad Hall - only the toad and his cronies are the ones being ousted. He is the Lord of Misrule, and will get removed by nemesis. He is Antinous and will bbe expelled by reason.

Don't know where that came from (except that people abusing the hospitality of the first person with my name has been in my mind for other reasons).
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sarasa:
The whole 'the media is lying' thing is worringing. Would Trump have any powers to curtail the freedom of the press in the way Erdogan has done in Turkey, or would that final be a step too far?

I don't think he could do it now, but if his narrative is allowed to hack away at the reputation of the mainstream media for several years, then it might become possible to find a political consensus putting certain tabs on the media. Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media. It's full of hype, spin and fake news, particularly from outlets close to political parties. British newspapers are a case in point.

[ 18. February 2017, 08:01: Message edited by: molopata ]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:

Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media. It's full of hype, spin and fake news, particularly from outlets close to political parties. British newspapers are a case in point.

Examples are helpful. Can you produce one from the UK papers where a story critical of Trump was "full of hype, spin and fake news"? One will do. And given Trump's dismissal of the BBC at the recent press conference, feel free to quote from the BBC website as well.

I don't think the media are perfect as information sources. I don't think the Trump administration is perfect as an information source. In order to evaluate sources, all of us need some kind of critical capability. We can weigh what is said for internal coherence, confirmation from other sources, track record of being right etc. As Shepherd Smith demonstrated (and Megyn Kelly before him), it is perfectly possible to work for an organisation which is slanted in favour of a particular position and yet retain some measure of critical objectivity over these things.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
I don't think Trump knows the difference between news and opinion.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media. It's full of hype, spin and fake news, particularly from outlets close to political parties. British newspapers are a case in point.

Examples are helpful. Can you produce one from the UK papers where a story critical of Trump was "full of hype, spin and fake news"? One will do.
I wasn't referring specifically to Trump, but to news in general. Look no further than the Daily Express and Daily Mail for a compilation of untruths and misrepresentations so outlandish that I feel that the Brothers Grimm would make a more reliable source of factual information.
So what I meant was that this is one of the very few things I could agree with Trump in principle, but look at it from a near-opposite political angle.

[ 18. February 2017, 09:06: Message edited by: molopata ]
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I don't think Trump knows the difference between news and opinion.

Maybe not. But he is in the Whitehouse ibecause many people stopped believing the offerings of experts and gagged neoliberal news moguls a long while back.
It is the age of news echo chambers, and if the chamber doesn't throw back the inner workings of our head we simply ain't interested anymore.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media. It's full of hype, spin and fake news, particularly from outlets close to political parties. British newspapers are a case in point.

Examples are helpful. Can you produce one from the UK papers where a story critical of Trump was "full of hype, spin and fake news"? One will do.
I wasn't referring specifically to Trump, but to news in general. Look no further than the Daily Express and Daily Mail for a compilation of untruths and misrepresentations so outlandish that I feel that the Brothers Grimm would make a more reliable source of factual information.
So what I meant was that this is one of the very few things I could agree with Trump in principle, but look at it from a near-opposite political angle.

If you think Donald Trump is criticizing the UK press then you completely misunderstand what he's doing. He's talking about CNN and the New York Times; he neither knows nor cares about the Daily Express and the Daily Mail.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
Again: I wasn't referring specifically to Trump, but to the news in general.

Of course I don't think he's criticising the UK press; I am. What I am saying is that much of the British press is extremely shoddy and if they don't run fake news, then at least something pretty close to it (in fact, I referred to the D. Express and D. Mail which are both pretty pro-Trump, btw). It is exactly this kind of media behaviour that makes it possible for Trump and his ilk to attack the media and make the attack stick, namely because he is at least partly right.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I have seen that "uranium" section of the Press Conference. If any PM in the UK did one so badly they would be out in hours, as would their briefing staff, but of course the systems are different.

What struck me was how patronising he is. I suspect 90% of his audience knew what uranium is (the other 10% are all his supporters), but he presents it like it is radical and new. I guess, because it is new to him, that someone explained to him that uranium could be used in nuclear weapons.

Of course, uranium is also used for nuclear power plants, possibly medical equipment? I don't know all of its uses. But someone has told him some snippet of information, and it has blown his mind. He just can't handle it.

And why should the US not have trade with Russia? It is not illegal, it is a reasonable trade. Trump does a lot of trade with the Russians.

And he is apoplectic about this! About the fact that the US does trade in important and difficult materials. Like anyone thought differently.

I can see children at school doing US history asking "So he misled people about some inappropriate sex? And they impeached him? Just for that?"
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Again: I wasn't referring specifically to Trump, but to the news in general.

Of course I don't think he's criticising the UK press; I am. What I am saying is that much of the British press is extremely shoddy and if they don't run fake news, then at least something pretty close to it (in fact, I referred to the D. Express and D. Mail which are both pretty pro-Trump, btw). It is exactly this kind of media behaviour that makes it possible for Trump and his ilk to attack the media and make the attack stick, namely because he is at least partly right.

No, you specifically referred to Trump - you said
quote:
Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media.
This is still utter nonsense - the behavior of the UK media can't possibly make it possible for Trump to attack the media, because he's not talking about them.

You may have valid criticisms of the Daily Express and the Daily Mail, but this is a really stupid reason to cite - it's idiotic to blame them for Trump's attacks on CNN and the New York Times.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
Dave, please read me in context. I didn't stop there:

Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media. It's full of hype, spin and fake news, particularly from outlets close to political parties. British newspapers are a case in point.

I am not talking about Trump criticising the media pertaining only to Trump, I'm talking about Trump's general criticism of the media that it is full of hype, spin and fake news. And that is as true for the British media as it is for the American. (Having at last found something I to some extent agree on with the bastard, I've kind of got to make a thing of it!)
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
The media don't fit your description, some of the media do. To paint all with the sins of the worst is definitely responsible for cheeto and probably for Brexit as well.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Thing is, we in the UK are well used to fake news.
Peace in our time? WMD's deployed in 45 minutes? A shallow, short-lived economic 'dip' in 08?... to name but a few.

On that other matter, I've come across people who fervently hold views much akin to the Mail and Express without ever having read the damn things, not even when eating their fish and chips.

All this banging on fake news is overblown hyperbole IMO. If there ever comes a time when individual US journalists, relentlessly dissing DT, start mysteriously disappearing then my alarm bells will be ringing.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
All this banging on fake news is overblown hyperbole IMO. If there ever comes a time when individual US journalists, relentlessly dissing DT, start mysteriously disappearing then my alarm bells will be ringing.

It's better to ring the alarm before the house is fully engulfed with flames.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Thing is, we in the UK are well used to fake news.
Peace in our time? WMD's deployed in 45 minutes? A shallow, short-lived economic 'dip' in 08?... to name but a few.

As you say, fake news isn't new. Though, aren't those examples the statements of politicians rather than news? They were reported accurately as what politicians said, which is completely different from newspapers/TV news reporting something invented.

Better (UK) examples would include the various "loony left" stories of how Labour run councils enacted all sorts of "politically correct" policies (Christmas becoming "winterval" or "Baa Baa Black Sheep" banned, etc) - which were almost all reported in a manner that significantly distorted actual events if not being pure fiction. Or, the long term reporting claiming that immigrants receive free NHS treatment or benefits, overstretch local resources, take local jobs etc. (again all widely reported as fictional).

I'm sure there are similar examples of fake news in US media over as long a period. And, a collection of outlets that are renowned for such reporting (Fox comes to mind from what has been reported). The irony being that Trump has targeted news outlets that have been the least guilty of fake news, while ignoring the much greater prevalence of fake news from outlets that are more generally supportive of his policies.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I'm sure there are similar examples of fake news in US media over as long a period.

Indeed, and the very same ones as the UK ones you enumerate, mutatis mutandis* (for instance instead of NHS put Medicaid).


_______
*changing the changeable
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
From my observations, the more partisan the source the more spin; but when it comes to flat out lying the right are far more likely to be guilty. And by lying I mean provable facts.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Dave, please read me in context. I didn't stop there:

Now the problem is, Trump is not 180 degrees wrong when he criticises the media. It's full of hype, spin and fake news, particularly from outlets close to political parties. British newspapers are a case in point.

I am not talking about Trump criticising the media pertaining only to Trump, I'm talking about Trump's general criticism of the media that it is full of hype, spin and fake news.

He's bullshitting. He simply says that any item critical of him is "fake news", while he casually peddles the most obvious, easily disprovable falsehoods without a trace of shame.

He's not "making a general criticism of the media", and you're a fool if you think he is.
quote:
And that is as true for the British media as it is for the American. (Having at last found something I to some extent agree on with the bastard, I've kind of got to make a thing of it!)
No, there's really no obligation for you to follow him into the pool of idiocy in which he splashes about. This is entirely your choice.
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
Drumpf tweets that the media are the enemy of the people. That's not a serious critique of the media; that's straight out of both the fascist and the communist playbook.

The problem, IMV, isn't so much the fake or real news; it's that few people know or care how to distinguish them properly or consider the details of the story rather than the headline. One of my colleagues was outraged by a news story about a new law that pedestrians will be required to wear reflective clothing. "The government won't tell me what to wear!" The real story was a proposal to regulate what can be labeled "reflective" or "safety" apparel so that it actually has enough reflective stuff to do the job (particularly for work clothing), unlike e.g. yoga pants or sneakers with useless teeny reflective logos or piping. It was a proposal for a regulation for clothing manufacturers, advertisers and retailers, not a law for pedestrians. See how complicated all that was? Makes my brain tired! Don't have time! It's so much easier for people to freak out or founder in cynicism instead.

When if I'm dissatisfied by a lack of detail, or obsessed with finding out the reality behind the story, I'll download that controversial report or court decision or whatever and read it for myself. I guess that's probably nerdier than the average body politic.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Gene Huber, the man who joined Trump on the stage at the rally, typified the loyalty of his supporters. He's star struck, a believer, rather like a cult follower. And seems a very pleasant human being.

You ask yourself, where is his critical faculty? Is it submerged by the adulation? In which case it will re-emerge as reality bites. Or, more worryingly, does he not really have one, which is why he's been drawn in.

As Golden Key just posted in Purgatory, John McCain has just done a demolition job on Trump's world view. So there are and will be voices around debunking the nonsense. How long will it take to sink in? Erode his loyalist power base?
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
And that is as true for the British media as it is for the American. (Having at last found something I to some extent agree on with the bastard, I've kind of got to make a thing of it!)

No, there's really no obligation for you to follow him into the pool of idiocy in which he splashes about. This is entirely your choice.
Ok. I'll break it down into chicken-nugget sized morsels for you without conjunctions:

1. Trump notes that a lot of media produce fake news.
2. I agree with this finding.
3. It is amazing that I agree with him on anything at all.
4. I remark that parts of the British press have been producing fake-news for years.
5. I do not agree with Trump on which media or on which particular news.
6. I mention The Daily Express and The Daily Mail as examples.
7. The Daily Express and The Daily Mail are very-pro Trump.
8. Trump has probably never heard of these newspapers.

Further clarifications:
a. I do not think the media is the enemy of the people.
b. Trump expresses popular half-truths to seduce people.
b. I do not think that Trump is sane.
c. I am not (I think [Paranoid] ) following him into a pool of idiocy for agreeing with him on one single thing.
d. Even broken clocks show the right time twice a day.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Interesting example of fake news.

From the Master of fake news.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
I wonder how much fake news would fail to be reported if Trump had a good night sleep rather than send a barrage of tweets at two in the morning.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
if Trump had a good night sleep

Given his alleged prowess with women, surely he's not having to spend the night in an empty bed while the First Bimbo remains in New York.

Or maybe that's the problem.
 
Posted by Sarasa (# 12271) on :
 
The thing that worries me about all this fake news stuff is that while the media is spending lots of time discussing it, Pence and others are in Europe actually talking about policy. I'm wondering if someone (enter name here) has decided to keep Trump happy with rallies, twitter etc while they do the actual governing, which is likely to be far more alarming to us all.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Interesting example of fake news.

From the Master of fake news.

Looks like he confused Sweden with Sehwan in Pakistan..

Easily done [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Thanks, Boogs. - Oh.dear.God! [Ultra confused] [Disappointed]
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
And that is as true for the British media as it is for the American. (Having at last found something I to some extent agree on with the bastard, I've kind of got to make a thing of it!)

No, there's really no obligation for you to follow him into the pool of idiocy in which he splashes about. This is entirely your choice.
Ok. I'll break it down into chicken-nugget sized morsels for you without conjunctions:

1. Trump notes that a lot of media produce fake news.

This is a very stupid mischaracterization of what Trump is doing. You have already failed at the first hurdle.
quote:
2. I agree with this finding.
3. It is amazing that I agree with him on anything at all.

Possibly not so amazing. You are, after all, someone who somehow thinks the behavior of the Daily Mail and Daily Express is what "makes it possible for Trump and his ilk to attack the media" when neither Trump nor his audience gives the slightest fuck about the UK press.
quote:
c. I am not (I think [Paranoid] ) following him into a pool of idiocy for agreeing with him on one single thing.

You don't even understand what you think you're agreeing with. Possibly you're still wandering around trying to find the pool of idiocy.
quote:
d. Even broken clocks show the right time twice a day.
This quaint saying isn't meant to be something you should aspire to as a life goal.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Interesting example of fake news.

From the Master of fake news.

Here's the story of what really happened in Sweden Friday night. (The moose story is particularly heart-wrenching.)
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
[Killing me] The moose story is worth passing on to CNN.
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
re Trump making a gnomic reference to an 'event' in Sweden, I like the comment from Carl Bildt (PM of Sweden in the early 1990s), which was Vad har han rökt? (What has he been smoking?) [Overused] [Killing me]
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
Here is a letter I sent to Senator McCain this morning:

quote:
Dear Senator McCain:

I am writing to let you know that I support you completely in your effort to expose the usurper whom the Electoral College has seen fit to install in the White House. I cannot call him the President; he is certainly not my President.

I have not always been in agreement with you on some of your positions, but you are spot on in this instance. Your office was also of great help to my father when his application for veterans' benefits became stalled.

We are fortunate to have a senior statesman such as yourself representing our interests. Please persevere! Perhaps you can persuade enough of your colleagues to make the time short until we once again have someone occupying the White House who is worthy of the honor.


 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Your first paragraph, unfortunately, nullified your letter.
Trump isn't a usurper and whilst he might feel that Trump is unqualified, McCain certainly will not view him as such.
The electoral college did as it has done in the recent history, at least.
Trump is your President. Liking or disliking has naught to do with that.

All you did was mark yourself as a nutter whose further words will be dismissed. Whatever aide reads those will not get past that first paragraph.

If you wish to be acknowledged, you need to dial back the rhetoric.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
Thank you for your ad hominem observations. In my mind he is a usurper and he is not my President. McCain is free to think as he wishes. Now let's get on with the thread, shall we?
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Thank you for your ad hominem observations. In my mind he is a usurper and he is not my President. McCain is free to think as he wishes. Now let's get on with the thread, shall we?

Ad hominem would mean I am attacking you, not the issue. And I am not doing that. If you are writing to make yourself feel better, knock yourself out. If you are wishing to have an effect, then you need to understand the rules of perception.
And what you wrote will most likely be perceived as I suggest.
There is one sure way to avoid comments you don't like on what you post, btw.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
Am I the only one in the room to be eerily reminded by the Florida rally of some charismatic conferences I've been in? [Ultra confused]
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
And that is as true for the British media as it is for the American. (Having at last found something I to some extent agree on with the bastard, I've kind of got to make a thing of it!)

No, there's really no obligation for you to follow him into the pool of idiocy in which he splashes about. This is entirely your choice.
Ok. I'll break it down into chicken-nugget sized morsels for you without conjunctions:

1. Trump notes that a lot of media produce fake news.

This is a very stupid mischaracterization of what Trump is doing. You have already failed at the first hurdle.
quote:
2. I agree with this finding.
3. It is amazing that I agree with him on anything at all.

Possibly not so amazing. You are, after all, someone who somehow thinks the behavior of the Daily Mail and Daily Express is what "makes it possible for Trump and his ilk to attack the media" when neither Trump nor his audience gives the slightest fuck about the UK press.
quote:
c. I am not (I think [Paranoid] ) following him into a pool of idiocy for agreeing with him on one single thing.

You don't even understand what you think you're agreeing with. Possibly you're still wandering around trying to find the pool of idiocy.
quote:
d. Even broken clocks show the right time twice a day.
This quaint saying isn't meant to be something you should aspire to as a life goal.
Whattt??? I haven't the foggiest idea what you're on about. Either you're incapable of linear thought or you're winding me up. [Confused]
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
The two options are not incompatible.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
re Trump making a gnomic reference to an 'event' in Sweden, I like the comment from Carl Bildt (PM of Sweden in the early 1990s), which was Vad har han rökt? (What has he been smoking?) [Overused] [Killing me]

I'm a Swedish-American who likes to keep in touch with the homeland. I know exactly what happened, and it's terrifying.

Friday, February 17 was the Swedish nameday for all those named Alexandra. Let this be a lesson to us all. [Razz]

sabine
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
Whattt??? I haven't the foggiest idea what you're on about. Either you're incapable of linear thought or you're winding me up. [Confused]

I'm not sure how I can make it any simpler for you:

 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
I'm not sure how I can make it any simpler for you:

Well I can give you credit for a least coming with a set of statements that can be understood this time.
quote:

[*]Your characterization of what Trump says and does is fundamentally mistaken. Trump does not "note that a lot of media produce fake news"; he points to true reports in (e.g.) the New York Times and calls them fake news, while he himself casually spreads easily disproved falsehoods. He is essentially a bullshitter.

[Roll Eyes] In fact he does, but what he more usually does is point to true news and call it fake. However, he only gets any traction because the first statement is true.
quote:

[*]That you "agree with this finding" is laughable. Bullshitters don't note things or make findings; it's not like he's contributing to critical discourse on the state of the media.

[Roll Eyes] I agree with the general finding, and I actually don't think you disagree with it either.
quote:

[*]Blaming the Daily Mail and Daily Express for Trump's behavior just compounds the stupidity of your position. It doesn't matter how inane, fatuous, and misleading they may be - none of what they say makes any difference to either Trump specifically or American politics generally. They have no salience here. Their behavior, however reprehensible, can hardly be blamed for his.

[Roll Eyes] And this is where you go totally off the rails. I did not blame Trump's behaviour on these newspapers. Trump is Trump and will do what he does as soon as he has an audience. But they have helped create the conditions in which people like Trump become credible spokespersons in the minds of some people.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
Has it occurred to anybody that perhaps Trump and his people are immigrants from a different timeline, and in their universe there actually were attacks? It could explain the surreal stuf they say.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
I'm not sure how I can make it any simpler for you:

Well I can give you credit for a least coming with a set of statements that can be understood this time.

Well, I'm glad I could finally dumb it down enough for you.
quote:
quote:

[*]Your characterization of what Trump says and does is fundamentally mistaken. Trump does not "note that a lot of media produce fake news"; he points to true reports in (e.g.) the New York Times and calls them fake news, while he himself casually spreads easily disproved falsehoods. He is essentially a bullshitter.

[Roll Eyes] In fact he does, but what he more usually does is point to true news and call it fake. However, he only gets any traction because the first statement is true.
quote:

[*]That you "agree with this finding" is laughable. Bullshitters don't note things or make findings; it's not like he's contributing to critical discourse on the state of the media.

[Roll Eyes] I agree with the general finding, and I actually don't think you disagree with it either.
quote:

[*]Blaming the Daily Mail and Daily Express for Trump's behavior just compounds the stupidity of your position. It doesn't matter how inane, fatuous, and misleading they may be - none of what they say makes any difference to either Trump specifically or American politics generally. They have no salience here. Their behavior, however reprehensible, can hardly be blamed for his.

[Roll Eyes] And this is where you go totally off the rails. I did not blame Trump's behaviour on these newspapers. Trump is Trump and will do what he does as soon as he has an audience. But they have helped create the conditions in which people like Trump become credible spokespersons in the minds of some people.

I see I spoke too soon. Still not simple enough, I suppose. The papers you pointed to can't have created conditions of any consequence in the US, because no one here pays any attention to them.

And I do not, in fact, agree that the mainstream US media (Trump's target) is "full of hype, spin and fake news." You're free to wallow in that bullshit with Trump and the trolls at Fox News, but don't include me in it.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Has it occurred to anybody that perhaps Trump and his people are immigrants from a different timeline, and in their universe there actually were attacks? It could explain the surreal stuf they say.

Do you mean like the evil alternate universe of Star Trek? Was the trump from this replaced with the evil maniacal one? That is among the sanest things said so far to explain this whole crazy mess.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
That's precisely what I was thinking of! [Cool]
 
Posted by Huia (# 3473) on :
 
I was thinking of the alternate realities in The Hitch-hiker's Guide To the Galaxy except it lacks the humour.

Huia
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Interesting example of fake news.

From the Master of fake news.

Looks like he confused Sweden with Sehwan in Pakistan..

Easily done [Roll Eyes]

Pres. Obama described Trump as having "severe learning disabilities". If that's true, T might well have problems reading, or making sense of what he hears. And I've long wondered if he has some hearing difficulties.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Sabine--

quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
re Trump making a gnomic reference to an 'event' in Sweden, I like the comment from Carl Bildt (PM of Sweden in the early 1990s), which was Vad har han rökt? (What has he been smoking?) [Overused] [Killing me]

I'm a Swedish-American who likes to keep in touch with the homeland. I know exactly what happened, and it's terrifying.

Friday, February 17 was the Swedish nameday for all those named Alexandra. Let this be a lesson to us all. [Razz]

...which was the name of the last czarina of Russia. The Russians, again!
[Eek!]
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
. Obama described Trump as having "severe learning disabilities". If that's true, T might well have problems reading, or making sense of what he hears. And I've long wondered if he has some hearing difficulties.

Which would be no excuse whatever.

If you have learning or hearing difficulties or have problems reading or hearing you check check and check again before you write or make a speech.

It takes longer but that's life - some people struggle to walk, some struggle to read and write.

My Dad had severe hearing difficulties and I have learning difficulties (dyslexia, ADHD) It didn't stop us being compassionate people who didn't make stupid mistakes when public speaking.

[ 20. February 2017, 07:18: Message edited by: Boogie ]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Has it occurred to anybody that perhaps Trump and his people are immigrants from a different timeline, and in their universe there actually were attacks? It could explain the surreal stuf they say.

A few months ago I said it felt like the other way around - that I'd slipped into an alternative universe. It's the simpler of the two (Martin will appreciate my use of Occam) as it not only explains Trump, it also addresses the insanity of Brexit, the self-destruction of Labour at a time when they had an unprecedented opportunity to put the boot into the Tories and the rest of the recent lunacy that abounds around the world.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Boogie--

Apologies if I caused any offense. I don't have a problem with a president with learning disabilities, provided they're aware of them and have ways of coping. Rewriting, as you said; an assistant; text-to-voice software, so they don't have to read; hearing aids, etc.

But his mind seems to be such a mess--e.g., mental illness*--and he's so divorced from reality, that I think he really might not understand that he has difficulties. It's everyone else who doesn't understand *him*.

And if he has both severe mental illness and severe learning disabilities (and possibly side-effects from a medication that's known for them), to the point where he can't function in a job that has serious consequences...

*Some people have complained that I refer to T as "mentally ill". It's not something I say lightly. I'm sorry to offend anyone. There are all sorts of mental illness, including some that can make a person very mean and explosive, and some related to committing sexual assault. That's not a reflection on anyone else with a mental illness--nor on me, with depression. And it's only my business because a) he's in charge of my country; b) his words and behavior affect people in other countries; and c) he's clearly not functioning well enough to do the job.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
And I've long wondered if he has some hearing difficulties.

He certainly does. He has difficulties with hearing the words 'you're wrong, Mr President'.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Boogie--

Apologies if I caused any offense. I don't have a problem with a president with learning disabilities, provided they're aware of them and have ways of coping. Rewriting, as you said; an assistant; text-to-voice software, so they don't have to read; hearing aids, etc.

No offence at all. My point was that his difficulties (whatever they are) are no excuse for his behaviour.

I feel for you and hope it's all soon over for you (and the rest of the world).
 
Posted by Jonah the Whale (# 1244) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:

And if he has both severe mental illness and severe learning disabilities (and possibly side-effects from a medication that's known for them), to the point where he can't function in a job that has serious consequences...

Or maybe he's just an arsehole. Occam's razor and all that.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It is denigratory to persons with mental illness, to call the PGinC mentally ill. And the Arsehole Defamation League will be in touch with you! Anal sphincters perform a useful societal function! To use them to describe Lyin' Donald is an insult.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
Also, since the PG is an American (I'm sorry to say), he is an asshole, not an arsehole.

[Razz]
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
"There's a hole in my donkey, dear Liza, dear Liza".
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
My pussyhat has made it to America without being confiscated by the authorities (the customs declaration said “bonnet en laine” (woolly hat). This is fortunate because my SiL has just given herself a rather disastrous home hair cut which she can now cover up with sassy protest [Big Grin] .
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Are you certain that Pussygrabber is an American?

[Paranoid]

Has anyone seen his birth certificate? He looks rather....er...... foreign, going by his colour. Mexican, perhaps? Certainly a Bad Hombre...

[Devil]

IJ
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Are you certain that Pussygrabber is an American?

[Paranoid]

Has anyone seen his birth certificate? He looks rather....er...... foreign, going by his colour. Mexican, perhaps? Certainly a Bad Hombre...

[Devil]

IJ

Maybe Mars?
 
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on :
 
Now, Pidwidgeon, we all know that he's a Slitheen

We need the imminent return of the Tardis with Dr.Who, Captain Jack Harkness, Sarah Jane Smith and Harriet Jones Former Prime Minister.........

Perhaps also Mickey Smith and Martha Jones just for good measure [Two face]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
and Harriet Jones Former Prime Minister..

We know who she is.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
Trump reminds me of a kid who has just learnt some rude words, and goes around at a respectable dinner saying "You smell of poopy pants".

And the WH staff are the parents trying to explain that he is just a kid, and doesn't mean any harm.

Isn't it cute that he is learning all these new words? Like You-ray-knee-um. That's a big word for him.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
Now, Pidwidgeon, we all know that he's a Slitheen

Nope, I didn't know that. I had to Google it, since I'm not into Dr. Who.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
and Harriet Jones Former Prime Minister..

We know who she is.
Not everyone is dedicated to Dr. Who.

[ 21. February 2017, 00:31: Message edited by: Golden Key ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Stephen--

quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
Now, Pidwidgeon, we all know that he's a Slitheen

We need the imminent return of the Tardis with Dr.Who, Captain Jack Harkness, Sarah Jane Smith and Harriet Jones Former Prime Minister.........

Perhaps also Mickey Smith and Martha Jones just for good measure [Two face]

Most of my Whovian knowledge is up through Peter Davison. I saw some Colin Baker and Patrick what's-his-name. Then nothing available for years, then a few eps of David Tennant, then none available again.

Anyway, I'll add to your list: Tegan, Nyssa, Adric, the brigadier, both Romanas, Lela, and dear Binro (not a companion, but a wonderful character from the "Key To Time" story line").

And, of course, K-9. [Smile]
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:
quote:
Originally posted by Stephen:
and Harriet Jones Former Prime Minister..

We know who she is.
Not everyone is dedicated to Dr. Who.
Dafyd's amusing line was a reference to the episodes where she always introduced herself thus, and people responded, "Yes, we know".

[edit: URL]

[ 21. February 2017, 06:39: Message edited by: Ian Climacus ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Ahhhh.
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
The latest piece of fuckwitted racist crap from this sorry excuse for a government:

British muslim teacher denied entry to US on school trip

Don't recall the UK, Iceland or Bangladesh being on the list of banned countries, which was ruled unconstitutional. The only possible reason for this outrageous treatment is that the poor guy was a young man with brown skin.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is what the PGinC billed as getting rid of political correctness. Which seems to mean that you can be as racist and misogynistic as your little heart desires.
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
It sounds like he just wants to forget the humiliating experience as soon as possible, but really, he should sue. If there were several other teachers in the party whose purpose for visiting the US was identical to his, but they were white, it would be a clearcut case of racial discrimination.

Who could he sue, and in what court?
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Rocinante:
Who could he sue, and in what court?

It would be rather difficult. US law has, AIUI, repeatedly granted immigration officials very broad latitude. For example, you don't need probable cause to conduct a search at a border crossing.

The US will also point out that there is no right for non-citizens to enter the US. Even possession of a valid visa does not grant such a right.

Newspapers basically always make errors in the reporting of visa-related issues, because there's a raft of specialist language involved that the average person doesn't understand.

The BBC reports that the local authority said that Mr. Miah had a valid visa. This is unlikely. As a British citizen visiting the UK with a school trip, he doesn't need a visa, but would be travelling under the visa waiver program. When you use the visa waiver program, you expressly revoke any rights you might have had to appeal against an immigration official's decision, which makes it even harder for Mr. Miah to sue anyone.

(He'll need a visa now: he's been denied entry to the US, which makes him ineligible for the visa waiver program. He would also need a visa if he has a criminal record. )

The report further says that Mr. Miah was "denied access" to the embassy. Probably this is because he didn't have an appointment.

Obviously in the current climate there's a suspicion that Mr. Miah might have been turned away because of being brown and Muslim. The reports all say "he was given no satisfactory reason", which makes me want to know exactly what he was told. But in general, US immigration isn't very forthcoming about why they're denying access to someone, and it's very hard to get any information out of them.

Supposedly there's some kind of redress process where if you think you've been denied admission wrongly (because they've confused you with someone else, for example) you can supply them with a boatload of information, which they might consider next time. Or not.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
He will, however, along with the rest of his party, have had a valid and individual ESTA, and as such, have been pre-vetted. Obviously, if something subsequent turns up (US bound flights hand over their passenger manifests before leaving) then all bets are off, but ESTAs are only valid for a short time.

It only takes a few incidents like this to say to brown people of whatever nationality, "Don't bother coming to the US. You might get in. You might not. Going to take that risk? Thought not."

Which is what they want, and is what they'll get, despite any protestations our lickspittle government might make.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Why the f**k anyone, whether brown, Muslim, or anything else, would actually want to go to America at the moment (except, perhaps, for pressing family reasons) beats me.

Apologies to all the millions upon millions of decent, non-racist, welcoming Americans whom I know exist....one day, perhaps soon, your country will be free again....

IJ
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Why the f**k anyone, whether brown, Muslim, or anything else, would actually want to go to America at the moment (except, perhaps, for pressing family reasons) beats me.

Apologies to all the millions upon millions of decent, non-racist, welcoming Americans whom I know exist....one day, perhaps soon, your country will be free again....

IJ

It has never been risk/annoyance-free for brown people to travel to America. Always much more chance of being harassed than pale peoples.
If they can get in, America is still safer for refugees than the places they are fleeing.
Not to mention work, family and pre-existing arrangements. It still has much good, both in scenery and people.
The UK has similar issues for brown people and Europe is seeing a rise in the far right. Where would [i]you[i/] go?
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
A blistering accusation of GOP partisans who claim to follow Christ.
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:

It only takes a few incidents like this to say to brown people of whatever nationality, "Don't bother coming to the US. You might get in. You might not. Going to take that risk? Thought not."

Well, quite.

Reading further, it seems as though his denial was not due to an interview with a US immigration worker, so must have been based purely on his passport information. Which probably means there's a Mohammed Miah on the no-fly list, and somebody thought it might be him.

The no-fly list is notorious for generating false positives, and equally notorious for making it difficult or impossible for someone to even find out whether they might be on it.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
lilBuddha - I quite agree, but it does seem as though, under Pussygrabber, America is even less welcoming than before. Alas, UKipperland is going the same way, as are others.

Perhaps I'm fortunate in being pale-skinned and non-Muslim. My ancestry is Scottish, on my mother's side (with a dash of Irish, as her forebears moved there a couple of centuries ago, and my maternal grandfather was a Dubliner). If I had to move anywhere else, it would probably be Scotland. Preferably an independent Scotland still in the EU, of course.

IJ
 
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Why the f**k anyone, whether brown, Muslim, or anything else, would actually want to go to America at the moment (except, perhaps, for pressing family reasons) beats me.

Apologies to all the millions upon millions of decent, non-racist, welcoming Americans whom I know exist....one day, perhaps soon, your country will be free again....

IJ

And indeed why the f**k anyone would want to come to this poxy little island is beyond me. If I had a clear way out to somewhere better- Germany, Benelux or Scandinavia for choice, but pretty much anywhere in western (EU) Europe would do- I'd go like a shot. (In fact, so ghastly is this country at present that we can use this as a rule of thumb when looking at migrants and asylum seekers. They are either (i) coming from somewhere so bloody awful that even this place looks good, which suggests they are truly desperate & should be viewed with some sympathy; or (ii) the kind of people who actually like the look of this place, in itself, in which case they are precisely not the sort of people we want any more of.)
 
Posted by Stephen (# 40) on :
 
Apologies to Golden Key and Pidwidgeon and others - I should have realised that not everyone grew up on Dr.Who like I did!

Albertus - yes. It might be worth noting though that the rise of far-right sentiment is not restricted to the USA or UK........Unfortunately.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
It probably isn't worth the effort to mention even more examples of Comrade Trump's blatant hypocrisy, but this report from that well-known liberal bastion, Forbes, makes me grind my teeth in frustration.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The BBC reports Pussygrabber's latest infamy (well, news to me, at any rate):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39047883

Are there no depths to which this orange slug will not stoop in order to make already challenging lives that much more difficult? The infantile dictator is now busily pulling the wings off flies...

IJ
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
The privacy of girls trumps that of transgender people. And he's flipflopped on it, giving in to Republican pressure.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The kind of privacy the Pussygrabber gave those girls in the changing rooms...??

Bastard.

May he rot in the lowest and slimiest Malbolge of Hell, with his privy members changing from one gender to another all the time.

IJ
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
May he grab and find male members. May he grab and find vagina dentata.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
[Two face] [Two face]

Not sure why I'm getting so uptight about transgender issues. It's not a subject with which I am at all familiar, and as far as I know, I'm not acquainted with anyone who is transgender.

It just seems to me that Pussygrabber is bent (no pun intended) on pooping on just about everyone who really could do with not being pooped on more than they are already.

Quite a contrast to his predecessor in office, no?

IJ
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The privacy of girls trumps that of transgender people.

In the US, almost all women's (and girls') restrooms have individual stalls with locking doors. The few that don't (usually in parks or campgrounds) were undoubtedly designed by men, and in my experience, most women avoid using them if at all possible (I'd rather use a dodgy ports-potty). If you're worried about girls' privacy, the easiest/cheapest/least intrusive solution is simply to legislate that all women's restrooms (as well as men's I suppose-- I'll let the guys decide if they want urinals to be "use at your own risk") have locking stall doors.

Problem solved.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The privacy of girls trumps that of transgender people.

In the US, almost all women's (and girls') restrooms have individual stalls with locking doors. The few that don't (usually in parks or campgrounds) were undoubtedly designed by men, and in my experience, most women avoid using them if at all possible (I'd rather use a dodgy ports-potty). If you're worried about girls' privacy, the easiest/cheapest/least intrusive solution is simply to legislate that all women's restrooms (as well as men's I suppose-- I'll let the guys decide if they want urinals to be "use at your own risk") have locking stall doors.

Problem solved.

Well, this is certainly one of the few times when conservatives and the alt right care about the rights or feelings of women in an issue.

sabine
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It is difficult for them to choose, who it is more important to oppress and denigrate. Decisions, decisions.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
Suppose a person who was listed as female on her birth certificate has transgendered to male. He's now a full-grown, macho, muscular man. Would Trump want him in the same restroom as his granddaughters, just because his birth certificate says 'female'?
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
It isn't about reason or logic. It is using fear-mongering to pander to their base.
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Suppose a person who was listed as female on her birth certificate has transgendered to male. He's now a full-grown, macho, muscular man. Would Trump want him in the same restroom as his granddaughters, just because his birth certificate says 'female'?

I'm wondering what the reaction would be from security staff and others if they saw such a person going into the Ladies' room.

[ 23. February 2017, 15:52: Message edited by: Rocinante ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Frankly, from Lyin' Don's point of view, it would solely depend upon the hotness of the person in question. A two or below? Ungropeable, and therefore of no interest.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
It isn't about reason or logic. It is using fear-mongering to pander to their base.

And of undoing what Obama did, good or bad, irrespective of how much sense it makes.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
In the US, almost all women's (and girls') restrooms have individual stalls with locking doors. The few that don't (usually in parks or campgrounds) were undoubtedly designed by men, and in my experience, most women avoid using them if at all possible (I'd rather use a dodgy ports-potty). If you're worried about girls' privacy, the easiest/cheapest/least intrusive solution is simply to legislate that all women's restrooms (as well as men's I suppose-- I'll let the guys decide if they want urinals to be "use at your own risk") have locking stall doors.

Problem solved.

Sorry - US public 'bathrooms' (in which you don't bath), 'restrooms' (in which you only rest for a very short while, if at all) or toilets have always been a mystery to me. Are you saying that men's cubicle doors don't lock? And sometimes women's don't either? Are there doors or cubicles at all, or just rows of loos without any privacy?

Would that be the case for places like restaurants or supermarkets or shopping centres or petrol stations, or schools?

This European perhaps doesn't grasp the full extent of the story. It sounds right hellish in itself, and 'Roman very public loos' to me. Thanks for elucidating! [Confused]
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Are you saying that men's cubicle doors don't lock? And sometimes women's don't either? Are there doors or cubicles at all, or just rows of loos without any privacy?

In almost all places, cubicle doors lock.

Occasionally, I have encountered a swinging door that acts as a privacy screen, but does not have a lock. Those are very rare (and usually at campgrounds and similar places).

I've never seen a roman-style multi-seat shitting facility. I don't think they exist.

(Almost all US cubicles have a half-inch or inch-sized gap around the sides of the door, which makes the privacy on offer mostly illusory. In the UK, doors are usually built so there's no gap.)
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
OK.
In your house, in the US, mostly you have a bathroom with one door that locks. This (usually small) room has a toilet, a sink and a tub or shower. You share it with whoever you live with; if your domicile is big enough you have two so the kids can have their own, the guest room, etc.

In small restaurants there is usually two rooms of this type, one labeled Men and the other Women. There won't be a tub/shower but there will be a toilet and a sink. The door locks; you go in and lock it, which indicates to people that it is occupied. Very similar to the ones on airplanes.

In bigger restaurants the door is still labeled Men or Women, but they do not lock. When you go in there are a couple stalls, each containing a toilet. These stalls do lock, usually with a simple latch. A restaurant with a heavy male clientele (sports bars etc.) will have a urinal or two on the walls.

In really large venues (concert halls, huge restaurants, amusement parks, etc.) there are long rows of stalls; the men's room has a long row of urinals. Think of airports or train stations.

What this means is that it is usually not possible to make a bathroom rule applying to everybody. Any change, especially involving replumbing, is very expensive. A sensible polity would invoke the MYOB rule. I do not want to know what you are doing in the bathroom, and you ought to have no interest in what I do. We all avert our eyes and quietly shut the stall doors; when we emerge we wash our hands without comment.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Thanks for taking me by the (properly washed) hand (wish we could say the same of the PG-in-Chief!), clearing up some of the mystery.

I must have had the unlockable swinging doors in mind, having seen them somewhere. I certainly sympathise with the MYOB rule Brenda puts forward. The gaps mentioned, and visible e.g. here also below the stalls, I'd find really irritating. It's perhaps less so the privacy - well, others could certainly look underneath! - but simply: where do you put your bag? (Sometimes you have stuff with you!) Couldn't just anyone reach in and grab your laptop or other possessions, except perhaps in the corner one - I'd deffo go for that if I had to 'go'! (The pic seems to be from a college.)

All doubts still haven't been flushed yet, I'm afraid to say. Let's just hope this isn't a floater.

[ 23. February 2017, 18:09: Message edited by: Wesley J ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Most stall doors have a hook on the back, upon which you can hang your bag. There may also be a fold-down flap onto which you can set stuff. The open space under the walls/doors is especially common in schools, so that supervisors can see what the kids are getting up to in there; it also allows the floors to be easily hosed down (there is often a drain in the floor of the room). Do you remember the famous 'wide stance' incident here in the US? In which the firebreathing GOP congressman was accused of soliciting gay sex by sticking his foot under the barrier and tapping the foot of the guy sitting on the toilet in the next stall. I should think that male-on-male solicitation of this type is far more common than transgender incidents.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Simple solution - make all loos unisex with cubicles all round, don't bother with urinals, they are not needed.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Are you saying that men's cubicle doors don't lock? And sometimes women's don't either? Are there doors or cubicles at all, or just rows of loos without any privacy?

In my travels through America, I have encountered cubicles with no door at all. Generally in remote or dodgy areas. I would guess the purpose is to not allow a concealed place for drugs use/exchange and/or sex.
My anecdotal evidence is that this is more common in the men's than the ladies. The lack of doors, that is.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
The only place I've seen doorless stalls in public women's rooms in the U.S. is on Waikiki Beach many years ago (don't know if they still have them). I assume the doors were removed because of illegal activity, but using one while wearing a one-piece swimsuit is horrid.

[ 23. February 2017, 19:44: Message edited by: Pigwidgeon ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Only the most casual or dodgy facilities have no door, in the US. Sometimes to prevent crime, sometimes because of vandals. As you may easily gather from the news stories, we are a shy people. It is enlightening to go to China and see the facilities there.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
The only place I've seen doorless stalls in public women's rooms in the U.S. is on Waikiki Beach many years ago (don't know if they still have them). I assume the doors were removed because of illegal activity, but using one while wearing a one-piece swimsuit is horrid.

Decision made by men, I assume.*
Those I encountered were mostly in the desert South-west at remote, low visitor tourist sites so one is spared that level of indignity at least.

*Before anybody gets their budgy-smugglers in a twist, I mean out of ignorance not necessarily misogyny.
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
don't bother with urinals, they are not needed.

They are much more efficient. By installing urinals, you can take several times the amount of piss per square foot.

(You get a factor of about two for efficiency in terms of approaching the urinal vs entering a stall and closing the door. You get another factor of 2-3 in required floorspace for a stall vs a urinal.)

For low-traffic facilities, you don't care. For high-traffic areas, you very much do.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
don't bother with urinals, they are not needed.

They are much more efficient. By installing urinals, you can take several times the amount of piss per square foot.

(You get a factor of about two for efficiency in terms of approaching the urinal vs entering a stall and closing the door. You get another factor of 2-3 in required floorspace for a stall vs a urinal.)

For low-traffic facilities, you don't care. For high-traffic areas, you very much do.

They have their disadvantages. There was a doorless stall place in Central Park in NY some years ago, but they also had traditional urinals. I saw a man swoop in on his roller blades for a quick slash, take aim and fire, but then Newton's 3rd Law applied itself, slowly propelling him backwards.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Urinals also have a much lower water usage power flush than a tank toilet, although newer model loos are getting more efficient every year.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The ever-popular bathroom stalker myth so beloved of conservatives is debunked here.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
{Slight tangent. Possibly NSFW.}

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Decision made by men, I assume.*
Those I encountered were mostly in the desert South-west at remote, low visitor tourist sites so one is spared that level of indignity at least.

*Before anybody gets their budgy-smugglers in a twist, I mean out of ignorance not necessarily misogyny.

On that topic, some ...misguided... man
came up with a way for women to, uh, seal our plumbing together on a monthly basis. (Let the reader understand.) NSFW for words, and possibly for a video that I can't start.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
{Slight tangent. Possibly NSFW.}

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Decision made by men, I assume.*
Those I encountered were mostly in the desert South-west at remote, low visitor tourist sites so one is spared that level of indignity at least.

*Before anybody gets their budgy-smugglers in a twist, I mean out of ignorance not necessarily misogyny.

On that topic, some ...misguided... man
came up with a way for women to, uh, seal our plumbing together on a monthly basis. (Let the reader understand.) NSFW for words, and possibly for a video that I can't start.

What the serious fuck?! He should be given some penis glue so he doesn't wet himself.

ETA: The vid is not directly related to the text. It is about body positivity, so there is a link, but it is not about the subject of the article.

[ 24. February 2017, 03:20: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
lB--

Thanks, re video.

I'm guessing he got disgusted by the trash usually produced, and decided to Take Steps.
[Roll Eyes] [Mad]
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
On that topic, some ...misguided... man
came up with a way for women to, uh, seal our plumbing together on a monthly basis.

This man is a little bit confused about how that can ever actually work in a reliable fashion. Comfort and so on aside, I'm intrigued by the idea of a glue that is unstuck by urine, but not by either sweat, blood, or other secretions.

I also wonder what happens to ladies who have a weakened pelvic floor (after a child or two?) and sneeze? I suspect the answer is that it wouldn't be pretty.
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
You'll pry urinals from my cold, dead hands. If that's not a poor image. I've pissed against the wall as women came in to use the stalls as the line for them was 100 deep (Oberammergau, Germany, 2010). Didn't bother me in the least.


So now he's calling for Nuclear Supremacy (TM). To be "the top of the pack". Who is this playing to?
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
You'll pry urinals from my cold, dead hands. . . . I've pissed against the wall. . . . Didn't bother me in the least.

Well, as long as we don't have to pry them from another part of your anatomy. [Eek!]

There's something to be said for the fine old trough-style urinal. As the linked-to article says: "Brothers are made at the trough."
 
Posted by Liopleurodon (# 4836) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The privacy of girls trumps that of transgender people. And he's flipflopped on it, giving in to Republican pressure.

What about transgender girls? That's who they're supposed to be sharing with, after all.

This is about the right of trans people to exist in public space.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Precisely. Nobody seriously believes that transgender people are assaulting innocents in bathroom stalls. If they can take away transgender persons' public bathroom access, this prevents them from going into public spaces. They cannot travel, possibly cannot hold a job. The goal is clearly to have them driven into a dark corner somewhere to die. Once this is successfully accomplished it won't be terribly difficult to gear it up for homosexual persons. And a brief perusal of history will reveal to you the time when it was impossible for women to get around in London, because there were no public restrooms. Ladies stayed at home.

There's a meme going around that summarizes this far more succinctly: "It wasn't about water fountains either."
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
The privacy of girls trumps that of transgender people.

In the US, almost all women's (and girls') restrooms have individual stalls with locking doors. The few that don't (usually in parks or campgrounds) were undoubtedly designed by men, and in my experience, most women avoid using them if at all possible (I'd rather use a dodgy ports-potty). If you're worried about girls' privacy, the easiest/cheapest/least intrusive solution is simply to legislate that all women's restrooms (as well as men's I suppose-- I'll let the guys decide if they want urinals to be "use at your own risk") have locking stall doors.

Problem solved.

Well, this is certainly one of the few times when conservatives and the alt right care about the rights or feelings of women in an issue.

sabine

It's not even that. This legislation didn't come from women who are speaking out about feeling unsafe in public restrooms. It's coming from men with an agenda to marginalize others, as noted by Liopleurodon and Brenda. But it also serves the dual purpose of portraying women as weak and vulnerable-- hence all the male posturing about how they are defending their wives and daughters. It looks like a pro-women protection, but by fabricating this imaginary threat what they're really doing is undermining the apparently dangerous notion of strong and self-sufficient women.

[ 24. February 2017, 14:18: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
cliffdweller, I was being sarcastic, and I agree with your response to my quip.

sabine
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Well, God forbid that strong and self-sufficient women should rule the world. Why, it might actually become a better place, and that would never do....

I just hope that Pussygrabber and his minions become incontinent, and have to go around smelling of piss because they are banned from loos.

IJ (feeling particularly vitriolic today)
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:

I just hope that Pussygrabber and his minions become incontinent, and have to go around smelling of piss because they are banned from loos.

They can always use the penis glue mentioned above.

[Snigger]
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
cliffdweller, I was being sarcastic, and I agree with your response to my quip.

sabine

Oh, I got that.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I just hope that Pussygrabber and his minions become incontinent

Become? [Snigger]
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
White House bars New York Times, CNN, other news outlets from briefing.

It just gets unbelievably worse and worse every day -- and he gets away with it!
[Mad]
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
Given the chaos of his press conference last week, they are not missing anything significant.

I think what it means is that they are no longer proper press conferences. They are baby-hands talking to his friends.

But yes, it is disgraceful. Another example of Trump refusing to be a President. I just wonder how long his aides will put up with his stupidity, before they stop protecting him, and let him be eaten.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I just wonder how long his aides will put up with his stupidity, before they stop protecting him, and let him be eaten.

I don't know that they will -- revolution will have to come from outside their group.

Trump's minions are acting like schoolyard bullies. They're getting away with all this garbage because they can -- they've got the Big Bully on their side, so they can taunt the rest of us.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
And like most schoolyard bullies, they don't have a whole lot of brain power: Two men got the Conservative Political Action Conference to wave Russian flags with Trump’s name on them.

[Killing me]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Is Outrage!

[Overused]

I wonder if Pussygrabber and his minions even know where Russia is.

Or Sweden, for that matter.

IJ
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Is Outrage!

[Overused]

I wonder if Pussygrabber and his minions even know where Russia is.

Or Sweden, for that matter.

IJ

Sarah Palin can tell him where Russia is -- she can see it from her backyard.
[Biased]

(Yes, I know that was actually Saturday Night Live, but...)
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
And like most schoolyard bullies, they don't have a whole lot of brain power: Two men got the Conservative Political Action Conference to wave Russian flags with Trump’s name on them.

[Killing me]

Bahahahaha! That's fabulous!
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Re restroom doors:

Sometimes, there's no *outer* door to the restroom. Have found that mostly at parks and state-owned rest stops. Some are designed that way, and others are simply missing a door that was there.

I've run into that kind of purposeful doorless design other places--multiplex theater, IIRC. Generally, the walls of the entry curve around, so you can't actually see anything unless you go in.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
That is often the case in airports as well. It's for the convenience not only of handicapped persons, but of persons towing rolling suitcases.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
The only place I've seen doorless stalls in public women's rooms in the U.S. is on Waikiki Beach many years ago (don't know if they still have them). I assume the doors were removed because of illegal activity, but using one while wearing a one-piece swimsuit is horrid.

Decision made by men, I assume.
Those I encountered were mostly in the desert South-west at remote, low visitor tourist sites so one is spared that level of indignity at least.


They have them in St. Louis city parks. All the women I know would rather dehydrate in the sun than use them.
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
At CPAC:

quote:
Trump told the country’s biggest annual gathering of conservative activists that he would crush the Islamic State, deport criminals, crack down on welfare, overhaul healthcare and put miners back to work.
[brick wall]

We seem to have a war on welfare here, while they want to give large businesses, some of whom pay little or no tax, tax cuts. But stuff the poor...stuff those struggling due to circumstances outside their control...stuff those mentally or physically ill...

Bloody politicians should have to live on benefits for a month and see how they go.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
That is often the case in airports as well. It's for the convenience not only of handicapped persons, but of persons towing rolling suitcases.

It's good for hygiene, too. A lot of people zip it up and then leave without washing their hands. I hate having to touch outside doors in those places.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
The trump* quotes painted on the bodies in this link are NSFW, and not safe for any civilized human being. Disgusting. The bodies on which they are painted are fine as far as I am concerned.

Re shaking trump's* hand. No. Don't do it.


*trump. gets a lower case t. low class, lower case.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
I Know This Is A Christian Website, but this sounds like a Good Idea (if only for letting off steam.....):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39090334

[Two face]

IJ
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I have a writer friend who runs a New Agey shop in Gloucestershire. I have urged her to set up an online service; there are plenty of Americans who would pay good money for a working from a bona fide witch.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
All right, this is funny, but I'm not sure if the link will act -- it should take you to an image on Facebook. It is a nice chart of crystals and what they can do for you in the current political climate. My favorite: "Lapis lazuli. Get a big one and drop it on a racist's head. Great for warding off negative energy."
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
I live close to a botanica. I could get a candle for "The Seven African Powers." Pretty sure they could withstand extreme vetting.

sabine
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I hate having to touch outside doors in those places.

That's why God created elbows.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I hate having to touch outside doors in those places.

That's why God created elbows.
So long as the doors open out. And don't have knob-shaped doorknobs.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
But, alas and alack, a knob as PGiC. [Frown]

Heaven help us.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
I Know This Is A Christian Website, but this sounds like a Good Idea (if only for letting off steam.....):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39090334

[Two face]

IJ

Sorry, to me it doesn't. Quite apart from any spiritual significance, I find it negative, divisive and counterproductive.

In the knowledge that many Christians have severe problems with sorcery, this is more designed to animate them to become protective of Trump rather than actually do any real harm to him.
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
Ian Climacus:
quote:
Bloody politicians should have to live on benefits for a month and see how they go.
A month isn't long enough. Six months. Even that isn't really long enough to give them a real taste of what people on benefits have to go through, because the politician will have lots of rich friends to scrounge meals off, all his/her work-related travel paid for, plenty of clothes and shoes to wear, insurance policies up to date, new or nearly new kitchen appliances...

Bet they wouldn't be expected to pay the bedroom tax either.

[ 27. February 2017, 09:28: Message edited by: Jane R ]
 
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:

A month isn't long enough. Six months. Even that isn't really long enough to give them a real taste of what people on benefits have to go through, because the politician will have lots of rich friends to scrounge meals off, all his/her work-related travel paid for, plenty of clothes and shoes to wear, insurance policies up to date, new or nearly new kitchen appliances...

This is the basis of Iain Duncan Smith's claim to understand unemployment and poverty isn't it ?

He trots out the tales of a month or so on the dole, neglecting to mention that at the time he was living rent free in a house on his father in laws estate.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jane R:
Ian Climacus:
quote:
Bloody politicians should have to live on benefits for a month and see how they go.
A month isn't long enough. Six months. Even that isn't really long enough to give them a real taste of what people on benefits have to go through, because the politician will have lots of rich friends to scrounge meals off, all his/her work-related travel paid for, plenty of clothes and shoes to wear, insurance policies up to date, new or nearly new kitchen appliances...

Bet they wouldn't be expected to pay the bedroom tax either.

And, most importantly, they know there's an end to it. We can cope with most things if we are sure they are time limited.
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
chris s:
quote:
This is the basis of Iain Duncan Smith's claim to understand unemployment and poverty isn't it ?

He trots out the tales of a month or so on the dole, neglecting to mention that at the time he was living rent free in a house on his father in laws estate.

Yup. Just like the tosser who made the news today, claiming that because he only needed a few pills to get over his anxiety disorder all the people who are signed off work with it are malingering and not really disabled.

Or Nigel Farrago, whining that he daren't put his nose out of doors because UKIP is being demonised. So, he can dish it out but he can't take it? Poor fragile flower. How fortunate for him that he is rich and can afford bodyguards.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The execrable and deservedly ex-politician Rick Santorum (Google his name for a bit of fun, but not at work!) announced the other day that Americans draw on their health insurance for fun and profit. Yes, there's nothing like deliberately getting diabetes or kidney disease and thoroughly enjoying the experience as you rake in the cash. I think a long bout of swollen prostate would do him good.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Another great link. This time to German Karnival (Mardi Gras) parade floats. On public streets in Germany, but they also like naked hiking. So borderline in the NSFW department.

German Carnival floats show Trump, May, other politicos no mercy
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
The photo of the Statue of Liberty float should grace every postcard sent to the White House on March 15.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I've been routing postcards out of desk drawers, etc. for this purpose, so will not probably be able to make one with any particular image. However I do solicit advice on sentiments to write on the other side. I know people who are putting considerable effort into sonnets and so on. I think I may just write LIAR! in red sharpie.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Don't forget "Show us your taxes".
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by la vie en rouge:
Don't forget "Show us your taxes".

I've put that on several of mine.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
Somehow our e-mail address got on to a White House mailing list - they must think we are fans. We got a mass e-mailing yesterday asking us if we had any suggestions on how to make America great again, to help donald fart with his speech today. Oddly enough, we had quite a number of suggestions that I hope he will find useful, though we're not expecting a 'thank you' note for suggesting that a healthy and educated nation could be a great one. My recommendation to begin the impeachment proceedings as quickly as due process allows, was, I thought, a particularly helpful one. It's nice to be able to help a struggling leader when he asks.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:

My recommendation to begin the impeachment proceedings as quickly as due process allows, was, I thought, a particularly helpful one. It's nice to be able to help a struggling leader when he asks.

[Killing me]
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
Somehow our e-mail address got on to a White House mailing list ...

Me too. I did not respond, but reported it as spam and blocked it. The next day the sane thing. It seems to be non-blockable.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Go down to the bottom of the email and see if there is an 'unsubscribe' link. If there is, use it -- it ought to work. I was actually able to unsubscribe from Trump campaign mailings, which list I accidentally got onto when I went and voted for Marco Rubio in the GOP primary in my state. (It is an open primary, so any voter can roll in and vote -- my son told me that this would stop Trump. Alas...)

Oh, and the POST humor columnist discusses Lyin' Donald's speech last night. The money quote: "Yup, Donald Trump spoke to Congress, and he did not bite a live bat in half." Everyone in DC is delighted.

[ 01. March 2017, 14:29: Message edited by: Brenda Clough ]
 
Posted by The Riv (# 3553) on :
 
Watched the speech last night. Interesting and not a little obvious when Trump tried to flex off script. He can't not embellish, and it's still odd to hear. Maybe he'll get out of campaign mode soon. Hated his remarks to the fallen Navy SEAL's widow. Sheesh.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
Hated his remarks to the fallen Navy SEAL's widow. Sheesh.

Smarmy is my word for those remarks. He took advantage of her while at the same time throwing "the generals" under the bus.

sabine
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
He can't not embellish, and it's still odd to hear. Maybe he'll get out of campaign mode soon.

I don't think it is campaign mode. It is full-of-himself mode.

"It will not out of the fleshe, that's bred in the bone"*. The guy can't not show that he is what he is: "treat them like shit", "young and beautiful piece of ass", "grab them by the pussy", "must be a pretty picture you dropping to your knees", "blood coming out of her whatever".

Just read "USA" for "them", "her" and "your's". and read again with "the world".


*quote from John Heywood, 1546.
 
Posted by The Riv (# 3553) on :
 
I mean, this bit: "And Ryan is looking down right now. You know that. And he’s very happy, because I think he just broke a record."

1. Trump knows there's a heaven & it's located beyond the sky.

2. Trump knows what the soul of Navy SEAL William "Ryan" Owens is doing *in* heaven -- nothing at all otherworldly -- just looking at Trump's talking party.

3. Trump knows that Ryan's widow knows that, too.

4. Trump knows that Wm. Owens is happy -- happy -- not b/c he's *in* heaven, but b/c the people who attended Trump's talking party clapped for Owens' visibly grieving widow for 4 min. Happy?! For applause?! I just can't even.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I can't tolerate the sound of the man's voice. And I have to download that app, that swaps out his image in everything and replaces it with a picture of a kitten.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Oh, and the POST humor columnist discusses Lyin' Donald's speech last night. The money quote: "Yup, Donald Trump spoke to Congress, and he did not bite a live bat in half." Everyone in DC is delighted.

Good call.

Meanwhile, this could/should have been your president:

Bernie Sanders takes the wrecking ball to DT's "speech" and says what Trump should have said.

...and he does it in 15 minutes. Eloquent. Measured. Coherent. Compelling. [Waterworks]
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by molopata:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Oh, and the POST humor columnist discusses Lyin' Donald's speech last night. The money quote: "Yup, Donald Trump spoke to Congress, and he did not bite a live bat in half." Everyone in DC is delighted.

Good call.

Meanwhile, this could/should have been your president:

Bernie Sanders takes the wrecking ball to DT's "speech" and says what Trump should have said.

...and he does it in 15 minutes. Eloquent. Measured. Coherent. Compelling. [Waterworks]

I was thinking the other day that if God looked like a human, he would be old, grumpy, immovable, right, and behind it all, compassionate. A lot like Bernie, in fact.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Trump Sons Detained At Vancouver Airport Due To Alleged Ties With Fascist Dictator. "The Trump boys, who have followed in their family’s rich tradition of leeching off their father,"

Okay it's humour. But!

No local politician would show up for the opening of their hotel.

quote:
Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are in police custody at YVR airport this evening, after alleged ties to a fascist dictator surfaced during routine questioning.

The two sons of a former American billionaire, had flown to the pacific northwest for the unveiling of the new Trump tower in Downtown Vancouver.

There is another headline "Pope urges trumpf to give up presidency for Lent", which you may also read.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is a good (and free) of the Russian shenanigans to date.
 
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :
 
Places the BBC is currently prevented from reporting from by governmental action:

a) Zimbabwe
b) The White House
 
Posted by Matt Black (# 2210) on :
 
(c) North Korea
 
Posted by balaam (# 4543) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
(c) North Korea

I wonder who Kim Il-trump will ban next.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
It appears that donald fart believes that anti-semitic atrocities are really a way for his enemies to get at him. Lord, how much longer must we tolerate this pathetically paranoid weakling?
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
(c) North Korea

I wonder who Kim Il-trump will ban next.
Or bump off.
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
.... I just can't even.

Apparently on teh intrawebz, reactions were neatly divided between those who have a direct connection to the armed forces and those who don't. I'm proud to say despite not being military or sentimental about the military, I was APPALLLED. He actually said, "They lost Ryan." [Mad] I heard someone try to spin that as Drumpf saying the SEALS felt they lost one of their own, not Drumpf ducking responsibility. [Mad] Even if that was what he meant (in between blaming Obama and the generals), there's no excuse for such poor phrasing in his most important speech to date.

And if The Riv and I agree, we must both be right.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
T was wrong to say/do what he did. However, a small bit of good may have come of it: the soldier's wife looked like it was a much-needed catharsis, based on the changes in her face during the applause.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
This is a good (and free) of the Russian shenanigans to date.

We've heard that there are now more Russians in the White House than play for the Washington Capitals*.


(*NHL, National Hockey League)
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Another Cheeto appointee says something stupid.*
Ben Carson, living refutation that a brain surgeon need not be able to use his own, calls slaves "immigrants".
Sam Jackson's response mirrored my own reaction.
quote:
OK!! Ben Carson....I can't! Immigrants ? In the bottom of SLAVE SHIPS??!! MUTHAFUKKA PLEASE!!!#dickheadedtom
*Yeah, I know.

[ 08. March 2017, 01:13: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
This video link is a short piece from 08 Mar 2017 CBC "The National". It asks if trump believes his untruths and documents some of them. It also asks about the media not labelling untruths.

I was greatly struck with the discussion of trumpy's speech to the USA Congress which was characterised as positive, "a game changer", "presidential" and other such silliness. The National focusses on several of these, the one I recall is that trump said there were 94 million Americans unemployed, which is sort of true, but only if you include retired people, full time students and several groups which have no intent to work at all. If only those who are truely unemployed and looking for work are included, the number is 9.5 million.

They also played video, with dates, of trumpy sometimes say "don't know Putin, never talked to him", which are interspersed with him saying "I have a relationship with Putin". What is true one day is false the next.

Can anyone tell us how it is that this man doesn't get completely skewered for his falsehoods? I just don't get it.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
This video link is a short piece from 08 Mar 2017 CBC "The National". It asks if trump believes his untruths and documents some of them. It also asks about the media not labelling untruths.

I was greatly struck with the discussion of trumpy's speech to the USA Congress which was characterised as positive, "a game changer", "presidential" and other such silliness. The National focusses on several of these, the one I recall is that trump said there were 94 million Americans unemployed, which is sort of true, but only if you include retired people, full time students and several groups which have no intent to work at all. If only those who are truely unemployed and looking for work are included, the number is 9.5 million.

They also played video, with dates, of trumpy sometimes say "don't know Putin, never talked to him", which are interspersed with him saying "I have a relationship with Putin". What is true one day is false the next.

Can anyone tell us how it is that this man doesn't get completely skewered for his falsehoods? I just don't get it.

He IS repeatedly skewered for his falsehoods-- daily, and in multiple venues. A whole more-than-cottage industry of fact checkers has arisen. The problem is, neither he nor his followers seem to care. And to some degree the repeated infractions only undermine the discussion-- people have heard it so many times they have started tuning out the issue of his fabrications.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Then the problem is why enough Americans don't think the truth is an issue. Not being an American and not being immersed in the culture, it boggles.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Then the problem is why enough Americans don't think the truth is an issue. Not being an American and not being immersed in the culture, it boggles.

Truth, like any other value humans have, will have variable weight depending on the context. This is true in Canada as well as the US. And UK for that matter. There is also the fatigue factor that I do not think Canadians are any different to.
Add in that many people seem to accept any number of flaws if it advances particular agenda of their own.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I can tell you that Americans are fully aware, about 60 percent of the population at least, and we are trying to do something about it. We cannot however just throw the rascal out. Not yet.

Since November I myself have:
knitted a dozen pussyhats, will knit more
called at the offices of both my Senator and congressman to express my concerns
mailed, emailed and phoned representatives
joined both Planned Parenthood and the ACLU
joined action groups on line
marched in Washington DC on January 21
plan to march on April 15 and April 22
looked into running for office (not on, in my navy-blue district)
am actually running for vestry (next best thing)

Any other suggestions are welcome.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Any other suggestions are welcome.

You've done/are doing a lot, Brenda! Just one more suggestion... see my signature. (I've got 200 postcards ready to drop in a mailbox on Wednesday.)
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Oh, I have a couple right here. They're addressed but I haven't yet decided which of the plethora of issues I want to address on them. So many possibilities!
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
200 postcards is no where near enough, even with two or three issues on each card.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I can tell you that Americans are fully aware, about 60 percent of the population at least, and we are trying to do something about it. We cannot however just throw the rascal out. Not yet.

Since November I myself have:
knitted a dozen pussyhats, will knit more
called at the offices of both my Senator and congressman to express my concerns
mailed, emailed and phoned representatives
joined both Planned Parenthood and the ACLU
joined action groups on line
marched in Washington DC on January 21
plan to march on April 15 and April 22
looked into running for office (not on, in my navy-blue district)
am actually running for vestry (next best thing)

Any other suggestions are welcome.

Many people have sent donations to Planned Parenthood in Mike Pence's name, ensuring that he is listed as a generous donor, and will receive a tax receipt for his generosity. No doubt he will feel obliged to declare that to the public in the interests of transparency.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
The Planned Parenting one is really funny, and sad.

Thanks for the reassurance that this is moving along. The guy will probably be out of office when?
 
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on :
 
Tomorrow isn't soon enough.

I was in full eye-roll mode when the orange one was lauded for his 'presidential' speech to Congress. Why are people patting him on the back for doing what should be expected? I know. It's just a rhetorical question.

Leon Panetta has been on the TV quite a lot recently stating how dangerous t's tweets are. If it's accepted that he is not really to be believed, then what happens if there's a real emergency? People will laugh and say, "It's just Trump. Pay no mind."?

It's so frustrating seeing this buffoon acting like a spoiled three-year-old every day. Are we the only ones suspecting he's missing some marbles?
 
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on :
 
Just to add, I'm not a Leon Panetta fan. He has been around the block a few times, however.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
If you donate to Planned Parenthood in Mike Pence's name he gets a thank-you letter. I bet they have it saved in their programs, and print out the correct number every day. You, the person with the money, get the tax deduction however. So donate away!

We joined the ACLU in January. My husband did it on line, and reported that there was no swag left. All the branded items in the on-line store were sold out; there were no tee shirts, mugs, mouse pads, etc. left in stock. PP has has a huge boost in membership as well. We also joined AARP (the American Association of Retired Persons) because they're rabid pit bulls on elder issues like Social Security and Medicare. And we are now discussing joining the League of Women Voters.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
So remind me, what is so great about Planned Parenthood?
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
They provide various types of health care and contraception for women at very low cost (maybe even no cost in some cases?).
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
There's a General Abortion Thread in DH, where anyone so inclined can answer that question...
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Except it is Pigwidgeon's point that Planned Parenthood is soo much more than abortion.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Yes. But our more, er, 'conservative' posters will get stuck on one point, and that point doesn't need thrashing out here.

Just trying to head trouble off at the pass.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Got this in my head.

Scott Pruitt
Claims man didn't do it
More research is needed
(But will research be heeded?)
We're all going to rue it.
 
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 
The new Health Care Bill has gotten Congressional Budget OFfice analysis and it's pretty horrible. The one consolation is that it takes health care coverage away most heavily from parts of the population who voted for Trump.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
The new Health Care Bill has gotten Congressional Budget OFfice analysis and it's pretty horrible. The one consolation is that it takes health care coverage away most heavily from parts of the population who voted for Trump.

Except many will blame the original Affordable Care Act. You can bet that is what the politicians will do.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It also bobs out a lot of health care for women.
 
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 
It does many bad things. But the Trump fans complaining that it's Obama's fault is going to stop when they die without medical coverage.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Yes, the Obama administrations behaved in such a despicable way. Providing a means for people to obtain a basic, and often inadequate, level of healthcare which had previously been beyond their means - only to have that small boon snatched from them by the Trump administration. What right did Obama have in giving people a glimpse of what they could have if only they were wealthy knowing that a Republican administration would deny them of that?
 
Posted by JonahMan (# 12126) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
It does many bad things. But the Trump fans complaining that it's Obama's fault is going to stop when they die without medical coverage.

If they're dead, they won't be in a position to complain about anything, surely?
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
I am the only one who felt very excited when faced with the headline “Trump’s tax return leaked” and was then cruelly disappointed after clicking through to the actual article?

I have some sympathy for the view that he leaked it himself. It’s the recent ones someone needs to leak. Taken that he is quite possibly the most shameless human being on the planet, what could possibly be so embarrassing that even he doesn’t want anyone to see them?
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I would bet anything that it is not merely embarrassing. Why would the PussyGrabber care about mere embarrassment? He has no shame anyway; he has done far worse things and you can view it on videotape. I cannot imagine what would shame him, and I have a good imagination.
No. There is criminal evidence in there, probably fraud or tax evasion. He -cannot- let those returns out. For our part we may hope that this is the tiny rift in the lute that will, by and by, make the blatting and sputtering mute.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
Has anyone checked his microwave? Perhaps they can find his more recent returns there.

Better yet, maybe he has one of these spying on him.

[Eek!]
 
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on :
 
So let me see if I understand this correctly...

Madbrows big scoop was that Trump paid most of 40 million dollars in federal income tax in a single year?

And as cover for their idiocy the suggestion is floated that Trump himself leaked the returns? A tacit admission that they may have been completely trolled?

That is a rare level of genius right there...
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
It would appear that the tax return that has been unearthed is the only one in recent years that he has paid anything at all - as well as being the one with the largest income. That second part is probably what embarrasses Trump, and the real reason why he's been so coy with his returns.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Hah! He's just a millionaire. Peasant.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by RooK:
It would appear that the tax return that has been unearthed is the only one in recent years that he has paid anything at all - as well as being the one with the largest income. That second part is probably what embarrasses Trump, and the real reason why he's been so coy with his returns.

I was thinking along similar lines. What is it that he would actually want to hide?

He's made no secret of the his admiration for people who manage to avoid tax through off-shore accounts and other measures. So, if his tax returns show a large income with low tax by such avoidance schemes he'd be using them to boast about his own cleverness.

If his tax returns show illegal tax avoidance, rather than clever use of legal loop-holes, then I'm sure the IRS would have been all over him long ago.

But, he's made a big thing of his business prowess (and, how that makes him suitable to be President - as though CEO and President are even similar). If his tax returns show that his businesses have not resulted in a substantial income, that he's struggling to maintain a multi-millionaire lifestyle on limited income ... well, that would be a massive embarrassment.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
Keep in mind that what was released was not a full tax return...just a fragment of one. Two pages, without supporting forms etc. Heck, I earn just a small fraction of what Trump (allegedly) reported on the return and my return is way more than 2 pages long. When people have been demanding to see his returns, what is wanted are those other pages: showing what he actually paid to charitable organizations (and which ones) and listing actual sources of income rather than just the total amount. That information is not presented on these 2 pages.

And that is assuming that these 2 pages are legit. The White House has not denied that they are his returns, but honestly unless the pages come from the IRS I wonder if they aren't just made-up sheets to sucker in stupid reporters who would rather be first on the air with news than actually verify sources.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
I watched the full episode last night. Yes, there was not a lot newsworthy in the tax return itself, and yes the speculation was raised there as well that Trump himself leaked the return-- probably because 2005 was the best (least incriminating) return he had, so by leaking it dramatically so it turns out a bust he hopes to take the heat off the more recent returns and whatever they may hide.

But what was interesting in the program was the argument Maddow made for why it was important to see those more recent returns-- to address charges of conflict of interest. She presented circumstantial evidence of what could very well be money laundering for Russian oligarchs in more recent land deals. I found, as always, her investigative reporting and argumentation quite sound.

I just hope MSNBC is providing her with good security, including a food taster.
 
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JonahMan:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
It does many bad things. But the Trump fans complaining that it's Obama's fault is going to stop when they die without medical coverage.

If they're dead, they won't be in a position to complain about anything, surely?
Yes. That was my point. Glad you figured it out.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
Unless that fragment of a tax return is authenticated by the IRS - which it won't be - it has no value whatsoever. Anyone can download the form, fill it in and send it off to a gullible TV station. It may be genuine, but there's absolutely nothing to prove it, unless we are all content with the assurance from donald fart's staff. There's no way to know that that's what was actually submitted and never amended. This isn't news - just another diversion.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I wonder if they aren't just made-up sheets to sucker in stupid reporters.

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
But what was interesting in the program was the argument Maddow made for why it was important to see those more recent returns. . . . I found, as always, her investigative reporting and argumentation quite sound.

Rachel Maddow is probably the most intelligent and thoughtful broacast magazine moderator on cable today. Her stories always seem to be carefully researched, fact-checked and written. She is far from being a "stupid reporter" who can be "suckered in."
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
I wonder if they aren't just made-up sheets to sucker in stupid reporters.

quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
But what was interesting in the program was the argument Maddow made for why it was important to see those more recent returns. . . . I found, as always, her investigative reporting and argumentation quite sound.

Rachel Maddow is probably the most intelligent and thoughtful broacast magazine moderator on cable today. Her stories always seem to be carefully researched, fact-checked and written. She is far from being a "stupid reporter" who can be "suckered in."

Agreed-- and I would add "courageous" to the list of adjectives.
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
She's not just smart; she went to Stanford and got a Rhodes Scholarship and her PhD from fucking Oxford. She always provides background and context and history. And she's funny. There really isn't anyone in media to compare with her.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
So has anyone heard anything about the effectiveness of the Ides of Trump postcard mail-in campaign? Was the White House mail room overwhelmed, as had been hoped? Or hasn't the Postal Service gotten around to delivering them yet?

I haven't seen anything on the news about it.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
If I were the PGinChief I would instruct the White House mail room to not breathe a word about them. A black hole of news, with nothing coming out. If nothing is said, no news is made, eh?

You can bet your life that he'll never look at them, he not being known for reading anything. But the WH volunteers will have to tabulate them all.
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
Meanwhile, apparently, MI6 was spying on Trump.

Because, y'know, we've got nothing better to do than waste time wiring the kitchen appliances in Trump Towers on the off-chance we might hear something of value... about his (failing) businesses or his reality TV shows or golf tournaments.

Oh but wait, he doesn't go in the kitchen does he? That's what his women are for.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
I thought trumpasoreass rex's discussion of wiretapping, well, I don't know what to think because it....

Wiretap conspiracy theory

quote:
I had been reading about things. I read in – I think it was January 20th, a New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article, I think they used that exact term. I read other things. I watched your friend Bret Baier the day previous, where he was talking about certain, very complex sets of things happening, and wiretapping. I said “Wait a minute, there’s a lot of wiretapping being talked about.” I have been seeing a lot of things.


[ 16. March 2017, 19:51: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
Every time Trump blathers about something he's seen or read, I wonder if he's been told that as President, he has access to many other sources of information besides cable news and crackpot websites .... it reminds me of a joke from a Bond movie:

quote:
James Bond: Are these pictures live?

M: Unlike the American government, we prefer not to get our bad news from CNN.

Goldeneye
 
Posted by John Holding (# 158) on :
 
THing is, SOror Magna, all those other sources are corrupt liberal lying sources, from the FBI and the CIA right on down. He simply can't trust anything they say, because he knows in his heart that they are wrong.

John
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
The news has had some almost funny aspects for most of this week - and I offer up thanks every day for Kellyanne - but it will be a lot less funny if something serious blows up internationally. The USA will go down like the Titanic if the fart is still in the White House. When a country finds it has nobody in charge, somebody needs to get the message that whatever the due process is, it needs to be invoked urgently to rid itself of this intellectually stunted, paranoid weakling.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I can say that I have contributed to this.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
And I followed a link from there to find that some guy called Mulvaney reckons it's compassionate to cut funding for Meals on Wheels.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Sean Spicer's defence of the indefensible was just about the most ludicrous performance by a White House spokesperson that I have ever seen. And the GCHQ allegation is truly ridiculous. It has provoked an unprecedented statement to that effect from the agency.

Trump's interview with Tucker Carlson was a classic example of the blundering incoherence of which he is capable when doubling down on some nonsense he has tweeted. But to see a loyal White House spokesperson multiplying the chaos is to see just how much disease and chaos can be created by the dark side of Trump's peculiar personality.

Spicer is forced to be loyal I suppose. It's that or resign. But I think he should resign for the sake of his own sanity.

What was it Ziegler, Nixon's Press Secretary said? "All previous statements are inoperative", I think. Yes, that would do nicely today as well.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
GCHQ rebuttal here.

There have been some odd people aiding Mr President at times, cf Donald Rumsfeld, but the current crop make them look sane and reasonable. Then again, contrast Trump and Dubya.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
A BBC news bulletin this morning confirmed that the White House has agreed not to repeat the GCHQ allegations. I wonder just who in the White House gave that promise. And I wonder if the Deceiver-in-Chief was consulted.

Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
PS There is now a UK Government Statement, issued by Theresa May's spokesperson. This is what it says.

"We've made it clear to the US administration that these claims (re GCHQ) are ridiculous and should be ignored. We've received assurances that these allegations won't be repeated."
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
Mind you, there is a part of me thinking that if there is a chance of a bozo like Trump getting the job, we would want to find out all we can about him. It is what security agencies are for. I'm sure the CIA checked Theresa May for more than shoe size.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
It was interesting to see that the allegation disappeared from the NY Times and Washington Post website front pages very quickly this morning. On the other hand, as someone pointed out on the BBC, why the hell would anyone bother to wiretap donald fart when he does such a good job of it himself with Twitter?
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
The cynical part of me (ie, all of me) notes that the GCHQ denial lacks an actual denial. Yes, the allegations are ridiculous and nonsense. But where is the 'no, we didn't do that' bit?

I'll be over here, folding the tinfoil into hats.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
And I followed a link from there to find that some guy called Mulvaney reckons it's compassionate to cut funding for Meals on Wheels.

There's been a lot of comment about this, since it is a program that just about everybody supports. Volunteers bringing meals to elderly shut-ins, what's not to like? I'm not sure what they mean when they say the program has not delivered results. Oldsters not dying in gutters is not a result? And analysis shows that bringing in meals (which are volunteer, remember, so that the Federal funding is merely organizational dollars) saves a ton of money in old people not having to go into nursing homes.

And I will just mention that it is the oldster cohort which is the most reliable voting bloc.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Yet more evidence that the US 'Government' is descending further into a maelstrom of madness...

[Disappointed]

IJ
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Here is a free click article better summarizing the Meals on Wheels brouhaha.

What is sad, in addition to dropping grannies out to starve, is the political ham-handedness of it all. This is not rocket science; Ebenezer Scrooge has never been a winning role model and it has never paid off, to target the elderly. Politicians have rightly feared the granny for years. And they're going to learn a sharp nasty lesson now.
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
The cynical part of me (ie, all of me) notes that the GCHQ denial lacks an actual denial. Yes, the allegations are ridiculous and nonsense. But where is the 'no, we didn't do that' bit?

I'll be over here, folding the tinfoil into hats.

Well, I am not an expert rhetorician, but how much daylight is there, really, between saying the "recent allegations" are "nonsense" and "utterly ridiculous and should be ignored", and saying "We didn't do those things"?

(Now, taking a swig of Kool-Aid...)

Looked at in a certain way, Spicer's statement, citing Napolitano, can be construed as saying numerous things, including...

1. The CIA didn't bug Trump.

2. The NSA didn't bug Trump.

3. The Department Of Defense didn't bug Trump.

4. Only GCHQ bugged Trump.

I suppose that, if it were proven at some point in the future that GCHQ had, in fact, bugged Trump, AND that one or more of the other agencies had had some involvement, the GCHQ could fall back on "Well, we never explicitly said that we never bugged Trump, the 'nonsense' we were referring to was the idea that no one else was involved."

[ 17. March 2017, 15:03: Message edited by: Stetson ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The other logical out is, they weren't bugging the PGinC. They weren't miking Trump Tower. What they were eavesdropping on is the Russians, which I trust and hope they often do. That the Russians were talking to Lyin' Don is but a detail.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Mind you, there is a part of me thinking that if there is a chance of a bozo like Trump getting the job, we would want to find out all we can about him. It is what security agencies are for. I'm sure the CIA checked Theresa May for more than shoe size.

Everyone spies on everyone. Despite the official cries of "How could you, our friend, spy on us", it is practically official policy. The methods used, and getting caught, are the real issues.
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Mind you, there is a part of me thinking that if there is a chance of a bozo like Trump getting the job, we would want to find out all we can about him. It is what security agencies are for. I'm sure the CIA checked Theresa May for more than shoe size.

Everyone spies on everyone. Despite the official cries of "How could you, our friend, spy on us", it is practically official policy. The methods used, and getting caught, are the real issues.
When Robert Kim got busted for spying on the Americans on behalf of his homeland South Korea, he was widely hailed as a hero over here, even among the kind of people who are normally the most pro-American. The attitude was basically "We wanted some info, the US wouldn't give it to us, Kim did, so he's a hero."

LA Times
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I saw the transcript of an interview Trump did (sorry, lost the link) which went along the lines of:

I: So why did you tweet that Obama wiretapped you?

T: Well I heard these words, these ideas about wiretapping.

I: So this was an official intelligence briefing?

T: Sort of, it was on Fox News, and then repeated by a friend of mine.

I: So Fox news alleged that Obama wiretapped you?

T: No - they just mentioned wiretapping. Months ago. And my friend mentioned it again. It reminded me.

I: So nobody actually suggested Obama wiretapped you?

T: No - I am smart, so I worked it out myself. It is what I would have done.

I: You would put an illegal wiretap on a president elect?

T: No, I wouldn't do it myself, of course. But Obama is a worse person than me, so I am sure he would have done it.

I: So you tweeted an accusation against a former president based on the fact that you had heard about wiretapping 6 months previously, and Obama must have done it because he is a bad person?

That seems to have been it.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
OK, this is beyond wonderful. Well worth one of your Washington POST clicks: in which someone at the WH clearly mistakes Alexandra Petri's satirical humor column for Rill Newz and puts it into their daily newsletter.

Apparently they were deceived by the headline of the original humor piece, which runs,“Trump’s budget makes perfect sense and will fix America, and I will tell you why“! Neither hyperbole nor irony is known to the WH press office, it seems.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Neither hyperbole nor irony is known to the WH press office, it seems.

There are lots of other things unknown to the press office, or the current resident of the White House. Decency, honesty, integrity .... a failure to understand hyperbole or irony seems to be minor in comparison.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Indeed, Alan. And Trump is the source of that dishonesty and lack of integrity. Here is a remarkable quote from a NY Times article.

quote:
It’s very easy to have a good meeting with Trump,” said Jeremy Shapiro, a former State Department official who is the research director at the European Council on Foreign Relations in London. “He’s very pleasant in person. He’ll promise you the world. And 48 hours later, he’ll betray you without a thought. He won’t even know he’ll be betraying you.”

 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I forgot to link the article which gives the quote.

Not sure if you can all see it without a subscription, but if you can, it is well worth a read. Trump is damaging the Presidency.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Trump has missed out on one of life's essential lessons - that to say 'I was wrong' is the strong thing to do. To never admit mistakes shows great weakness.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Trump has missed out on one of life's essential lessons - that to say 'I was wrong' is the strong thing to do. To never admit mistakes shows great weakness.

He can hardly be held up as an example of this. It is practically endemic and regarded as one of the signs of the "robust", ie, aggressive and confrontational, qualities found so widely in politics and business too: it may have started in business and migrated to politics but in both spheres it is now taken that the ends always justify any means.
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Trump has missed out on one of life's essential lessons - that to say 'I was wrong' is the strong thing to do. To never admit mistakes shows great weakness.

He can hardly be held up as an example of this. It is practically endemic and regarded as one of the signs of the "robust", ie, aggressive and confrontational, qualities found so widely in politics and business too: it may have started in business and migrated to politics but in both spheres it is now taken that the ends always justify any means.
Plus, when politicians do admit to personal failings, it's more often than not along the lines of this exchange Joe Biden had with the media some time in the 2008 campaign...

REPORTER: What would you say is the Number One weakness in your character?

BIDEN: Well, sometimes I think I might be a little too devoted to my job. You spend so much time trying to do what's best for the American people, you wonder if it's taking away from other things like family.

That's not verbatim, but the gist of the answer was indeed that Biden's biggest character flaw is his concern for the American people.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I forgot to link the article which gives the quote.

Not sure if you can all see it without a subscription, but if you can, it is well worth a read. Trump is damaging the Presidency.

I'd thought the Russians the maddest previous.
quote:
After the news conference, Mr. Spicer echoed Mr. Trump’s unapologetic tone. “I don’t think we regret anything,” he told reporters. “As the president said, I was just reading off media reports.”
This is nothing less than mad.

quote:
Julianne Smith, who was a deputy national security adviser to Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., said Mr. Trump did not appear to realize how much American intelligence agencies depend on Britain in dealing with threats around the world. “He will probably live to see the day when he will regret firing off such an egregious insult to Britain and then failing to apologize for it,” she said.
No, he won't. He doesn't have the capacity to process it.

[ 18. March 2017, 10:29: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
“As the president said, I was just reading off media reports.”

Spicer must the first of his kind to believe that his job is to be briefed by the media and repeat their fantasies. Even the worst of his predecessors knew otherwise.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
“As the president said, I was just reading off media reports.”

Spicer must the first of his kind to believe that his job is to be briefed by the media and repeat their fantasies.

Even while calling them liars and scoundrels. It's like the Republicans lay awake at night trying to find new ways to push the boundaries of hypocrisy.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Is it true that Disney has a trump Musical in the works? An unreformed Shrek plays trumpy, the Donkey plays Spicer.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
“As the president said, I was just reading off media reports.”

Spicer must the first of his kind to believe that his job is to be briefed by the media and repeat their fantasies.

Even while calling them liars and scoundrels. It's like the Republicans lay awake at night trying to find new ways to push the boundaries of hypocrisy.
Actually, I think they are torn between the massive excitement of a president who will support cutting nearly anything because he literally has no idea how they work and the fear that this could ruin the Republican Party after.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Stetson--

Re Biden's flaws:

Actually, that's a standard way of answering that question in job interviews. You respond with something that is actually an asset. Interview books teach it.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Here's an article about the many post cards being sent to the WH this week. And there was another article about how since mid-January there has been a run on poster board, foam core and other sign-making materials, here. These should both be free clicks. I can testify that it is hard to find a skein of pink yarn in the stores.

[ 18. March 2017, 20:01: Message edited by: Brenda Clough ]
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Here's an article about the many post cards being sent to the WH this week.

What, precisely, is that supposed to achieve? Self-satisfaction on the part of the senders and those of like mind?

I shouldn't think the cards get beyond the wastebasket of the White House post room.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I would lay long odds that Lyin' Donald never sees a one of them. You can bet that the wise mail room people will simply not mention them to him, to avoid stress; he will certainly never seek them out.
However. The White House systems run traditionally. All mail sent to it is processed somewhere in Maryland, for bombs/poisons/white powders, etc. This is why the drive is for post cards, which pass through more rapidly; you can't enclose a bomb in a post card. Everything is tabulated and logged; so many letters, so many parcels of home-made cookies (never eaten, always disposed of because poison), so many portraits of the president executed in crayon, etc. Everything not perishable is kept, for history; frequently these offerings are housed in the Presidential library -- they need to put something into them, after all. I mailed The PGinC a pussyhat; I selected an acrylic yarn, which I know will last forever. Two hundred years from now wondering historians will look at it and admire how I tucked in the ends.
If the president wants to see his mail he can. Obama, an eminently literate man, had it set up that ten representative letters were passed to him every week, for him to read and answer. He wanted to keep in touch with what people were thinking. The current office holder has Twitter.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
My question stands.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:
The current office holder has Twitter.
Fitting, as the current office holder is a Twit

Writes because of x-post.
Curse you, Eutychus!

[ 18. March 2017, 20:51: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
Edited, not writes.
Curse you autocorrect and time limit!
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Here's an article about the many post cards being sent to the WH this week.

What, precisely, is that supposed to achieve? Self-satisfaction on the part of the senders and those of like mind?

I shouldn't think the cards get beyond the wastebasket of the White House post room.

Yes. Unless a large number of those postcards are coming from people who voted for Trump but are now upset with how he is governing, he can justifiably dismiss them as of little political significance.

It's a little like the Tea Party during Obama's first term. The media was all like "OMG!! The Tea Party! They're fighting mad and want Obama out!!" Then, in 2012, Obama wins again, and people are like "Huh? What about all those angry Tea Partiers?"

But it didn't occur to those people that the Tea Party was never anything more than a bunch of people who never liked Obama to begin with, now advertising the fact.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
Unless a large number of those postcards are coming from people who voted for Trump but are now upset with how he is governing,

Or people who did not vote or stupidly voted for a third-party candidate.

quote:

But it didn't occur to those people that the Tea Party was never anything more than a bunch of people who never liked Obama to begin with, now advertising the fact.

Given the amount of Americans who cannot be arsed to vote, I think it was a legitimate fear that it might be some of those who would actually participate for a change. And, they did get representation in congress in previous elections. Including, Paul "Fuck everyone but the rich" Ryan.

[ 19. March 2017, 02:20: Message edited by: lilBuddha ]
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Voter apathy is all very well when the world is just ticking along fine with no one upsetting anyone much. The Apathy of contentment as a New Labour MP put it after one of their Election victories where low turnout was highlighted.

Problem comes when you get rumblings below decks and someone is in there ready to exploit it. People are inclined to forget that with politics there is always is a representative lurking who can appeal to masses who are afraid, bored shitless or aggrieved in some unspecified way.

[ 19. March 2017, 10:37: Message edited by: rolyn ]
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Is the USA going to invade North Korea? Is that his Iraq? Do you suppose president Caligula* will declare it by twitter? Will it just be drones and bombs, or will it also be troops on the ground? Will that justify Muslim travel bans?

Please tell me this all a Jackass movie. That Kurt Vonnegut was wrong. That some of the circles are unbroken. That the better chicken is your mother.

*RNL and AJ quoted this as a Mexican nickname
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Here is an answer for you. When the PGinC speaks, do we take it seriously? Literally? or both? This article suggests that one form we do take seriously, but not literally, is poetry. Which makes Li'l Donny T a surprisingly solid poet. Have a look, it's a free click.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
Is the USA going to invade North Korea? ... Will that justify Muslim travel bans?

Of course, we all know that North Korea is a sponsor of Islamic terrorism. The Muslim travel ban will keep all those North Korean agents out of the US.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
I have to think that lying is just food to him. Sois screwing people over. Nourishment. Yum yum. You cannot shame such a man. Those who attempt feel shame when they try. The behaviour is so extreme, when he doesn't accept anything, then they must be hysterical. There is an underlying truth that the act of debating brings its own legitimacy.
 
Posted by Rocinante (# 18541) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Of course, we all know that North Korea is a sponsor of Islamic terrorism. The Muslim travel ban will keep all those North Korean agents out of the US.

I predict that this quote will soon be used by Sean Spicer at a WH press briefing, attributed to a reliable source. "Many people say..."
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Meanwhile, Comey and Rogers showed today that facts have power. And, stunningly, Spicer stuck to the stupid White House script re the libellous tweets re Obama.

Will Trump apologise to his predecessor? Current thinking is that Hell will freeze over first. I wonder what he will say instead?
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
But you see aliens tried to bug trumpy by inserting an anal probe. But they couldn't get it in. Too full of sh*t.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This about says it for me. (Should be a free click.) There is a rock-bottom support for the Pussy Grabber that cannot be shaken. There is no point in trying. You made your bed. Lie in it. You've dragged us all down with you, but we don't have to pretend this is good.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:

Will Trump apologise to his predecessor? Current thinking is that Hell will freeze over first. I wonder what he will say instead?

He'll double and triple down, of course. He always does. And then he'll blame the whole mess on someone else (ooh, shiny!).

Sooner or later this is going to end up in a denouement of such absurdity that the powers-that-sort-of-be will all get together, Republican and Democrat, and quietly hand him over to the doctors.

I open the news every day wondering how much longer. It's morbid, like watching a slo-mo car crash.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The big problem with this charming scenario is the Republicans. They have power now; they won't want to give it up. It will be a long, long day before they admit they were wrong. It will have to get worse; I only hope it won't involve nukes.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
They wouldn't be giving it up; they've got Pence still. And at some point the calculation will be that it's better to cut their losses while they still have a hope of reelection than to wait until that's past hope. (Of course, their estimate of exactly when that point is reached will vary from that others see.)

Me, I think it a bit more likely that instead of nukes we will get outright undeniable dementia in a very public situation. I'm thinking almost of the "underpants on head" variety embarrassing. We're almost there now.

[ 21. March 2017, 03:22: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
The speech at the Kentucky rally was 'old'. Fox News have dropped the 'very talented' Napolitano for an indefinite period. Trump's popularity is nosediving. Reality is biting.

I'm not sure whether Ryancare helps him much, even if it passes in the House. Reality is biting there as well.

And then there is North Korea.

This thin skinned, politically inexperienced, flawed human being has a lot on his plate today. I wonder how he will handle it.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I wonder what he will say instead?

Waffle, waffle, prevaricate, blame others, talk complete nonsesnse, big up himself and his 'plans', more waffle, quote fox, evade, lie, mislead ------ squirrel!
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
posted by no prophet's flag is set so...
quote:
... aliens tried to bug trumpy by inserting an anal probe. But they couldn't get it in. Too full of sh*t.
[Overused] [Killing me] [Overused] [Killing me] [Overused] [Killing me]

Thank you. I was having a lousy day till I read that.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is an article from that popular publication around the SoF, Playboy magazine. We all of course read it for the articles, and this one is about the growing movement of Trump Regretters, those who voted for Lyin' Don and then discovered they had been scammed.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The big problem with this charming scenario is the Republicans. They have power now; they won't want to give it up. It will be a long, long day before they admit they were wrong. It will have to get worse; I only hope it won't involve nukes.

OF course, "Republicans" is a mixed group-- old school traditional conservatives and newer Tea Partiers. And there's "Republican" voters and then there's "Republican" congress-- the ones who actually can take action on Trump's actions.

I suspect GOP Congressional reps will be happier with Pence than with Trump, so will have no problem getting rid of Trump, and many are savvy enough to know that will make them look like self-sacrificing heroes. But I think they are getting something useful from Trump right now-- he is tearing down the apparatus of the liberal state, doing all sorts of draconian things that they want-- even if in a lesser, hopefully somewhat humane way. If they wait until he's done everything they want, even if in more extreme forms (e.g. immigration ban, ACA replacement) and even if they get some nasty stuff along with it, then they will be able to distances themselves from those unpopular moves after they impeach Trump. They can keep the stuff they like without it "sticking", they can remove some of the more extreme stuff around the edges, and still look like good guys. A very neat trick IMHO and I'm cynical enough to believe that's the plan.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
They have called for the wind; let's hope we all don't reap the whirlwind.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The mere thought that the Pussygrabber's 'government' seems to be saying that they are willing to go war with North Korea and Kim Wrong-Trim (what is it with these guys and their hair?) is enough to freeze the blood.

Let alone freezing the world with the resulting nuclear winter.

[Help]

IJ
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
We wouldn't have to worry about global warming.
 
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :
 
I'm so old I can remember when conservatives pretended to worry about the possibility a president being under FBI investigation. Seems like it was only five months ago!

quote:
FBI director confirms investigation of possible collusion between Trump campaign and Russia

Director James B. Comey confirmed for the first time Monday that the FBI is investigating possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian authorities during the 2016 election campaign.

Don't worry, I'm sure White House spokes-entity Kellyanne Conway will have some kind of pity insight that will clear everything up.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Global warming? Isn't that an 'alternative fact' or something...?
[Paranoid]

IJ
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
An interesting opinion piece by a psychiatrist who is not trying to diagnose Trump, but to understand him.

"Perhaps Trump’s bigotry is also derived from his narcissism; since he must see himself as perfect to defend his fragile ego, he may also see his own characteristics (white, male, heterosexual, Christian) as superior. He is likely to do what he can to ensure those who share these characteristics remain superior by proliferating inequality and disadvantage for those who do not. In his mind, since the US has now become an extension of himself, he will act to enhance its position as the dominant power, irrespective of the cost to the rest of the world."
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
If this were so, and if he could actually do it, I do believe the majority of the electorate would be perfectly fine with it. Nationalism is a powerful and ancient force.

I do not believe it is so. The PG may tell himself "l'etat, c'est moi" (except he wouldn't quote a Frenchman, the only French he knows is probably on menus). But if it came to a choice between a good for his own precious self and a good for the general citizenry, who do you think would come out on top? There is not a self-sacrificial bone in the man's body; you cannot point at one example. It is himself, Number One, all the way, and if the nation's interests happen to align with those drives then hurray. Otherwise, sucks to be you.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is an excellent summary of the current state of play. It is a free click, but profoundly depressing.
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Like father, like son.

Not only would it seem that DT junior has inherited the tweeting bug from his father, it would seem he also has the same ability to fire off tweets without reading/listening to the comment, remark or action on which he claims to tweet.

His response to the attack in London yesterday was disgraceful.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The entire family is a horror show.
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
What a little turd.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It is sinking in that Lyin' Don is not actually lying. He actually cannot tell truth from fiction. There must be a technical term for this.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
It is sinking in that Lyin' Don is not actually lying. He actually cannot tell truth from fiction. There must be a technical term for this.

I think it has been becoming clear for a while that he is not simply telling lies, as most politicians do, but he is psychologically incapable of telling the difference between truth and lies.

It doesn't make it any better. In fact, it makes it worse - there is probably no solution other than removing him from office.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
It has been around for a few weeks, and I must have missed it. A delightful acronym for donald fart's position as So Called Ruler Of The United States: SCROTUS. It suits him very nicely.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
SCROTUS may be a crypto Muslim. "he represses his Islamic faith because he sees it as negative or, maybe, even deleterious to his presidential or business career".

It is at least as sensible as anything out of his mouth-butt.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The glossy fashion mag Cosmopolitan of all people calls out the Plastic Barbie's position in her father's administration for the nepotism that it is. Have you ever seen a more faux face?
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
It's been a while since I've taken such enjoyment in reading about someone else's misery.

Trump voter: My husband is being deported Friday
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stetson:
It's been a while since I've taken such enjoyment in reading about someone else's misery.

Trump voter: My husband is being deported Friday

Especially this:

"In a county that backed Trump with 70 percent of the vote, residents were upset that the president who promised to deport undocumented immigrants was rounding up undocumented immigrants in order to deport them".

Say what you like about Trump, he is keeping his campaign promises. Those that do demonstrable harm at any rate.
 
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on :
 
I should say that it's not just Trump supporters who have a double-standard when it comes to which illegal immigrants deserve to be ejected from the country.

I remember a case in my hometown, late 90s, in which a filipino women had taken sanctuary in a local church, hoping to avoid deportation after her visa had expired(or whatever the issue was with her status). I heard a few comments along the lines of "Hrrumph. Maybe if she came here on a boat as a refugee, they'd let her stay", the implication being that, unlike the scraggly swarms showing up on our coastlines, this woman really deserved to be in Canada.

I suspect the fact that she had the backing of a church, plus that the Philipines is widely known to be a Christian country, might have had something to do with the special pleading.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is a free click: Slate summarizes the evolving media position on the PG's ineradicable mendacity.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Say what you like about Trump, he is keeping his campaign promises. Those that do demonstrable harm at any rate.

And Mexico just called him to say the check for the wall is in the mail.
[Disappointed]
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
This is a free click: Slate summarizes the evolving media position on the PG's ineradicable mendacity.

Here is another explanation of the same Time Magazine article - broken down nicely (same points)
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I think it is clear that nobody expected Trump to keep his campaign promises. Neither his supporters or his opponents.

I suspect most supporters thought he would deal with the "problem" immigrants, but (because he is Trump) he is actually trying to do what he said.

Because he doesn't understand. The dick.
 
Posted by molopata (# 9933) on :
 
And while we have long known that he doesn't say what he means, it is now clear that he doesn't mean what he says either. His make-or-break, all-or-nothing approach to Trumpcare has turned into a "maybe we'll try again". What a whimp,
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
Trumps primary "first act" - repealing and replacing ObamaCare - fails. Despite having a Democrat majority. Despite (apparently) working "really hard" to get it through.

I think the only response to this is:

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you UTTER DIPSHIT.
 
Posted by Hedgehog (# 14125) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Trumps primary "first act" - repealing and replacing ObamaCare - fails. Despite having a Democrat majority.

I think you mean Republican majority. The failure of the bill is being blamed on the Democrats because...ummm...they were powerless to prevent it. Or something. That part hasn't been explained yet. And probably never will be.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you UTTER DIPSHIT.

[Killing me] [Yipee] [Killing me] [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Trumps primary "first act" - repealing and replacing ObamaCare - fails. Despite having a Democrat majority.

I think you mean Republican majority. The failure of the bill is being blamed on the Democrats because...ummm...they were powerless to prevent it. Or something. That part hasn't been explained yet. And probably never will be.
Maybe the word has got back to some Republicans in Congress that their poor and aging supporters really don't want to lose their benefits under the Affordable Care Act, so the Congresspersons are already acting with an eye to the midterms. Can but hope.
 
Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
The failure of the bill is being blamed on the Democrats because...ummm...they were powerless to prevent it. Or something. That part hasn't been explained yet. And probably never will be.

Yes, my take on Trump's response:
quote:
"We did the best we could, but no Democrat was going to vote for the bill, so it's their problem now - they own it. And when Obamacare explodes in a big mess later this year, then they should come to us and work with us to create a wonderful, bipartisan bill that will solve everybody's problems."
So apparently, the fact that Republicans couldn't put together a highly partisan bill means that all they were lacking was Democratic input?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
What a dysfunctional mess....you couldn't make it up.

What's next on the list? Mexico refusing point-blank to pay for The Wall? (Or have the Bad Hombres done that already?).

IJ
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
The man just has no clue that what worked in a company basically handed him to by his Dad, filled with people who worked for him, doesn't work in running a country with separation of powers.

He's childish and petulant, and the fact that he ever got anywhere NEAR the job he's now in says something pretty distressing about the state of modern society.

Behind the orange facade there's nothing.
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
The Republican Party has had 150 years to come up with a health care plan other than letting the poor die in the streets. Is it any surprise they couldn't cobble one together in a few months?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
I suppose separation of powers works quite well when the majority party in Congress has lost the ability to get its act together. The President doesn't have a rubber stamp to rely on.

The GOP reps in the House seem to make up a very strange coalition. I wonder what else they will find it difficult to agree on. Tax reform? Infrastructure rebuild? The Wall? Withdrawal from international trade deals?

Trump will fast lose interest in this finicky process of building majorities.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
The Republican Party has had 150 years to come up with a health care plan other than letting the poor die in the streets. Is it any surprise they couldn't cobble one together in a few months?

But to a very large extent they did come up with one. It's called Obamacare. There are significant features of the system that exist because Republicans wanted them.

[ 25. March 2017, 01:51: Message edited by: orfeo ]
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
Yeah, but their subsequent hypocrisy should negate any credit for their bright ideas. Even Mittens disowned Romneycare to satisfy their Obama hatred.

Anyway, I'm partying tonight. The Art of the Deal turned out to be a black velvet Elvis and some people actually noticed.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Soror Magna:
Yeah, but their subsequent hypocrisy should negate any credit for their bright ideas. Even Mittens disowned Romneycare to satisfy their Obama hatred.

Well, it turns out one of the things that the no true Scotsman line of argument can be used for is to say that no true Republican can have a decent idea.

Because a decent idea would be a counterexample to your sweeping statement, and that would be just wrong.

Fuck me but I can't stand this shit today. Everything reduce to 2 sides like it's a fucking football match.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
I think this could be a sign of things to come - battling wings of the republican party unable to agree on anything with Trump, confused, in the middle.

Hopefully he'll get nothing done and slink away in four years time to make way for politicians who know the job.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hedgehog:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Trumps primary "first act" - repealing and replacing ObamaCare - fails. Despite having a Democrat majority.

I think you mean Republican majority. The failure of the bill is being blamed on the Democrats because...ummm...they were powerless to prevent it. Or something. That part hasn't been explained yet. And probably never will be.
Yes Republican Majority. Sorry. I am terrible at remembering who is who.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
One effect of Trump's performance in office so far is that Bernie Sanders has become the most popular politician in the US. Speaking as someone who has a lot of time for Bernie's principles and values, I still wonder if that's just a further sign of public fed-upness with the messy political processes involved in getting things done, rather than just being clear about what you think ought to be done.

I don't think Bernie will be President - probably too old in 2020 - but I'm not sure he would be much better at 'making his sausages' than the Donald is at 'making his sausages'. Getting agreements amongst the disparate has its ugly side, but avoiding the messiness, or not understanding how to do it, just renders you ineffective.

[ 25. March 2017, 08:45: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I think this could be a sign of things to come - battling wings of the republican party unable to agree on anything with Trump, confused, in the middle.

Quite possible. The Tea Party is almost a separate party in practical terms. I think over the years there were quite a few vicious selection fights where a more traditional Republican was driven out of their spot.

So even though there is a majority of "Republicans" in Congress, I suspect in truth there will often be something close to a 3-party system.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

Hopefully he'll get nothing done and slink away in four years time to make way for politicians who know the job.

In four years he can do a lot of damage to America and the world.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:

Hopefully he'll get nothing done and slink away in four years time to make way for politicians who know the job.

In four years he can do a lot of damage to America and the world.
Not if he gets nothing through.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
For the the Tyrant this guy was supposed to be he does seem to have his hands somewhat tied. Maybe he will come and go and have sweet F A to show for it, rather like his predecessor.

Globalisation is the force which is ruling over all of us and ain't nuffin gonna stop that, not even a Fake dictator.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Hopefully he'll get nothing done and slink away in four years time to make way for politicians who know the job.

From the time of his "election," I've never thought he'd make it through four years -- resignation, removal by impeachment, or death -- either natural or assassination. (But we'll need to get rid of Pence before that happens, like we got rid of Agnew before Nixon resigned.)
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
I hardly think Pussygrabber's predecessor achieved nothing. Clearly, YMMV.

Apart from anything else, at least Mr. O'Barmagh (clearly an Irish name, and therefore a non-American terrorist), was (and is) a kind, decent, intelligent, literate, compassionate human being. Even those who opposed him must be missing him already, no?

IJ
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The Democratic leadership gives the credit to grassroots activism for killing Trumpcare. From the article: "This week, as Republicans fumbled the AHCA, Democrats held relatively low-key events to draw attention to their fight. At each, they credited activists with slowing down the bill and derided Republicans for being led by Trump’s whims."
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The Democratic leadership gives the credit to grassroots activism for killing Trumpcare. From the article: "This week, as Republicans fumbled the AHCA, Democrats held relatively low-key events to draw attention to their fight. At each, they credited activists with slowing down the bill and derided Republicans for being led by Trump’s whims."

The grass roots activism, long may it flourish, was important, and a lot of Republicans knew they could kiss their seats goodbye at the next election if they helped to take away the ACA, but never underestimate the power of the other dissenting Republicans for whom Don'tCare was insufficiently destructive. They haven't gone away, and they won't.

It is rather nice that the fart always called it Obamacare rather than the ACA as a way to scare people off it. Now he has to put up with everyone calling it that to give it the honour it deserves.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
This list is imperfect, in that it credits Obama for some things he really didn't do but rather watched happen. But most things he can justly take at least some credit for. It definitely shows he has more than F/A to show for his 8 years. That's a fatuous attack, not a balanced assessment. It's a stupid thing to say.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
The voters aren't stupid. (Or, more accurately, aren't all stupid.) We noticed this. They weren't even bothering to hide their hatred this time around.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
The voters aren't stupid. (Or, more accurately, aren't all stupid.) We noticed this. They weren't even bothering to hide their hatred this time around.

This is good but it rather makes it sound like women are the only group that the Republicans want to make miserable, or don't give a fuck about. That's a wee bit too simplistic.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
The notion that Obama got nothing done is logically inconsistent with a Republican agenda that largely consists of "we will undo what Obama did".
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is from the POST, an account from a Congressional staffer about what it's like to get all those phone calls. Contacting your congressperson really does work.
 
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 
The next step is for Trump to break Obamacare by scaring off the Insurance providers and not getting the younger people to join. Then he can point to it and say See!
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
This is from the POST, an account from a Congressional staffer about what it's like to get all those phone calls. Contacting your congressperson really does work.

It is encouraging to read the comments after the (very insightful) article, people sharing tips and experiences, helping each other with advice and support.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The notion that Obama got nothing done is logically inconsistent with a Republican agenda that largely consists of "we will undo what Obama did".

You say that like being logically consistent is something Republicans aspire to.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
This is from the POST, an account from a Congressional staffer about what it's like to get all those phone calls. Contacting your congressperson really does work.

It is encouraging to read the comments after the (very insightful) article, people sharing tips and experiences, helping each other with advice and support.
Yes, it is good to know that our actions have an impact. The postcards-to-the-White-House thing, for instance, I doubt anyone will learn anything about for a while.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
it is good to know that our actions have an impact. The postcards-to-the-White-House thing, for instance, I doubt anyone will learn anything about for a while.

That reminds me. My question still stands.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Oh, there is a value in people expressing their concerns. Even if the PGinC doesn't listen, he might. No one marching in Washington expects Tiny Fingers to look out his windows and see them. IF he does I am certain he believes they are paid to be out there. It is we who are empowered by our protest.
And you can bet these were not the only mailings; many more were addressed to those Congresspersons. Who do listen, because they are (more or less) sane, and (certainly) have an eye for Number One.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Kleptocracy update: Nearly 1 out of every 3 days he visits one of his properties. This is why it's worth subscribing to the POST; they ferret out all these fascinating stats and lay them out in bar graphs.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
The notion that Obama got nothing done is logically inconsistent with a Republican agenda that largely consists of "we will undo what Obama did".

You say that like being logically consistent is something Republicans aspire to.
I think it's something I aspire to them aspiring to.
 
Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
*** NEWS FLASH ***

Former ABofC Lord Carey of Clifton has likened Donald Trump to the Good Samaritan and said that his lying, hypocrisy and hedonistic lifestyle are irrelevant [Killing me]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Are you sure you didn't mishear, and it was a character in the parable? Specifically the robbers who leave the traveller half dead by the road side.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
L'Organist is right. Carey's comments are in "The Times" (and elsewhere).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
*** NEWS FLASH ***

Former ABofC Lord Carey of Clifton has likened Donald Trump to the Good Samaritan and said that his lying, hypocrisy and hedonistic lifestyle are irrelevant [Killing me]

One weekend's good deeds in an entire lifetime, and AFAIK good deeds don't earn salvation.

Back in your places everyone.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
We'd be more than happy to send T over to Carey, so he can receive the blessings of the Donald face to face. In fact, all of T's minions can go, too. Carey gets blessings, and we get blessed rest.

So let it be written, so let it be done.
 
Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on :
 
Link
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Lord Carey of Clifton said that, as in the parable of the Good Samaritan, Mr Trump had promised to offer support to the “wounded and helpless left behind by the elite”, and was “giving a voice to the silent”.
Source (registration required).

The big difference is that the good Samaritan did more than promise to help. He helped.
 
Posted by Qoheleth. (# 9265) on :
 
PS: The Daily Mail [now please wash your hands] version includes a picture of +David Hope captioned as +Carey, which someone suggested should be grounds for defamation.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Don't know about Good Samaritan, other than the parallel with regards to the Samaritans being well and truly hated.
If you ask me Carey looks to be practicing dead cat politics in a bid to save the CofE.

On trumpton one does though have to ask what this fellow has so far done that is oh so bad. I mean has he invaded any oil rich sovereign countries triggering a trail of death, destruction and chaos for decades afterwards?
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
The Good Samaritan (as told by Lord Carey):

But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him And said: Look at the awful things that have happened to this man. He's been mugged, probably by Mexicans. I can help him, only I can help him. I'm the best at helping. I'm so good at helping, folks. I'm amazing. What? He's dead? Fake news, he's not dead. It is the priest and Levite's fault that he's dead, which he's not, FakeNews, blame them.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
On trumpton one does though have to ask what this fellow has so far done that is oh so bad. I mean has he invaded any oil rich sovereign countries triggering a trail of death, destruction and chaos for decades afterwards?

Give him time.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
He has only been kept from doing horrid things (stripping health insurance from millions, for example) by grim determination and loud protests. He's been steadily peeling back environmental protections, which will be catastrophic for the future.
I have never heard of the PGinC going out of his way to do anything for anybody. His vaunted charitable donations revolve around free golf time at his resorts, or full-length portraits of himself; his 'gifts' are actually donated by others. His charitable foundation is a fraud. So far as I know he has never given so much as a bus seat to an old lady, or dropped a coin into a beggar's cup. His charities either benefit himself or his children/businesses/other interests.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
*** NEWS FLASH ***

Former ABofC Lord Carey of Clifton has likened Donald Trump to the Good Samaritan and said that his lying, hypocrisy and hedonistic lifestyle are irrelevant [Killing me]

Carey is irrelevant.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
On trumpton one does though have to ask what this fellow has so far done that is oh so bad. I mean has he invaded any oil rich sovereign countries triggering a trail of death, destruction and chaos for decades afterwards?

Give him time.
Please don't.

What has he done so far that is so bad? He has tried to strip millions of poorer people of health, so that richer people can pay less tax. He has tried to exclude people based on their religion. He is in the process of promoting environmental catastrophe, at the precise time when we need critically to promote environmental care.

So fare, he has focusses internally, and caused incredibly problems. One can only hope he doesn't get a chance to look further afield.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:

So fare, he has focusses internally, and caused incredibly problems. One can only hope he doesn't get a chance to look further afield.

To late, they've already stepped up airstrikes whilst doing none of the diplomacy to mitigate the damage.
Thse administration is nothing more than a mob of angry, ignorant and privileged toddlers.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
His vaunted charitable donations revolve around free golf time at his resorts, or full-length portraits of himself; his 'gifts' are actually donated by others.

A few pictures of him have circulated with him playing golf. The guy's a lard-ass. He's president Lard-Ass.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Thse administration is nothing more than a mob of angry, ignorant and privileged toddlers.

That is libelous. How dare you insult angry, ignorant and privileged toddlers like that!
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Alan cries well!
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Two angry, ignorant toddlers are now pulling faces at each other.

[Disappointed]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Make the most of any fine weather you might be enjoying, people - the nuclear winter is not far off...

[Help]

IJ
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Yes, and I've given up the Red for Lent so was rather hoping mad mango and the little bloke in North K. could put Armageddon on hold till after Easter.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
I think you've probably got time to put the best vintage in A Safe Place, whilst the sabre-rattling goes on betimes.

Best not start reading War and Peace, though. It'll only serve to depress you even more during the Last Days.

On second thoughts, it'll all be over in an hour-and-a-half, according to Tom Lehrer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrbv40ENU_o&nohtml5=False

IJ
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Over at the LA Times they're running a long series about Lyin' Don.
Here is the first one. It ran yesterday
And here is the second which appeared today. These are sterling, and should be a free click.
 
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :
 
quote:
He targets the darkness, anger and insecurity that hide in each of us and harnesses them for his own purposes.
Wow. You know it's bad when the secular press stumbles into biblical rhetoric because it's all that seems up to the task.

It leaves me thinking about Trump as the scourge of God's wrath; driving men back to t(/T)ruth by the personification of its absence. I hope we catch on quick.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
Two angry, ignorant toddlers are now pulling faces at each other.

I think the prospect of North Korea - possibly the only country in the world with even more of a spoiled toddler in charge than the US - acquiring a genuine nuclear first strike capability is worrying enough for any US President to be encouraging China to do something about it. Even if that something is just an agreement to look the other way while the US, South Korea and Japan fuck Kim's shit all the way up.

The only alternative seems to be to wait for Kim to vaporise a city - maybe Seoul, maybe Tokyo, maybe San Francisco - before doing anything about him. If left alone he will decide to do it eventually, and North Korea doesn't have any of the political or procedural safeguards that the US has to prevent Trump from doing the same thing.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
What a cheerful thought. Kim Wrong-Trim and Trumpauron the Great....maybe God's wrath is about to be poured out on the world.

Happy Armageddon, everyone! Not long now...

IJ
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
North Korea doesn't have any of the political or procedural safeguards that the US has to prevent Trump from doing the same thing.

You do know what stands in the way of Trump ordering a first strike against any other target, don't you?

Nothing. Nada. Zilch.

He can call for the football, authenticate the codes, and missiles will launch all without him having to consult anyone at all.

Source (One among many. They're not making this shit up.)
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Have you ever wondered about his neckties? He ties them so long that he has had to use scotch tape to hold down the short end at the back. (I am not making this up. There are photos!)
Anyway, this is cheering -- Twitter images revolving around the necktie. Sauron and Voldemort were purely villainous; is it a feature of Real Life that our villains endure constant mockery and comedy? Can we imagine SNL making fun of the Dark Lord of Middle Earth?
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
He can call for the football, authenticate the codes, and missiles will launch all without him having to consult anyone at all.

On one of T's run-aways to his place at Mar-a-Lago, where T was having confidential meetings in front of the resort's guests, some guy took a selfie with the guy carrying the nuclear attache' case!
 
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Have you ever wondered about his neckties? He ties them so long that he has had to use scotch tape to hold down the short end at the back. (I am not making this up. There are photos!)
Anyway, this is cheering -- Twitter images revolving around the necktie. Sauron and Voldemort were purely villainous; is it a feature of Real Life that our villains endure constant mockery and comedy? Can we imagine SNL making fun of the Dark Lord of Middle Earth?

I'd like to see one of a tie dragging behind him, caught in his shoe like a piece of toilet paper. [Snigger]
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Those long ties are a kind of variation of the (claimed) tendency for short men to send long-stemmed roses to women they are attracted to. The ties are a kind of compensation for other inadequacies - maybe.

Spicer's comment about Syria and chemical weapons took the biscuit yesterday. I was yelling at the screen "You can get more aggressive. You have the power. Think North Korea!"

(Oh wait. That might offend the Russians. Syria is after all their client state. But the Trump regime mustn't upset them. Can't go there. Maybe the geopolitics of this are complex? Still, slamming Obama is always good for their support base. Or maybe I mean their base support?)

It's not just the self-serving hypocritical self-righteousness that pisses me off. It's the sheer, stupid, incompetency. If they must do these damn stupid things, do they have to do them in such damn stupid ways.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Those long ties are a kind of variation of the (claimed) tendency for short men to send long-stemmed roses to women they are attracted to. The ties are a kind of compensation for other inadequacies - maybe.

As a wearer of long ties, I can tell you that sometimes they are just a compensation for having a gut that sticks out over your belt. A tie that falls short of the horizon (as it were) looks dumb. A tie that is too long looks dumb but not quite as dumb.
 
Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
What a cheerful thought. Kim Wrong-Trim and Trumpauron the Great....maybe God's wrath is about to be poured out on the world.

Happy Armageddon, everyone! Not long now...

USA v North Korea could only become Armageddon if China got involved. If China agreed to look the other way then the worst that could happen would be maybe one American/South Korean/Japanese city being nuked, and anything from one to every North Korean city nuked.

(If China vows to jump in on NK's side then all bets are off. One can only hope Kim's already pissed them off enough for them to be privately in favour of his removal.)

IMO, the most likely scenario in which nukes are launched sees Kim fire one at either Seoul or San Francisco, followed by America retaliating by firing one at Pyongyang. I'm not convinced that Kim has ICBM capability or the ability to deliver more than one nuke over long range at one time.

After the nukes flew, there would be an all-out invasion of NK by SK and US forces, followed by a nasty (but ultimately short) conventional war. "Conventional" meaning the US would park a few carrier strike groups about a hundred miles off shore and use drones, bombers and missiles to rain down ordnance on anything that moves for a few weeks, followed by the ground troops rolling up the country from the south. There would be resistance, and many casualties on both sides, but the US's vastly superior resources would probably ensure the ultimate victory.

Granted, the nukes would seriously suck for the people in the cities concerned (for about three seconds, anyway). But it wouldn't cause nuclear winter or worldwide devastation any more than the other nukes that have been detonated over the last 60-odd years did.
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

The only alternative seems to be to wait for Kim to vaporise a city - maybe Seoul, maybe Tokyo, maybe San Francisco - before doing anything about him.

Remember during "Desert Storm," the American troops were taunted by threats saying, "Your wives are sleeping with Bart Simpson?" They thought he was a big movie star here.

I live in one of many tiny towns across America called "Washington." I live in fear.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
Granted, the nukes would seriously suck for the people in the cities concerned (for about three seconds, anyway).

You are as well-informed on the consequences of a ground-burst nuclear explosion as you are on US launch protocols, I see. [Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
My idle question was, how useful is comedy as a weapon against idiot politicians? Someone has analyzed why TV satirists are actually doing a better job than the regular news.
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Those long ties are a kind of variation of the (claimed) tendency for short men to send long-stemmed roses to women they are attracted to. The ties are a kind of compensation for other inadequacies - maybe.

As a wearer of long ties, I can tell you that sometimes they are just a compensation for having a gut that sticks out over your belt. A tie that falls short of the horizon (as it were) looks dumb. A tie that is too long looks dumb but not quite as dumb.
I've noticed recently that in the US there is something of a fashion trend to tie the tie shorter, noticeably above the buckle, than previously, whereas in the UK it is tied slightly longer, to or on the buckle. I understand the shorter tie is to match the shorter jacket fashion (which I dislike), so perhaps Trump's tie compensates for the longer jackets he favours, and not for something more Freudian. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

On a side note, surely a man with so much money could find suits that fit properly.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
He is borderline obese -- not my description, but his tame doctor's, so it must be true. Such figures are hard to clothe elegantly.
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
On a much more serious note, the prospect of a nuclear war, even if limited to the Korean theatre, is profoundly dispiriting. The North Koreans have suffered so much for so long, incinerating them strikes me as a final, insulting injustice. As a final irony, a nuclear strike against North Korea would be seen to confirm the mythology propagated in North Korean propaganda, that America seeks to destroy the Korean people.

[ 05. April 2017, 14:28: Message edited by: Pangolin Guerre ]
 
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
I doubt if an attack on North Korea would begin with nuclear weapons. I imagine the Navy would close in and sink North Korean ships and there would be a lot of drone strikes, missiles and conventional bombing. The North Koreans would therefore have plenty of time to attack South Korea, for which they are very well prepared.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
I've noticed recently that in the US there is something of a fashion trend to tie the tie shorter, noticeably above the buckle, than previously, whereas in the UK it is tied slightly longer, to or on the buckle. I understand the shorter tie is to match the shorter jacket fashion (which I dislike), so perhaps Trump's tie compensates for the longer jackets he favours, and not for something more Freudian. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

On a side note, surely a man with so much money could find suits that fit properly.

And he could also afford a decent barber.
[Roll Eyes]

But back to the ties... He has his own company that makes ties (in China, of course). If he wants to wear them that long, why not have some custom made so that the short end can be tucked into the label rather than relying on a piece of tape?
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
I've noticed recently that in the US there is something of a fashion trend to tie the tie shorter, noticeably above the buckle, than previously, whereas in the UK it is tied slightly longer, to or on the buckle. I understand the shorter tie is to match the shorter jacket fashion (which I dislike).

"Gentleman of fashion" is quickly becoming an oxymoron in the United States. Look at how many men think it proper to wear brown shoes with blue suits (and after sunset at that!).
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The late, great Stanley Holloway had summat to say about brown shoes (well, brahn boots, anyway):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAfb1HaZ0Mo&nohtml5=False

IJ
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
It is bourgeois and pedestrian to colour coordinate. Better to clash. If clothes be art at all.

[tangent]
I own about 350 ties. I am wearing the flowered ones these days. Also decided to resurrect the wider ones versus the narrow. Those who wear neckties daily can usually tie them in the dark, to the right length.

The real argument is what knot to use. Preferring the four-in-hand myself. The two windsor knots are for the under-confident who are compensating for something. You can tell a lot about the person by their knot. The kent knot is for children.

Windsor knots with plain bulky fabrics tied too short are for lard-asses and lard-brains.
[/tangent]
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Myself, I just wear ties; I haven't worked out a theology of them.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
It is bourgeois and pedestrian to colour coordinate. Better to clash. If clothes be art at all.

[tangent]
I own about 350 ties. I am wearing the flowered ones these days. Also decided to resurrect the wider ones versus the narrow. Those who wear neckties daily can usually tie them in the dark, to the right length.

The real argument is what knot to use. Preferring the four-in-hand myself. The two windsor knots are for the under-confident who are compensating for something. You can tell a lot about the person by their knot. The kent knot is for children.

Windsor knots with plain bulky fabrics tied too short are for lard-asses and lard-brains.
[/tangent]

You can't - ties have been consigned to Room 101.

[Razz]
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Ties are a tool of oppression, deliberately worn by peons to show their subservience to their masters by placing a mock hangman's noose around their own necks.

Burn them. Free yourselves.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
How about this?

Bannon's gone from the NSC
 
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on :
 
The anchorman on the news just referred to President Chump. Could he possibly be trying to be as pointed as the satirists? [Smile]
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by jedijudy:
The anchorman on the news just referred to President Chump. Could he possibly be trying to be as pointed as the satirists? [Smile]

[Killing me]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
How about this?

Bannon's gone from the NSC

The Onion's Andy Borowitz tweets, "Obviously something horrible is about to come out about Steve Bannon but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE GOD let it not be a sex tape."
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Borowitz works for the New Yorker, not the Onion.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Oops my mistake, sorry. Too quick with the send key.

The below is from a friend's online discussion of DC comic book movies; in one of the Justice League cartoons Lex Luthor doesn't wash his hands after using the restroom because, he announces, 'I'm evil!' My friend asserts that this was modeled upon, yes you guessed it, the PGinC.

"Trump contradicts his "germaphobe" claim in THE ART OF THE DEAL, saying that he deliberately doesn't wash his hands after taking a bathroom break during a meeting, as shaking hands and knowing he's making the other guy symbolically touch his junk gives him a psychological advantage."

I have not and certainly will never read the book; my eyesight is limited and must be conserved. Has anyone, who can back up this citation?
 
Posted by romanlion (# 10325) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Oops my mistake, sorry. Too quick with the send key.

The below is from a friend's online discussion of DC comic book movies; in one of the Justice League cartoons Lex Luthor doesn't wash his hands after using the restroom because, he announces, 'I'm evil!' My friend asserts that this was modeled upon, yes you guessed it, the PGinC.

"Trump contradicts his "germaphobe" claim in THE ART OF THE DEAL, saying that he deliberately doesn't wash his hands after taking a bathroom break during a meeting, as shaking hands and knowing he's making the other guy symbolically touch his junk gives him a psychological advantage."

I have not and certainly will never read the book; my eyesight is limited and must be conserved. Has anyone, who can back up this citation?

No
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
I hate to say that romanlion might be right, but the passage in question contains at least two grammatical errors. They may have escaped him or his ghost writers, but surely not his editors (if he had any).

Regardless, anyone even contemplating shaking hands with him does so at his or her own peril. Personally, I'd rather touch the Ebola virus.

[ 06. April 2017, 03:29: Message edited by: Amanda B. Reckondwythe ]
 
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :
 
Miss Amanda, just make sure that you don't give him a lift in your Daimler.
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Snopes is pretty good on truth checking, Brenda. And Trump is a self-admitted germaphobic hand washer.

I'm not. But I'd much rather shake hands with Angela Merkel. Trump and his friend Bill O'Reilly (and Bannon too, come to think of it) are the sorts of people I'd prefer to shake warmly by the throat.

[ 06. April 2017, 04:55: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
If I ever had the misfortune to meet the Toddler, I would take a dump beforehand, and not wash my hands. Then he would be, metaphorically, wiping my ass.

And if he really is such a germopohobe, it might freak him out.

The thing I always find interesting is that this seems to be considered reasonable by a lot of people. TBH, he probably would do this, if he had thought about it. Becasue he is a petty piece of shit.
 
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on :
 
quote:
The late, great Stanley Holloway had summat to say about brown shoes (well, brahn boots, anyway):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAfb1HaZ0Mo&nohtml5=False

IJ

I really enjoyed that.

..."I'll admit 'e 'ad a nice black tie,
black fingernails and a nice black eye'...

Thanks IJ
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Whew, you relieve my mind very much. (There was no point in asking the comic book folks about it, they were debating Batman and Superman's power dynamic.)

Here is another online comment from an analytical media-centric friend (I got a million of 'em):

"If there is not enough about President Trump to be dispirited (or terrified) by, one need only see a video of him from the Eighties to realize how far his cognitive faculties have decayed.
He was never a wit, but those old TV clips show that he was once capable of a quick reply and, occasionally, a degree of humorous self-deprecation. His vocabulary was larger.
Now he glares suspiciously at questions, head lowered like a tortoise's expecting attacked, and speaks slowly and badly. He never engages with the subject of a question; he simply deflects it dismissively, using only phrases you have heard him say before. When he is in good spirits, he enacts one of the two or three scripts--bluff showman; expansive braggart--that he can do more or less automatically."

We did not use to be able to do this -- go back and view people through time via YouTube videos.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
How about this?

Bannon's gone from the NSC

The Onion's Andy Borowitz tweets, "Obviously something horrible is about to come out about Steve Bannon but PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE GOD let it not be a sex tape."
Here's the Bannon piece by Andy Borowitz in the New Yorker. My Dear Wife laughed till she cried when she read it.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
Why does ..... Trump have ..... to speak ..... in ................................. two word ...... clusters oh ........ so s.l.ooooow..l...y?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Because other.......wise........he can't........follow........his autocue........

(and, as someone else has said, the poor sap's possibly brain-damaged).

IJ
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
I wonder if it's because he has a hidden earpiece and is being fed his lines by someone nearby, who has to feed them in small chunks because it's all 45 can process without losing his place.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
I wonder what his (disjointed) comments or tweets might be regarding the latest news from Sweden?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news

Doubtless he will call for solidarity with sadly-afflicted Norway...or Denmark....or Finland....

IJ
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I wonder if it's because he has a hidden earpiece and is being fed his lines by someone nearby, who has to feed them in small chunks because it's all 45 can process without losing his place.

What bothers me the most is that he didn't look the camera (i.e., the people) in the eye as he spoke, but glanced off to the side or vaguely into space. Unlike other presidents.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
One of these days, you'll actually be able to see the strings....

Thunderbirds are GO!!!!!!

IJ
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
I think presidents do look off to the side, when using teleprompters--that's where they are. Some may be familiar enough with the text and have a good enough memory that they can think "oh, right, point A", and go on to talk about point A without much need to check the teleprompter.

T, I think, tends to simply read what's on the teleprompter.

I did wonder who came up with the ideas for the speech. He made religious comments that he usually doesn't, and talked like we're at the outbreak of a world war.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Particularly fine, since the PG made so much hay about other pols using teleprompters. He was supposed to be Too Smart, not to mention Too Genuine, to ever have to use such a thing. His habit was just to open his mouth and let it fly. If he now has to be sock-puppetted by off-site managers it would be a cruel and lovely thing.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
The times when T seems more presidential--less bluster, no grunting, no "bigly"--are when he uses teleprompters.
 
Posted by W Hyatt (# 14250) on :
 
I noticed that in today's press conference, Trump came up with a gem of an oxymoron: "NATO is no longer obsolete."
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Wait, I thought teleprompters were a sign of a bad president? Oh, sorry, I guess that's only true if the president is black.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is notably puerile and juvenile, even for the Toddler-n-Chief.
The money quote: TRUMP: It's so incredible. It's brilliant. It's genius. Our technology, our equipment, is better than anybody by a factor of five. I mean look, we have, in terms of technology, nobody can even come close to competing. … So what happens is, I said we've just launched 59 missiles heading to Iraq and I wanted you to know this. And he was eating his cake.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
I don't know how authoritative - if at all - this site is, but it would be instructive to know how many of trump's missiles actually reached their publicly stated target, and who and what else was obliterated by the the others. A number will have dropped straight into the sea for various reasons, but some will have reached other places on land. 59 out of 59 hitting the stated target is not credible.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I don't know how authoritative - if at all - this site is

The site may or may not be reliable, but that link took me to a 404.
 
Posted by Dave W. (# 8765) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I don't know how authoritative - if at all - this site is [snip]

Yes, who could possibly tell how authoritative a site is that features such articles as "Jewish Banksters Identity Politics", "Donald Trump Controlled by Mossad - Parts I, II, and III", and "MASSIVE US INVASION OF SYRIA HAS ALREADY BEGUN".

By the way, this is probably the link you meant to post.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by W Hyatt:
I noticed that in today's press conference, Trump came up with a gem of an oxymoron: "NATO is no longer obsolete."

I like this, this is gold.

I'm going to have to see if I can use this logic on people at work. "The rule about eating other people's lunches was obsolete, but now you're after mine, so..."

Hey, I can try.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
Hang on, the president of the US is dazzled by the fact that he can order missiles to be fired and they are is rather like a toddler learning to use the TV remote.

I doubt we will ever get any real figures for where the missiles went. I saw one report indicating 23 hit their target (and someone who seemed to be senior military and involved describing it as a really poor show). In truth, a third probably missed, and some of them probably caused civilian injuries ("The babies. The poor babies").

And it had absolutely no military values. It was Trump showing that his penis sprays his cum wherever he wants (but, like the tomahawk, I suspect the payload is hardly worth the trouble). He is playing the Biscuit game, and telling Assad to eat the biscuit. Assad just crumbles it into the ground, and Trump still claims he won because he came first.

This might be tolerated in toddlers and immature teenagers, but is astoundingly embarrassing in Trump. Seriously, America, can you not get rid of him, before he does something really dangerous?
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
And the detail that is most salient to his mind is not the political implications, the possible loss of human life, or the larger meaning of chemical weapons. No! It is that he was able to eat a piece of chocolate cake while ordering this strike.

I have to get a button made. Not a tee shirt, because I clearly will have to wear it daily. We are going across the pond later this year and I will need something that says, "So sorry. I didn't vote for him. We are trying to get him out." I wonder if I can get it in several languages.
 
Posted by Sarasa (# 12271) on :
 
Every American I've met recently starts by apologizing for Trump - I guess ones that voted fro him don't visit the UK?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Perhaps because they don't know where the UK is...

IJ
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sarasa:
Every American I've met recently starts by apologizing for Trump - I guess ones that voted fro him don't visit the UK?

Many of his supporters were laborers who feared losing their jobs, and Trump was going to "Make America Great" and get their jobs back. Many were America-First types who see no reason to spend their vacations visiting foreigners. I certainly don't have statistics, but I do think you'd find more world travelers among the Clinton voters.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Sarasa:
Every American I've met recently starts by apologizing for Trump - I guess ones that voted fro him don't visit the UK?

Many of his supporters were laborers who feared losing their jobs, and Trump was going to "Make America Great" and get their jobs back. Many were America-First types who see no reason to spend their vacations visiting foreigners. I certainly don't have statistics, but I do think you'd find more world travelers among the Clinton voters.
And the problem there was that "Clinton voters" didn't vote. FWIW I think Clinton took them for granted.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
And the problem there was that "Clinton voters" didn't vote. FWIW I think Clinton took them for granted.

We voted -- more of us than voted for Trump. We just didn't get the right numbers in the right states.
[Frown]
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Perhaps because they don't know where the UK is...

IJ

As much as I dislike isolationism, I feel I must defend the American type somewhat. It is a huge country with OCEANS on two of its borders. And those living in the middle* have both a lower overall income and the added expense of extra distance before they can get to a different country. So they will have had less opportunity to travel that the average Brit.
The true shame for many Americans is how little they visit other parts of their own country. This has always perplexed me.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
So they will have had less opportunity to travel that the average Brit.
The true shame for many Americans is how little they visit other parts of their own country. This has always perplexed me.

I generally agree - though I would probably qualify the first part as "less opportunity to travel internationally than the average Brit". Though, the EU is comparable in size to the US and how many Brits actually travel beyond the borders of the EU?

And, added to the opportunities to travel are the generally miserly allowance for paid annual leave "enjoyed" by most people in the US compared to most in the UK. It's not easy to go anywhere if you don't have the time.

But, there certainly are people in the US with little or no knowledge of their own country. The woman at the internationally known car rental company who took our call when we struggled into Santa Fe on the spare wheel, with another tyre almost bald and the suspension shot who was insistant that we had voided the warrantee by taking the car out of the country being a case in point. I bet she voted Trump. "I'm afraid you're mistaken my dear. We are not in Mexico, we are in New Mexico, and that is still within the borders of the United States of America".
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.:
quote:
Originally posted by Stercus Tauri:
I don't know how authoritative - if at all - this site is [snip]

Yes, who could possibly tell how authoritative a site is that features such articles as "Jewish Banksters Identity Politics", "Donald Trump Controlled by Mossad - Parts I, II, and III", and "MASSIVE US INVASION OF SYRIA HAS ALREADY BEGUN".

By the way, this is probably the link you meant to post.

Right - posting too late at night again.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
"Look, I've got the absolutely massive bomb with a huge blast. No, I'm not trying to make up for personal deficiencies."

Given the size of his bomb, I can only presume his penis is absolutely microscopic.

More importantly, this is not a precision weapon. It's purpose is to devastate a vast area - miles across. It will kill and injure everyone in a huge area, irrespective of their ISIS sympathies.

I have seen reports that ISIS in Afghanistan has, possibly, 1000 adherents. It is not a large contingent, and this action will make a minor difference to the battle.

But he has done it now. So next time, when he needs to up the ante, he has nothing left. Rather, nothing that bears thinking about.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Our only hope is that he has the attention span of a gnat. Today, big bombs. Maybe tomorrow, pussies again? Tax reform? Mexican rapists? Whatever. He's not consistent in anything, even turpitude. At some point the stopped clock will be right.
Perhaps this will help distract him. I will be there, marching in downtown DC with some charming signs. The punny ones say "Putin Your Money Where Your Mouth Is" and "Where Czar Your Taxes?"

[ 13. April 2017, 19:56: Message edited by: Brenda Clough ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
And the problem there was that "Clinton voters" didn't vote. FWIW I think Clinton took them for granted.

We voted -- more of us than voted for Trump. We just didn't get the right numbers in the right states.
[Frown]

Amen. T and/or Russia managed to get enough electoral college votes. Clinton won the popular vote--*millions* more than T. Without the electoral college system, T wouldn't be in the White House (when he's there).
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
And the problem there was that "Clinton voters" didn't vote. FWIW I think Clinton took them for granted.

We voted -- more of us than voted for Trump. We just didn't get the right numbers in the right states.
[Frown]

Amen. T and/or Russia managed to get enough electoral college votes. Clinton won the popular vote--*millions* more than T. Without the electoral college system, T wouldn't be in the White House (when he's there).
OK, OK. Not enough votes where they mattered, like Florida, Ohio and Iowa, the traditional bellwether states.
 
Posted by Stumbling Pilgrim (# 7637) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
This is notably puerile and juvenile, even for the Toddler-n-Chief.
The money quote: TRUMP: It's so incredible. It's brilliant. It's genius. Our technology, our equipment, is better than anybody by a factor of five. I mean look, we have, in terms of technology, nobody can even come close to competing. … So what happens is, I said we've just launched 59 missiles heading to Iraq and I wanted you to know this. And he was eating his cake.

Well, that interview seems to reveal what it was really all about - showing off in front of Xi.
 
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Stumbling Pilgrim:
Iraq

[Paranoid]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
lilBuddha--

quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Perhaps because they don't know where the UK is...

IJ

As much as I dislike isolationism, I feel I must defend the American type somewhat. It is a huge country with OCEANS on two of its borders. And those living in the middle* have both a lower overall income and the added expense of extra distance before they can get to a different country. So they will have had less opportunity to travel that the average Brit.
The true shame for many Americans is how little they visit other parts of their own country. This has always perplexed me.

Thank you for this!
[Overused]

Lots of people do travel within the States, and within their own states. But it's expensive, and often difficult. By car? Well, you've got to have one; be able to afford gas; and be able to deal with traffic, cranky co-riders for many long hours, repairs, and getting lost. (GPS directions aren't necessarily accurate, and there've been news stories of people winding up in bad situations.) Planes? Expensive; you have to deal with all the security stuff; and you can get your head bashed, as you are hauled out of your paid-for seat. Trains? Fun, but they don't go everywhere, and they take a long time. Long-distance bus (Greyhound, etc.)? A much longer time than trains; cramped seating; scheduled stops at all hours--BUT sometimes they'll cancel the bus you're on, while you're on it, and dump you in a station at odd hours to wait hours for the next bus.

Plus you've got to pay for lodging (unless you can manage to stay with a friend or relative) or a tent-camping space. Plus food.

Plus Americans don't get much paid vacation (and bosses often frown on actually using it). Many, many people don't get any at all.

Plus busy, entangled, over-booked lives. Given all of the above, many people who *do* have paid vacation time take "stay-cations". You still live at home; but maybe play tourist in your own area, catch up on household chores and repairs and medical appointments--and sleep. If you don't have vacation time, then you do some of that on weekends.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
Yep. Vacations are for dpoing all the critical shit that you couldn't get done during the work week, like seeing doctors, fixing the car, doing your taxes, painting the house...
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Alan--

Thanks for the understanding you displayed!

quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, there certainly are people in the US with little or no knowledge of their own country. The woman at the internationally known car rental company who took our call when we struggled into Santa Fe on the spare wheel, with another tyre almost bald and the suspension shot who was insistant that we had voided the warrantee by taking the car out of the country being a case in point. I bet she voted Trump. "I'm afraid you're mistaken my dear. We are not in Mexico, we are in New Mexico, and that is still within the borders of the United States of America".

Yes. Before the Olympics in Australia, an American in New Mexico called the US number for buying tickets. Ran into the same problem you did. "New Mexico, Old Mexico, I don't care. If you're not from the US, you can't buy tickets here."

I don't understand not at least recognizing the *name* of a state. Now, if you sat me down with a blank map of the US, I'd have some problems with what goes where. I know which things are in which part of the country, but I tend to forget what's next to what. I do periodically look at a map to remind myself, and occasionally play a geography game online.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
I once had a FedEx driver refuse to pick up a package from where I worked because it was going to Alaska, which is in Canada, not in the U.S. So obviously the address was wrong, in addition to which it would need different paperwork for a 'foreign' destination.
[Roll Eyes]
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
though I would probably qualify the first part as "less opportunity to travel internationally than the average Brit".

I think I said this as well.
quote:

Though, the EU is comparable in size to the US and how many Brits actually travel beyond the borders of the EU?

True. But within the EU, there are many cultures to enjoy. For those who bother to learn and engage, that is.


quote:

But, there certainly are people in the US with little or no knowledge of their own country.

When looking for a tourist spot in a town with very few, it did not appear where the map indicated. So spoke with a pleasant young girl in the closest shop. She had no idea of the place I was seeking, so I left and went round a corner, finally seeing the sign for my destination. Right. Across. The. Street. From. The. Shop.


quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
"Look, I've got the absolutely massive bomb with a huge blast. No, I'm not trying to make up for personal deficiencies."

The mission was begun under Obama, which is why Trump and Spicer speak so strangely when asked if they authorised it.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
He is borderline obese -- not my description, but his tame doctor's, so it must be true. Such figures are hard to clothe elegantly.

I find that very hard to believe. To my eye, being in the same category, he looks to be on the borderline between obese and morbidly obese, and more likely just plain morbidly obese.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
He has had no medical or psychiatric evaluation available to the public. Nor will he, you can bet. For all we know the Russians have a transmitter embedded in his skull.
 
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
I think presidents do look off to the side, when using teleprompters--that's where they are. Some may be familiar enough with the text and have a good enough memory that they can think "oh, right, point A", and go on to talk about point A without much need to check the teleprompter.

T, I think, tends to simply read what's on the teleprompter.

I did wonder who came up with the ideas for the speech. He made religious comments that he usually doesn't, and talked like we're at the outbreak of a world war.

President Reagan was the first to use a technique where a bullet proof glass in front of the podium had the text projected on it as a heads up display. OF course he was a mildly skilled actor.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:

Though, the EU is comparable in size to the US and how many Brits actually travel beyond the borders of the EU?

True. But within the EU, there are many cultures to enjoy. For those who bother to learn and engage, that is.

Are you suggesting there aren't many cultures to enjoy in the US? I would beg to differ (and, I remember several occasions where Brits here ignited righteous indignation from US members for suggesting that the US is monocultural). Even from just occasional visits I know the culture of Chicago and Santa Fe are very different (very different cuisine, different language, different attitude to life generally, different heritage ...). New York, DC and Florida are all different again, in their own ways. I've not visited New Orleans, though would love to, or California ... I'm sure they're all different again.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
"Look, I've got the absolutely massive bomb with a huge blast. No, I'm not trying to make up for personal deficiencies."

The mission was begun under Obama, which is why Trump and Spicer speak so strangely when asked if they authorised it.
The entire operation might have been Obama, but scaling it up like this is Trump. I don't believe that they dropped a device that size without explicit authorisation from Washington.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
I don't think they'd be *allowed* to drop it, without specific permission from T, since he's commander-in-chief.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Anyone see the latest anti-Trump protest? Not another march (been plenty of those), letter writing, hat knitting or anything quite as down to earth as that.

Yes, the latest anti-Trump protest is also the first ever protest in space.
 
Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:

Though, the EU is comparable in size to the US and how many Brits actually travel beyond the borders of the EU?

True. But within the EU, there are many cultures to enjoy. For those who bother to learn and engage, that is.

Are you suggesting there aren't many cultures to enjoy in the US? I would beg to differ (and, I remember several occasions where Brits here ignited righteous indignation from US members for suggesting that the US is monocultural). Even from just occasional visits I know the culture of Chicago and Santa Fe are very different (very different cuisine, different language, different attitude to life generally, different heritage ...). New York, DC and Florida are all different again, in their own ways. I've not visited New Orleans, though would love to, or California ... I'm sure they're all different again.
This. Arriving in Vermont a couple of weeks after having been in southern California, the differences were readily apparent.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:

Though, the EU is comparable in size to the US and how many Brits actually travel beyond the borders of the EU?

True. But within the EU, there are many cultures to enjoy. For those who bother to learn and engage, that is.

Are you suggesting there aren't many cultures to enjoy in the US?
No. I am saying that there is a shared base that is stronger than what is shared across European cultures. Whilst there are pockets of non-assimilation, the vast majority has a base of shared Americanism.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
though I would probably qualify the first part as "less opportunity to travel internationally than the average Brit".

I think I said this as well.
quote:

Though, the EU is comparable in size to the US and how many Brits actually travel beyond the borders of the EU?


According to this about 3.8 million Brits visit the USA every year. Quite a few probably go to Canada, too. And I have an ever increasing acquaintanceship with people who love and go to Latin America. And few of us, I would say, don't have relatives and friends who regularly head off to Australia to holiday with family over there. In addition, not every European country is part of the EU, so there are those nations to take into account; often frequented, eg, on cruises and package holidays.

And speaking of cruises - they are fantastically popular with the British; and are not confined to the EU, as you can imagine.

And last but not least bearing in mind how many Brits are ethnically Indian/Pakinstani, African and West Indian, so cumulatively large numbers regularly go back and forwards to those various continents to revisit family there. A casual conversation with your average Brit can easily turn into a travelogue of 'where I went on my international holiday'!

It's a good point to make, that those who live on the British Isles exist on too small a part of the globe to isolate themselves from the rest of it. Though we, too, can fall into the same habit of simply not exploring our own Islands as much as we might. I love travel, but the enjoyment of the varied countryside in Ireland and the UK is really inexhaustible. So I can understand why many USA citizens simply don't feel the need to leave their own shores.

You've got to remember, too, our often crap weather. If one has the money to buy a little sunshine, we're going to go for it!
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
So I can understand why many USA citizens simply don't feel the need to leave their own shores.

Some do not leave their own states, counties and cities. Some do not even leave their own boroughs! Yes, you can find the same thing in the UK. IME, however, it is well more pronounced in the US.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
In this day of cable TV travelogues, Google Earth, YouTube videos, and an infinity of travel, tourist, and historical websites, I don't think anyone has any excuse. If you don't know about other cultures or places, it is because you are incurious about them.
The difficulty these days is rather to find a place that is unvisited and unknown.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
Traveling in one's own country is a matter of privilege. If a person lacks an education, works more than one low-paying job, has children to care for, no real transportation, and has to go to the library to access google, exploration becomes something outside the reach of a tired, overworked, low-income person.

This is not meant as an excuse for those who are lucky enough to explore and just don't do it. I would hope that people with time and money would use them both to enhance their appreciation of our interesting world.

But I've worked with so many people just trying to keep it together. The idea of a vacation to another city, let alone another region, and the idea of time to spend on websites for the pleasure of virtual cross-culturalism isn't part of their life.

I'm sure this is true in other places as well.

sabine
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
Yeah, that was my first thought, too.
 
Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Kelly Alves:
Yeah, that was my first thought, too.

On this crowded island full of impatient, cranky people and barely functioning public infrastructure, it's also a monumental pain in the arse.
 
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
I think it is more likely that Trump has a receiver rather than a transmitter implanted by the Russians in his skull. A receiver is a fairly simple device. (I don't actually regard either as likely in absolute terms.)
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
I think it is more likely that Trump has a receiver rather than a transmitter implanted by the Russians in his skull. A receiver is a fairly simple device. (I don't actually regard either as likely in absolute terms.)

Whatever, it would be more intelligent than anything already in his skull.

Apparently, today he has taken a detour on his way to Mar a Lago (of course - lazy shit), to avoid a protest about his tax returns.

I have farts with more integrity than Trump.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
There were a large number of people at the Tax March in Washington DC. We had a perfect day for it, and the cops closed Pennsylvania Avenue so we could march on it. An eddy of protesters surrounded the Trump Hotel, with cries of "Shame! Shame!" And there was another locus of hooting at the White House, where the tenant has gone off to play golf and so was not there to hear us.
I carried a sign that said "Where CZAR Your Taxes", and on the flip side "Putin Your Money Where Your Mouth Is".
I am no good at estimating crowds, but there were a lot of people. The forecast was for 10,000 marchers.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
Huffington Post puts it at 25,000 in Washington, D.C., and 20,000 in New York City.

I hope there was a demonstration in Palm Beach, Florida as well.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Reuters UK reports only a couple thousand in DC, clearly low. Perhaps they left early.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by me:
I hope there was a demonstration in Palm Beach, Florida as well.

I just found out that there was -- and he had to pass some of the demonstrators on his arduous journey from Mar-a-Lago to his private golf course.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I was at someone's house yesterday where there was an aerial photo of a golfing area in Florida. If his place is anywhere like that one, he is going to have a serious problem with sea level changes.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
I have a theory ("and it is my theory, and it is mine"--Ann Elk [Biased] ) that T has used his real estate holdings to build his own, self-focused world. He can move from one part to another, without spending much time anywhere else.

So he can go from his home in Trump Towers to one of his resorts, and play golf there. He isn't in the White House much, because it's not *his*--no matter how much he redecorates. Plus he never really wanted the job. So he heads down to Mar-al-Lago as often as he can.

I don't know how he gets the fast food he loves (McDonald's, AFAIK). Maybe he sends someone?
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
Are you saying we should tactically support cutting climate change prevention so we can see him drown as fast as possible?

(@ Penny S)

[ 16. April 2017, 10:54: Message edited by: Wesley J ]
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
[...] I don't know how he gets the fast food he loves (McDonald's, AFAIK). Maybe he sends someone?

There's not really much need for this. According to several news outlets, e.g. the Miami New Times, his hotel staff are already trying their best to poison him and his guests.
 
Posted by Clint Boggis (# 633) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
[...] I don't know how he gets the fast food he loves (McDonald's, AFAIK). Maybe he sends someone?

There's not really much need for this. According to several news outlets, e.g. the Miami New Times, his hotel staff are already trying their best to poison him and his guests.
I can see a Nobel Peace Prize ( or a short-listing, at least) and the undying gratitude of most of the world for whoever manages it.
 
Posted by Stercus Tauri (# 16668) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
I think it is more likely that Trump has a receiver rather than a transmitter implanted by the Russians in his skull. A receiver is a fairly simple device. (I don't actually regard either as likely in absolute terms.)

There should be plenty of room for both.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
Golden Key - undoubtedly. He is not unusual in that - many of the extremely wealthy do that. And trump, despite probably not being anything like as wealthy as he claims, wants to be in that club.

The problem is that as President, he should be in the White House, precisely because it is not his own house. It is the representation of the office, and should give a sense of the significance of the office to the current holder.

For Trump, I presume, he hates being there because it makes him realise just how totally unfit for such an office he is. It reminds him that the people who occupy that office are usually great men who struggle with the burdens of the office, who take genuine responsibility for being president.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Are you saying we should tactically support cutting climate change prevention so we can see him drown as fast as possible?

(@ Penny S)

Not at all. He'd only move to a higher level site! And sue the government.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
quote:
Originally posted by Wesley J:
Are you saying we should tactically support cutting climate change prevention so we can see him drown as fast as possible?

(@ Penny S)

Not at all. He'd only move to a higher level site! And sue the government.
Perhaps the penthouse of Trump Tower.
 
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
As a little change of subject: maybe this has already been brought up, but does anyone else think The Donald and Melania have cheesy nouveaux riche taste in furnishings? Not important in the grand scheme of things but...geez!
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
Well, much of my furniture is second hand, so perhaps I shouldn't judge. [Smile] However, if I'd leveraged a lifestyle with bankruptcy and not paying workers, etc. I might want something glittery to distract from the smoke and mirrors.

sabine
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
I've often said that having wealth is not synonymous with having taste. Trump epitomizes this.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This should amuse: Invaka leaves notes for her babysitter. It's the New Yorker and should be a free click.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I've often said that having wealth is not synonymous with having taste. Trump epitomizes this.

I've long felt that the most expensive cars are also the ugliest.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Lyda--

quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
As a little change of subject: maybe this has already been brought up, but does anyone else think The Donald and Melania have cheesy nouveaux riche taste in furnishings? Not important in the grand scheme of things but...geez!

I'm not knowledgeable about eras of architecture and design; but it looks part Baroque, and maybe Marie Antoinette's era. I can see her sitting in one of those chairs, with her piled-up wig.

Might be fun, for the occasional special dinner. But I'd find it overwhelming, whether the real thing or a Florida knock-off.

T has a thing about gold. Everything has to be gold. Even his toilet in Trump Towers. And there were rumors he might put a golden toilet in the White House, too. I wonder if that's a take-away from Norman Vincent Peale's positive thinking sermons? Visualize what you want (wealth, power, self-worth, finally getting your father's love because you *won*); surround yourself with it; and you'll achieve it.
 
Posted by Sarasa (# 12271) on :
 
My son (an industrial chemist) and husband spent a long time yesterday specualting on Trump's gold lifts (elevators) and what they are probably made of. Strange the conversations the man inspires.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
I think I read somewhere that some person, possibly Freud, made some connection between gold and excreta - which makes the gold loos somehow meaningful in a way Trump probably doesn't think of.

[ 17. April 2017, 07:21: Message edited by: Penny S ]
 
Posted by Dafyd (# 5549) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I think I read somewhere that some person, possibly Freud, made some connection between gold and excreta

King Lear in one of his mad speeches does so. He likens wealth to constipation and says the rich should take a purge so it ends up with the poor. It's one reaction to the trickle down theory.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
Well he does shit on people.

It does seem that people who want to put on a show of wealth and power use a lot of gold. Whereas people who actually do, don't.

I think the reason Trump isn't open about his tax returns and finances is that he is actually bankrupt. That is the last thing he wants to admit.
 
Posted by Sioni Sais (# 5713) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
Well he does shit on people.

It does seem that people who want to put on a show of wealth and power use a lot of gold. Whereas people who actually do, don't.

I think the reason Trump isn't open about his tax returns and finances is that he is actually bankrupt. That is the last thing he wants to admit.

If he's going to quote from the Bible it will always be from Chapter XI.
 
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
[Snigger]
 
Posted by Gee D (# 13815) on :
 
Maybe that's why he can't get a decent wig and haircut.
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
So, Trump has congratulated Erdogan on his narrow (and, by Turkish law, fraudulent*) referendum victory. Not that anyone needed further proof or demonstration of Trump's instincts. This is a referendum which, regardless of the outcome, could not but damage Turkish society along a fault line dividing the cosmopolitan (Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir) from the rural. Rather familiar.

In my current employ, I have noticed a surprising number of well-educated Turkish applicants; many were last employed in Turkey until some time just after the coup (or, 'coup') attempt last summer. Should I expect to see more American applicants in the near future?

*I believe that the figure I heard was in excess of 3 million ballots that did not bear the verification stamp (to prevent ballot box stuffing) were counted on order of the supreme election court. That is in excess of Erdogan's margin of victory.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
The "dialogue" with North Korea seems to be running more or less like this:

Trump: My big penis-shaped object [bomb] went an orgasmic "kaboom!", but yours [missile test] only went "pop".

North Korea (through their Ambassador to the UN): You [the USA] are creating a dangerous situation in which thermonuclear war may break out at any moment.

Rest of the World: it's like two tantrum-prone toddlers in a petrol station playing with matches.


[Mad]

It looks like Bill Clinton was right when he said, after a visit there, that the North Korea- South Korea was the most frightening place on Earth.

[ 18. April 2017, 07:23: Message edited by: Tukai ]
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
I think I read somewhere that some person, possibly Freud, made some connection between gold and excreta - which makes the gold loos somehow meaningful in a way Trump probably doesn't think of.

Was it the Aztecs who called gold the excretion of the gods, or something? Too lazy to google, sorry - but something like that in some place like that?
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
Here we are!
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
From the New Yorker, a report on how the Resistance is doing. We are indeed having an effect, with our marches and pussy hats. It's important to keep the pressure up. We can have a lot of influence on domestic policy, where a weak-kneed and conflicted Congress must heed angry voters. But in foreign policy it is indeed scary.

I keep thinking (because that's my calling) about how an end game would work. Alas, I can see a scenario in which Lyin' Don does something awful to North Korea or Libya or whatever place has caught his attention on that day. And then there is kickback -- a bomb, a missile, a 9-11. Only then, when there is carnage and smoking ruins (which is to say, =American= carnage, because no other kind counts for Congress, sorry all you Syrians and Iraqis) will the impeachment proceedings really kick in.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
Would someone please get Trump a globe or a world map?

A U.S. aircraft carrier that the White House declared a deterrent to North Korea was at the time sailing in the opposite direction.
quote:
The problem was, the carrier, the Carl Vinson, and the four other warships in its strike force were at that very moment sailing in the opposite direction, to take part in joint exercises with the Australian Navy in the Indian Ocean, 3,500 miles southwest of the Korean Peninsula.

 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is a minor funny, but amusing. Also a free click!
 
Posted by Piglet (# 11803) on :
 
[Killing me] [Killing me]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is from the Post and kind of sad: to comfort her dying husband in his last moments, she told him that Trump had been impeached. I assume he died happy, but then what happens when he arrives in Heaven? Perhaps they don't have internet there, but surely Heaven has a library.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
The Washington Post has cut me off (even though I've been staying away from them for several weeks now because of their limit), but I got the first sentence read.

At any rate, I don't know if there is internet service in Heaven -- I hope so (if I make it there) because I'll want to keep an eye on the Ship, though I don't imagine I'll be able to post. There will definitely be a wonderful library.

However, I feel pretty safe in saying that the name "Trump" is not said aloud up there.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I don't think the full text of the story (which was mainly biographical) tells you more than the headline. FWIW the man died at peace.

I can't imagine that the denizens of Heaven do not keep up with current events, simply because the prayers of the saints need to be current, wouldn't you think? Hopefully they get better reportage than the Post or Faux News, and so can pray accurately.

I do believe that Heaven must have a deep and very complete library, well organized and catalogued. None of this searching futilely around for the book you need. I have just shuffled through five separate library systems, and the one I'm looking for is not there. (sigh)
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
I always figure (hope!) that if people in the next life can see us in this one, they are more forgiving and understanding of our sinful and selfish ways than we are down here with one another.

In my mental heavenly library, you just sit at your carrel and say "ACCIO BOOK ABOUT 17TH CENTURY LACEMAKING" and five or six fly through the air and land on your shelf.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
I can already do that, as long as I know title and author. Inter Library Loan is a mighty tool. But it gives no room for serendipity, the creative power of just wandering around and finding something you had never known existed. I hope for rooms and bays and halls full of shelves and books, and endless time to follow the threads of inspiration across time and space. Large desks near the windows (with bucolic views of, say, the angels playing baseball or something at a good quiet distance) to bring the books back to, and the computer power to open the several files I need to jump back and forth between, to write like the wind.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
The first time I went to my assigned library carrel as a grad student, I found graffiti scratched into the small bulletin board: What is the secret of life? (one handwriting) The secret is to have a good time (in another handwriting For a good time call xxx-xxx-xxxx in a third handwriting.

[Big Grin]

sabine
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
The first time I went to my assigned library carrel as a grad student, I found graffiti scratched into the small bulletin board: What is the secret of life? (one handwriting) The secret is to have a good time (in another handwriting For a good time call xxx-xxx-xxxx in a third handwriting.

[Big Grin]

sabine

I presume you called the number just to see what the next stage was....
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Now this is fine. The fashion mag GLAMOUR runs an article pointing out Trump's sex-abuser tactics. Gaslighting, testing the boundaries, getting the victim isolated, it's all there. And in a magazine usually dedicated to trends in eye shadow and brow tweezing! It is a free click, btw.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
(with bucolic views of, say, the angels playing baseball or something at a good quiet distance)

Surely the angels play cricket: the game takes an eternity, and nothing ever happens. It's like soccer but slower and without the fake injuries.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Baseball games take upwards of three hours. I can't imagine how people sit through them.

This is from the POST, an excellent summary by the dean of the DC pundits on why we must not let up on Lyin' Donny.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Baseball games take upwards of three hours. I can't imagine how people sit through them.

You don't sit through them. You get up, you get peanuts, you people watch, you go check out the horribly overpriced junk at the souvenir stands. Nobody sits through the whole game. It's an outing.

It's also a psychological battle of wits and nerves, and I can't imagine angels playing that way.

Good call on not letting up on 45.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Re angels' sports:

Well, of course, they can play anything they want. But I'm sure one of their faves is Quidditch.
[Cool]
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Re angels' sports:

Well, of course, they can play anything they want. But I'm sure one of their faves is Quidditch.
[Cool]

I'm sure St. Moses the Black would be a beater.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Baseball games take upwards of three hours. I can't imagine how people sit through them.

County cricket matches usually take 3 days. An international test match 5 days (and, the "stop after five days rather than play to a win" is a relatively modern innovation). The difficulty of watching a full cricket match is usually that play stops for rain, or bad light towards the end of the day - neither of which would (I expect) be an issue in heaven.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
It only rains at night.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
And this all has to do with trump how? You want to hit him with bats? Which is an idea. His hair reminds of a salmon we once left in the fridge too long. Furry with tendrils waving like wheat in the cooling fan-breeze. The colour of nicotine stained teeth.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Thanks for that image, O no prophet....

[Projectile]

(my usual reaction at mention of the tr**p)

IJ
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
Allen Lichtman (American University), who predicted Trump's victory early, is now predicting Trump's impeachment; collusion with the Russians, violation of the emoluments clause, demonstrable lying being the possible grounds. To be passed in the House of Representatives it would require all the Dems + 24 GOPs (~10% of GOP congressfolk). As Lichtman also pointed out, many GOPs would rather have Pence, a reliable career conservative, than erratic Trump who lacks any meaningful relationship to the party, and as midterm elections loom, they might want to distance themselves from Trump, depending on what unforeseen events transpire.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
It can't possibly happen until after 2018. As long as the GOP holds both houses of Congress they'll stall and drag, even if Lyin' Donny's malfeasance is undeniable.
With luck, the power will shift. And then, we can see Congressional action with teeth in it. Subpoenas for those tax returns, for instance.
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
Well, Lichtman seems to think that the momentum will begin before the 2018 elections, as GOP representatives start to distance themselves from Trump out of fear of falling victim to an an anti-Trump backlash He called Trump's election early, so this hypothesis must, at least, be entertained.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
I can only hope Trump hangs on long enough to damage the GOP. If Pence replaces him before the mid-term elections, much hope will be lost,for Pence is everything that is a threat presented by Cheeto, but with the appearance of competence.
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
I suspect that Pence is adequately competent. Therein lies a great danger.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
I suspect that Pence is adequately competent. Therein lies a great danger.

Her was my governor. He's not competent for much beyond doing what the powers-that-be tell him to do (he's not competent to actually be that power).

He won't be the psychological and governmental train wreck that is Trump, but he won't be much better.

Also, he has strange pseudo-christian ideological ideas.

sabine

[ 22. April 2017, 15:46: Message edited by: sabine ]
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
He is, IIRC, a Dominionist.

Enjoy that separation of Church and State while you still have it.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:
quote:
Originally posted by Pangolin Guerre:
I suspect that Pence is adequately competent. Therein lies a great danger.

Her was my governor. He's not competent for much beyond doing what the powers-that-be tell him to do (he's not competent to actually be that power).

And that is why he is dangerous.
quote:
Originally posted by Doc Tor:
He is, IIRC, a Dominionist.

Enjoy that separation of Church and State while you still have it.

The illusion of separation, the US doesn't have it in a practical sense. Not putting America in the same category as Saudi Arabia but Christianity is more dominant than the Constitution or its creators hoped for. What they will lose is more of what actual separation currently existing.
 
Posted by The5thMary (# 12953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I always figure (hope!) that if people in the next life can see us in this one, they are more forgiving and understanding of our sinful and selfish ways than we are down here with one another.

In my mental heavenly library, you just sit at your carrel and say "ACCIO BOOK ABOUT 17TH CENTURY LACEMAKING" and five or six fly through the air and land on your shelf.

Oh, mousey...now you have me worried! Are those who have passed into the loving embrace of Jesus seeing me fiddling with my naughty bits?!
[Ultra confused]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Since nearly everybody around you, and everybody who has ever been alive, has done the same, I doubt it will be of profound interest. They can also (in theory) see you in the commode, you know. And every being alive or ever alive has had poops, except possibly those single-celled life forms. Oh look, biological forms are being biological again. Not of theological significance.
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
[...] And every being alive or ever alive has had poops, except possibly those single-celled life forms. [...]

Would the latter refer to 45, one wonders?
 
Posted by Huia (# 3473) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I always figure (hope!) that if people in the next life can see us in this one, they are more forgiving and understanding of our sinful and selfish ways than we are down here with one another.


After my mum died some well meaning person said something about her looking down from heaven and I was thrown into a panic, until I had a chat with someone with good pastoral and theological skills.

Looking back it was funny because Mum once said she had experienced a similar reaction having been told that about one of her relatives.

Huia [Paranoid]
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
So the Trump threatens 'major major' conflict.

How did the USA trust this man, who has the language skills of a 7 year old?

The only time I have heard him use any kind of complex description is when he's been reading, two slow. words. at a. time.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
So the Trump threatens 'major major' conflict.

How did the USA trust this man, who has the language skills of a 7 year old?

Most of us didn't -- and don't -- trust him.

At least he didn't threaten a "bigly, bigly" conflict, or a "yuuuuge" one!
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
So the Trump threatens 'major major' conflict.

How did the USA trust this man, who has the language skills of a 7 year old?

The only time I have heard him use any kind of complex description is when he's been reading, two slow. words. at a. time.

I think that his simple speech and simple rhetoric were a feature, not a flaw, of his campaign.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Wouldn't have thought that evaporating a whole city, and everything in it, at the press of a button could really be described as a conflict .
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
One of the things learned during this first 100 days coverage is, Li'l Donny has had a button installed on the desk in the Oval Office. This is the historical desk crafted out of the timbers of the HMS Resolute. There have been other buttons on this famous desk (the nuclear button is the one you've probably heard about, but it's not actually a button). But this new one? It summons a servant, with a Coke.
And those funny guys at the Post have created this article, outlining how you too may install a soda button on your desk! Tip: it's easier to just go to the fridge.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
One of the things learned during this first 100 days coverage is, Li'l Donny has had a button installed on the desk in the Oval Office. This is the historical desk crafted out of the timbers of the HMS Resolute. There have been other buttons on this famous desk (the nuclear button is the one you've probably heard about, but it's not actually a button). But this new one? It summons a servant, with a Coke.
And those funny guys at the Post have created this article, outlining how you too may install a soda button on your desk! Tip: it's easier to just go to the fridge.

So that's how he got so fat!

I wonder what he'll do in hot weather when he can't wear those enormous coats?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
He'll have to drink more coke in order to keep cool....O, wait a minute, though.....

(Pause for sudden vision of the Oval Office getting ovallier and ovallier as the President gets biglier and biglier.....).

IJ
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I wonder what he'll do in hot weather when he can't wear those enormous coats?

Well . . . .
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
And now Trump has admitted that perhaps he wasn't ready to be president.

Not in those words, mind you. But the fundamental core of him whining about missing his old life and how being president is harder than he thought it would be is basically that.

And of course he wasn't ready to be president. Because it was totally fucking obvious. Each and every person who ever entertained thoughts to the contrary - in spite of virtually everything he has ever said or did - is guilty of abject idiocy. Including Trump himself.

Some claim that they had no choice. The only alternative was worse!

Those are the words of a stupid person being stupid.

Who drives the bus - the drunken idiot or the person who intends to drive in a direction you don't want to go? A rational person will realize that competency is not merely "nice to have". The driver going a direction that you don't like will at least deliver you there intact, with the option of trying to go a different direction later. The drunken idiot driver runs the risk of killing everyone, and a high likelihood of wrecking the vehicle such that nobody gets anywhere they want to go.

And as I mutter through this metaphor, I find it extra-annoying to realize that the party of idiots who championed this idiotic circumstance are the exact same idiots who almost burned out the engine of this metaphorical vehicle last time. And it took 8 years of persistent competence despite their efforts to fix things to their current level of relative functionality.

If all you miserable old baby boomers would hurry up and die of self-inflicted and un-prevented health issues, that would probably be the best for everybody.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Oh sweetie. You need us. You need a large cohort of gray-haired voters who have been relying on the safety net to be there for retirement. You need us, to march and carry nasty signs and scream at town hall meetings at rubber-spined Congressmen. You need the AARP to snap its fingers and defend Social Security. Fear the Granny, youngster. We'll see to it that there'll be a Medicare when you need it.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
No, he's right. Baby boomers have whined their way into everything. Including the actual effing possibility of retirement. Which the end of alphabet, echo and millenial generations will ever get only if they kill us, inherit and sell everything to China. Kill the Beast.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
I've just read an excellent tweet about trump's latest rally.

"‪He doesn't want to be president. He just wants to win the presidency over and over again."

So true.
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
You need us.

Speaking personally, I think the majority of value for most humans is purely caloric. So I view you as being eminently replaceable by a rowdy row of potatoes.

Speaking as a human being capable of conceiving consequences to actions: no, I absolutely do not think we need over-representation of a demographic that actively works against the well-being of society. The vicious stupidity of MAGA-sympathies who are in fact worthless resource sinks is a miserable hypocrisy that nobody needs.

History is watching us. And, I'm pretty fucking sure history is thinking to itself collectively, "EEEEWWWWWW! Gross!"
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
I've just read an excellent tweet about trump's latest rally.

"‪He doesn't want to be president. He just wants to win the presidency over and over again."

So true.

[Overused]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
....and get biglier and biglier crowds each time.

[Disappointed]

IJ
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
This looks like it'll be an interesting book.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
This looks like it'll be an interesting book.

Perhaps. The descriptions I've read have been a lot of "oh the poor white underclass, bottom of the heap in America" -- rather ignoring the black underclass and the fact of race-based slavery and its repercussions.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
I've read the book, and I don't think it claims that it's own focus is one that supercedes another. It is a well researched explanation about one subject matter. The illustrations and drawings are also good. I would recommend it.

I did not read the chapters in order. The book is very long, so I would pick it up and choose whichever chapter interested me at the time. Probably not what the author had in mind.

Actually, I think J.D. Vance's "Hillbilly Elegy" leans more toward the attitude that mousethief is referencing that this book.

sabine

[ 30. April 2017, 17:12: Message edited by: sabine ]
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
Fair do's. I haven't read either.
 
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:

Actually, I think J.D. Vance's "Hillbilly Elegy" leans more toward the attitude that mousethief is referencing that this book.

'Hillbily Elegy' was certainly execrable on all sorts of levels.
 
Posted by Tukai (# 12960) on :
 
With two "unpredictable madmen" * facing off with nuclear weapons over North Korea, I have been inspired to re-read Nevil Shute's 1956 novel "On the Beach". It tells of the end of human life following nuclear war.
In particular it tells through personal tales how the Australian city of Melbourne awaits the slow drift southward of the radioactive dust and air from the all-comers nuclear war that killed off all human life in the northern hemisphere two years earlier. It is discovered half-way through the book that the war started with a couple of one small nuclear states getting their bomb in first, and then the big boys got drawn in - partly by mistake.
Let's hope it's not too prescient! [Votive]

* "unpredictable madman" is the phrase used by the Australian foreign minister to describe Kim Jong Un. She argues that is why we should uncritically support the USA, but Australian cartoonists and commentators reckon the description applies equally to the current US leader.
 
Posted by lilBuddha (# 14333) on :
 
From the ,barely, sentient Cheeto
quote:
"People don't realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why?" the president said. "People don't ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?"
Link
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
Very strange convergence: I was unaware of the existence of On The Beach, and while I was away for the weekend at a cottage, it came up in conversation. And, now, it pops up here. Apparently I have to buy it, despite having forsworn further purchases. I listen for the signs. We also discussed A Canticle for Liebowitz.

[ 01. May 2017, 23:46: Message edited by: Pangolin Guerre ]
 
Posted by roybart (# 17357) on :
 
Come on, let's try look at this in proportion. The "whys" of the Civil War have been addressed in fewer than a billion words in the last 150 years. How can a busy man like Mr. Trump be expected to know of their existence? Let's be fair. This is called Thinking In 140 Characters and is actually quite an efficient use of time.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Over at the Post columnist Jennifer Rubin delineated the many ways that Trump has demonstrated he is not normal in the last few weeks.
And the complicity and spinelessness of the GOP has revealed that that they are incapable of defending the Republic against him. So they are irretrievably tarred as well.
The money quote: "During the first 100 days the Republic has survived, but the GOP, permanently we think, has been morally compromised and intellectually corrupted, just as many of us warned. “Everything Trump touches dies,” GOP consultant Rick Wilson is fond of saying. Trump’s victims now include a respectable Republican Party."
 
Posted by anoesis (# 14189) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by sabine:

Actually, I think J.D. Vance's "Hillbilly Elegy" leans more toward the attitude that mousethief is referencing that this book.

'Hillbily Elegy' was certainly execrable on all sorts of levels.
Oh boy, yeah. Reads like an essay from a first-year Uni student. Subject has plenty to say but has not troubled to order his thoughts. If the second half is amazing, I guess I missed out, but it seemed unlikely.
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
BBC Radio 4 had an interesting programme yesterday evening at 8 pm on the history of the USA which dealt with the founding, and how the roots of the Civil War were established at the very beginning, with the southern states insisting on the Constitution being drawn up to protect slavery - for instance with the northern states required to return missing property to slave owners. (While never using the word slave) I had not known this.

So the embarrassing one is wronger than he seems.
 
Posted by roybart (# 17357) on :
 
And, there is a direct line connecting the slavery issue to the near-monopoly enjoyed by the Republican Party in the formerly Democratic "solid South."

When New Deal Democrats began supporting civil rights for black people in the 30s and 40s, Southern voters switched within two decades to the Republicans, who were now quite happy to give up their legacy of anti-slavery and "the party of Lincoln." In 2016 the Southern vote was solidly for Trump.

(Please note that Christian denominations were leaders in this turn to the Republicans, among the most influential being the Southern Baptists.)
 
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
quote:
'Hillbily Elegy' was certainly execrable on all sorts of levels.
Oh boy, yeah. Reads like an essay from a first-year Uni student. Subject has plenty to say but has not troubled to order his thoughts.
The book reads very much like one of those evangelical hagiographies - minus the conversion story. In fact if someone had told me it had been ghost written by John/Elizabeth Sherrill I would not have been surprised. I would also not be surprised if Vance used it in the future as a platform to elected office.

It valorises a particular culture, while not actually examining the culture itself too closely, or the reasons why the protagonist had the opportunities he did (his grandparents moved away from area in which the culture was strongest). He clearly wants us to valorise the culture for everything that makes the people in it vote Republican, while simultaneously wanting to limit the political discourse itself to the kinds of economic remedies which Republicans will support (there's no mention of the administration of the mining towns where a lot of these people would have originated from, and why this might have led to some of the attitudes they display).

From a European perspective it seemed somewhat obvious that a socialised medical system would actually improve things greatly for that society - obviously there are plenty of other problems there. It's not, however, a solution that Vance is likely to propose simply because of his political leanings.

.. and apart from the tell of a foreign name, you could read the book and be unaware that his wife is of Indian origin - given the racial attitudes of his relatives it's somewhat telling that this is never discussed in the book.

[ 02. May 2017, 11:47: Message edited by: chris stiles ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
BBC Radio 4 had an interesting programme yesterday evening at 8 pm on the history of the USA which dealt with the founding, and how the roots of the Civil War were established at the very beginning, with the southern states insisting on the Constitution being drawn up to protect slavery - for instance with the northern states required to return missing property to slave owners. (While never using the word slave) I had not known this.

So the embarrassing one is wronger than he seems.

That particular issue was a compromise that the Founding Fathers knew would come back to bite them. But to get the job done they signed on. (A great and entirely easy way to learn about the issue is to view the musical 1776. It's not often staged but was filmed as a movie which is a cult classic.

Meanwhile on late-night TV last night host Jimmy Kimmel made a heartrending plea for universal health care. His newborn son had a heart defect and had open-heart surgery before he was hours old; without health insurance he surely would have died. And the infant now has a pre-existing condition (born with it) that will, if Trumpcare goes through, make him uninsurable for the rest of his days.
 
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
From the ,barely, sentient Cheeto
quote:
"People don't realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why?" the president said. "People don't ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?"

I cannot, offhand, think of a more frequently discussed topic in American history.

quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
BBC Radio 4 had an interesting programme yesterday evening at 8 pm on the history of the USA which dealt with the founding, and how the roots of the Civil War were established at the very beginning, with the southern states insisting on the Constitution being drawn up to protect slavery - for instance with the northern states required to return missing property to slave owners. (While never using the word slave) I had not known this.

There are three places where the original U.S. Constitution deals with slavery, all of them assiduously avoiding the actual words "slave" or "slavery". The first is the three-fifths clause (Art. I, §2, cl. 3) which inflated the power of slave-intensive states by counting their (non-voting) slaves towards political representation in the federal government. Slaves are referred to as "all other Persons" in that section.

The second mention was the twenty year prohibition on Congress outlawing the international slave trade (Art. I, §9, cl. 1). There slaves are referred to as "such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit".

The third was the fugitive slave clause (Art. IV, §2, cl. 3), which required states to return runaway slaves which had escaped into their jurisdiction to their lawful owners. Here slaves are called a "Person held to Service or Labour". This was a particular bone of contention leading up to the Civil War, with slaveholding states accusing non-slaveholding states of failing to uphold this Constitutional provision. (This also demonstrates that "state's rights" was a post hoc justification for the Civil War that didn't really become popular until after the war was over. The southern states opposed "state's rights" when it came to states asserting their rights to waive enforcement of the fugitive slave clause.)
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Older voters may have voted for Lyin' Don, but they intensely dislike his proposed policies.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Quite how I came across this chilling little Trumpocalypse item, I know not, but....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asvaYp2u4SI&t=28s

The idea of a Mad Pussygrabber launching nukes indiscriminately is truly awful, as is that of a Citizen Militia surrounding and protecting him against the public.

IJ
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Meanwhile on late-night TV last night host Jimmy Kimmel made a heartrending plea for universal health care. His newborn son had a heart defect and had open-heart surgery before he was hours old; without health insurance he surely would have died. And the infant now has a pre-existing condition (born with it) that will, if Trumpcare goes through, make him uninsurable for the rest of his days.

*tangent alert* My infant granddaughter was born with a similar life-threatening (or I should simply say "fatal w/o surgery") condition and had the exact same surgeon at the same hospital. It is truly a wonderful, wonderful place where God's work is being done every day.

The bill for the first month of our granddaughter's care was in excess of $800K US. Just the first month. Like Kimmel's son, she will require at least 2 more open heart surgeries. You can do the math.

And like Kimmel's son, she quite literally would not be alive (and cooing adorably if I might say) today if not for the considerable efforts of the Medicare system to finance this endeavor and pay for her continued lifelong care. We were told quite frankly that no insurance would cover this. (The fact that it would probably be significantly cheaper if we had single payer is, of course, also relevant...)

What I want to get up on the rooftops and scream at every one of my evangelical brethren is: "THIS is what pro-life looks like you morons!" This is what it means to be pro-life-- to care for EVERY life-- not just fetal lives but also newborn babies with serious heart conditions-- but also tattooed 20 year olds with hearing loss and 50 year old smokers with lung cancer. To American babies but also to Syrian babies. I could go on to parse how pro-life applies to black lives matter and mass incarceration and the death penalty-- and LGBTQ lives and sexual assault and access to bathrooms. Yes, I can feel the rant welling up within me as it only can in a grandma who has been in that precise same waiting room where Kimmel spent the worst 3 hours of his life.

I am pissed and there's nothing in the world more dangerous than a pissed-off grandma. GOP: you've been warned. [Mad]

*end tangent as grandma returns to her knitting...*

[ 02. May 2017, 22:57: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is what the GOP is saying to you, Cliffdweller. I hope this Congressman's church throws him out, bell, book and candle, the full excommunication, anathema until he repents barefoot in the snow holding a beeswax candle four feet long, kneeling to knock his forehead on the threshold of the narthex while the congregation yells "Shame! Shame!" at him.

If you look at the actions Jesus actually undertakes, surely in the top ten is healing. It is one of the main things He ever did. He was a walking, talking universal health care system.

[ 02. May 2017, 23:52: Message edited by: Brenda Clough ]
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Tukai:
With two "unpredictable madmen" * facing off with nuclear weapons over North Korea, I have been inspired to re-read Nevil Shute's 1956 novel "On the Beach". It tells of the end of human life following nuclear war.
In particular it tells through personal tales how the Australian city of Melbourne awaits the slow drift southward of the radioactive dust and air from the all-comers nuclear war that killed off all human life in the northern hemisphere two years earlier. It is discovered half-way through the book that the war started with a couple of one small nuclear states getting their bomb in first, and then the big boys got drawn in - partly by mistake.
Let's hope it's not too prescient! [Votive]

* "unpredictable madman" is the phrase used by the Australian foreign minister to describe Kim Jong Un. She argues that is why we should uncritically support the USA, but Australian cartoonists and commentators reckon the description applies equally to the current US leader.

Sorry, I'm late to this party. I have seen moral equivalency arguments between the North Korean leader and Trump on social media around this comment of Bishop's. Trump is indeed awful and a blot on the reputation of the United States. But he doesn't put workers and contractors in concentration camps, he just avoids paying them. He may have got famous on a game show, but he didn't use a gameshow as a ruse to murder his brother. Trump is an asshole and possibly a white collar criminal. Kim is a dictator who murders his own people and relatives to stay in power.

I'm sure Tukai was making a joke but this is hell, and I have a bee in my bonnet.

Oh, my other bee: Australia does not and has never followed the USA blindly into war. What we seek is intimate access to the leadership of the country. In September 2011, Howard was in the room adding his voice to those who were advising Bush to bomb Afghanistan, and then to invade and topple the Taliban. We were indeed 'all the way with LBJ' in the Vietnam war because that is what Australian leadership wanted. The domino theory of Communist expansion had us as the last domino, as there were active Communist movements in both Malaysia and Indonesia in the 1950's and 60's. We always help the Americans in war because it is in our interests to do so in the minds of our leaders. In East Asia, we are usually the ones egging on the Americans, because we perceive American involvement in that theatre to be in our national interest. Frankly, the left in this country does not like Americans, as a rule, and it distorts the left's view of Australia's national interests. Either that or they are trots like many of the NSW Greens.

Of course the left loves Woody Guthrie.

[ 03. May 2017, 04:48: Message edited by: simontoad ]
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:


If you look at the actions Jesus actually undertakes, surely in the top ten is healing. It is one of the main things He ever did. He was a walking, talking universal health care system.

This should be your next banner.


[Overused]
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
quote:
Originally posted by anoesis:
quote:
'Hillbily Elegy' was certainly execrable on all sorts of levels.
Oh boy, yeah. Reads like an essay from a first-year Uni student. Subject has plenty to say but has not troubled to order his thoughts.
The book reads very much like one of those evangelical hagiographies - minus the conversion story. In fact if someone had told me it had been ghost written by John/Elizabeth Sherrill I would not have been surprised. I would also not be surprised if Vance used it in the future as a platform to elected office.

It valorises a particular culture, while not actually examining the culture itself too closely, or the reasons why the protagonist had the opportunities he did (his grandparents moved away from area in which the culture was strongest). He clearly wants us to valorise the culture for everything that makes the people in it vote Republican, while simultaneously wanting to limit the political discourse itself to the kinds of economic remedies which Republicans will support (there's no mention of the administration of the mining towns where a lot of these people would have originated from, and why this might have led to some of the attitudes they display).

From a European perspective it seemed somewhat obvious that a socialised medical system would actually improve things greatly for that society - obviously there are plenty of other problems there. It's not, however, a solution that Vance is likely to propose simply because of his political leanings.

.. and apart from the tell of a foreign name, you could read the book and be unaware that his wife is of Indian origin - given the racial attitudes of his relatives it's somewhat telling that this is never discussed in the book.

I'm very surprised at all this criticism of a book that never for one minute tries to say it has all the answers to America's social problems, or any of them for that matter.

I read it as part autobiography and part observation of the people and area where he grew up. He doesn't talk about African Americans because they are very scarce in those areas. He's writing about what he knows. My large high school had exactly one African American and no Asians or Hispanics. Isn't it someone else's place to discuss race in America?

I grew up in West Virginia, just across the border from his town and I now live in southern Ohio very close to the town to which his family immigrated. Everything he said rang very true to me.

As to why the protagonist had the opportunities he did -- he mentioned it briefly and I saw it happen to many people I know. If a student stands out in one of these poor schools his teacher will probably help him apply for a full scholarship to a university, even places like Yale or Harvard. Those schools always reserve quite a few spots for under privileged students. My cousin went from a very poor area to West Virginia University, then Yale, and on to become the state's Attorney General. My brother got an appointment to West Point from our little school. It happens enough so that he probably didn't think he needed to detail the process or brag about how brilliant he was.

I thought the book was excellent precisely because he didn't seem to take the usual, "Oh look at the Appalachian poor, aren't they pitiful, it's all the fault of ____!" He knows there are many factors.

The coal mines closed because of simple supply and demand. There is no "town administration" that would keep these mines open just to create jobs. We regular folk would all love socialized medicine, but years of Democratic government hasn't given it to us. It's part the lobbying of big pharm and the AMA and partly an unwillingness to fund it with taxes, and who knows what else, but it's not just that no one has thought of it before and we needed someone from England to suggest it.

Most people accept that the people in Vance's book need to move to where the jobs are. That's why my high school reunions have so few people still living in the home town. Vance tries to explain why some never leave and why those who stay often aren't willing to work at the places that are hiring. This really has nothing much to do with politics. Most of the poorest people don't vote at all and whoever is in office doesn't make their lives better.

They are depressed and unmotivated because of it. This area has a huge opiate epidemic going on and we're trying to address it at the state level. I voted for Clinton, but I doubt if anything would be different if she had won. JFK went to "the poorest town in the country" in West Virginia when he was running for office and he did put some programs in place that helped, but it didn't turn us into a thriving state.
 
Posted by goperryrevs (# 13504) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
This is what the GOP is saying to you, Cliffdweller. I hope this Congressman's church throws him out, bell, book and candle, the full excommunication, anathema until he repents barefoot in the snow holding a beeswax candle four feet long, kneeling to knock his forehead on the threshold of the narthex while the congregation yells "Shame! Shame!" at him.

(from the article)
quote:
Just like Jesus said, ‘The poor will always be with us.’ There is a group of people that just don’t want health care and aren’t going to take care of themselves.
Hmmm. Jesus is quoting Deuteronomy 15. A few snippets from that passage:

But there should be no poor people among you, because the Lord your God will richly bless you in the land he is giving you as your own.

If there are poor among you, in one of the towns of the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not be selfish or greedy toward them. But give freely to them, and freely lend them whatever they need.

Give freely to the poor person, and do not wish that you didn’t have to give.

There will always be poor people in the land, so I command you to give freely to your neighbors and to the poor and needy in your land.


Doesn't really fit his anti-Obamacare worldview, does it?
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
I've yet to meet these people the religious right are convinced don't want health care. They sure weren't in the waiting room with me and Kimmel.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
As I say, clearly not a Christian. Anathema, anathema. I have a four-foot long beeswax candle right here.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
As I say, clearly not a Christian.

But it is worse that that. I don't mind people who aren't Christian, and I don't even mind them commenting on the Bible and Christianity.

But this is just talking such utter drivel it makes Westboro seem sensible. It is so distant from what Jesus means - clearly meant from all of his teaching - it beggars belief.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
As I say, clearly not a Christian.

But it is worse that that. I don't mind people who aren't Christian, and I don't even mind them commenting on the Bible and Christianity.

But this is just talking such utter drivel it makes Westboro seem sensible. It is so distant from what Jesus means - clearly meant from all of his teaching - it beggars belief.

Yeah, it's that black-is-white double speak that grinds, isn't it? Rather than, "I disagree with Jesus on this" just rewrite it so Jesus meant the exact opposite of what he actual said.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Meanwhile, ultra-conservative Liberty University (they of Jerry Falwell Sr & Jr fame) has invited POTUS to be their graduation speaker, and Shane Clairborne has a beautiful dream.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Meanwhile, ultra-conservative Liberty University (they of Jerry Falwell Sr & Jr fame) has invited POTUS to be their graduation speaker, and Shane Clairborne has a beautiful dream.

I love it! But it would never happen at "Liberty". [Frown]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Perhaps not, but what a wonderful idea for other events graced by the Presence of the Pussygrabber...

[Overused]

IJ
 
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:

I'm very surprised at all this criticism of a book that never for one minute tries to say it has all the answers to America's social problems, or any of them for that matter.

I do not have any particular problems with the autobiographical/observational parts, but it's a fact that his particular political bent and prescriptions constantly come through. There's the recycling of stereotypes of welfare queens, his basic advice which consists of pulling on ones own bootstraps, the ways in which the attitudes of individuals come to stand in as attitudes of a 'liberal elite' (see section on professor critiquing the war in Iraq, which he takes to be an insult of his service).

At the same time, he wants us to sympathise with the culture he describes, but in fairly narrow terms. There are books written decrying cultures of crime, drugs, violence and family breakdown but those are generally written by Conservatives on Black America, in this case he'd have us ignore all of that and admire the culture for the things that cause them to lean conservative (loyalty, reflexive patriotism and some idea of family values).

quote:

My large high school had exactly one African American and no Asians or Hispanics. Isn't it someone else's place to discuss race in America?

Frankly he can talk about whatever he wants, except if you read the book you would be none the wiser that he married someone of Indian extraction, and they had two wedding ceremonies one of which was a traditional Hindu one. His relatives - who appear to be highly opinionated over everything else - seem remarkably silent about this (they are fairly vocal about why they don't like Obama for instance - the answer turns out to be his accent [Roll Eyes] ).

quote:

My brother got an appointment to West Point from our little school. It happens enough so that he probably didn't think he needed to detail the process or brag about how brilliant he was.

He did not need to boast in order to make the point that these opportunities may not necessarily make him a good representative of his culture.

quote:

The coal mines closed because of simple supply and demand. There is no "town administration" that would keep these mines open just to create jobs.

I wasn't talking about the coal mines closing, so much as the extent to which a lot these towns were essentially 'company towns' and administered as such - with all the problems that brought.

quote:

but it's not just that no one has thought of it before and we needed someone from England to suggest it.

[Roll Eyes] I'm sure it's occurred to plenty of people before, nevertheless the prescriptions Vance comes to consists of recycled Cosbyisms and the idea that poverty alleviation is too politicised.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
I am just reading on Twitter that Trumpcare has been passed by congress. Which will deprive millions of people of health care coverage. Because it is an appalling piece of legislation.

OTOH, I am also hearing that the Senate will not accept the bill (I have no idea exactly how US politics works), so at least some people in the legislature have some sense.

And Trump is such an abusive, dangerous, shithead.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
And Trump is such an abusive, dangerous, shithead.

Did you just realize this?
[Razz]
 
Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I am just reading on Twitter that Trumpcare has been passed by congress.

It has been passed by the House of Representatives—one half of Congress.

quote:
OTOH, I am also hearing that the Senate will not accept the bill (I have no idea exactly how US politics works). . . .
In order to become law, a bill has to pass both the House and the Senate in identical form. There are basically three possibilities:

— The Senate passes the bill in exactly the same form, in which case it goes to Trump for his signature.
— The Senate makes changes to the bill and passes the amended version, in which case it goes back to the House for a vote to concur in the Senate version. If the House does not concur, a conference committee with members from both houses is created to try to work through differences and present a compromise to both house.
— The Senate lets the bill die by taking no action on it.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
BBC 'news' announced it as 'Trump scores healthcare victory in House', like it's a good thing...

[Disappointed]

One can only hope that, like other things Trump attempts, it dies.

IJ
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Meanwhile, ultra-conservative Liberty University (they of Jerry Falwell Sr & Jr fame) has invited POTUS to be their graduation speaker, and Shane Clairborne has a beautiful dream.

I love it! But it would never happen at "Liberty". [Frown]
But I sure hope it does! [Cool]

cliffdweller, thanks for that link.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This should be a free click, Esquire's Charles Pierce explaining why this legislation is so corrupt.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
And, if you will forgive me, one more opinion column from the POST on the same subject.
The money quote:
"Members of Congress vote on a lot of inconsequential bills and bills that have a small impact on limited areas of American life. But this is one of the most critical moments in recent American political history. The Republican health-care bill is an act of monstrous cruelty. It should stain those who supported it to the end of their days."
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
And Trump is such an abusive, dangerous, shithead.

Did you just realize this?
[Razz]

No, but I think it is worth reiterating every so often, because some people do seem to have forgotten.

And thank you Nick Tamen for clarifying the process. Always useful.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
People might find the "How to fire Trump" thread (Purg.) interesting.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
I found it disgraceful that after passing a bill that would put millions of people at risk of being unable to keep themselves healthy (or alive) House Republicans cracked open beers and acted giddy--as if they'd all just gotten prom dates in high school.

sabine

[ 05. May 2017, 14:06: Message edited by: sabine ]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Although the bill cuts support for many female ailments (pregnancy, rape counseling) all the male ailments (prostate, erectile dysfunction) are carefully covered. Surprised?

This is a profoundly misogynistic bill. I thought it was just poor people and colored people; I had not realized they hated women quite so much.

Someone posted a shot from the current Hulu series The Handmaid's Tale. The sex-slave Handmaids in their red robes and white bonnets are sitting on a bench, and one says, "But they told us the Senate wouldn't pass it."
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
Although the bill cuts support for many female ailments (pregnancy, rape counseling) all the male ailments (prostate, erectile dysfunction) are carefully covered. Surprised?

Well, look at the bunch of white men celebrating. (I note there is half of a face of a token woman in the group.)
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Hell (because it is), the overdose of testosterone isn't even the worst thing about the picture. The worst thing is the fact that they are celebrating. Celebrating passing a bill that the Congressional Budget Office estimates will mean 24 million will lose their health care-- which means millions will suffer and even die needlessly. The party that has won election after election crowing about being "pro-life" has never managed to save a single fetal life, but has now managed to end millions of lives both born and unborn.

"Pro-life" is the new pro-death.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
I wouldn't count on that bunch being overloaded with testosterone -- which is why they have to prove how "manly" they are by being bullies.

But yes, it's the fact that these old white guys are celebrating (apparently with much beer) that they've screwed the little guy.

[Mad] [Mad] [Mad]
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Darlings, the reason Viagra is still covered is because they need it in the giant economy size.

One of the more useful things we could do is donate. Even a small sum, to the opponents of these morons. Dollars is the only thing they fear.
 
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
I wouldn't count on that bunch being overloaded with testosterone -- which is why they have to prove how "manly" they are by being bullies.


And why they think it's more important to cover erectile dysfunction than pregnancy.

I thought this article gave a chilling description of how something like this health care denial act can happen.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
Not sure this will work for everybody, but click on it and see if you can see the image.

It's a meme, safe for work.

This link is free but somewhat less safe (language, New Republic, language!) but expresses well the feeling of many women. There's a reason why The Handmaid's Tale is a hit this year.

[ 05. May 2017, 22:35: Message edited by: Brenda Clough ]
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
I am in awe of your strength to fight on and get up every day. I think I'd curl up under the duvet and wait for the world to end... But no doubt that is what they want...no resistance.

That quoting of the "poor will always be with you" makes me sick. I read an article years ago that said there were Republicans who thought like that and I thought it was liberal exaggeration. You couldn't make it up.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
I am in awe of your strength to fight on and get up every day. I think I'd curl up under the duvet and wait for the world to end... But no doubt that is what they want...no resistance.

We have done that. They told us to be ladies, to be submissive, to keep our voices down and our hands in our laps. They tried to enforce it with legislation, with hiring, with paying us less than men, with fashions that kept us quiet and hobbled. It got us bupkis. So now we're doing it different. Already the sight of a pink pussyhat makes them grope for the Viagra. They shall know fear.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
What a surprise! 13 Republican senators will draft the Senate's version of legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare. Take a guess how many of the 13 are women.
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
What a surprise! 13 Republican senators will draft the Senate's version of legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare. Take a guess how many of the 13 are women.

Zero
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
What a surprise! 13 Republican senators will draft the Senate's version of legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare. Take a guess how many of the 13 are women.

Zero
Yup.
[Frown]
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
People might find the "How to fire Trump" thread (Purg.) interesting.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who regularly sees that thread title and thinks "out of a cannon".
 
Posted by ThunderBunk (# 15579) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
People might find the "How to fire Trump" thread (Purg.) interesting.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who regularly sees that thread title and thinks "out of a cannon".
Surely the mother of all cannons?!
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
I was wondering if there were enough bits of Saddam's supergun still around.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Any cannon big enough for Trump would indeed have to be yuge. Bigly yuge.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
Nothing compared to what would be needed if we also had to include his ego
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Perhaps it could be egostracted before the firing?

I'll get me coat, switch off the light, and shut the door...

IJ
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I was wondering if there were enough bits of Saddam's supergun still around.

Britain could soon knock out parts for another one. Going to need every dodgy deal we can lay our hands on pretty soon.
 
Posted by chris stiles (# 12641) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I was wondering if there were enough bits of Saddam's supergun still around.

Britain could soon knock out parts for another one. Going to need every dodgy deal we can lay our hands on pretty soon.
The UK replaced that market by selling sarin-precursors to the Syrian government.
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
This is deliciously Abrahamic. (A free click and safe for work too!)
 
Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :
 
Love that, Brenda!
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
That was one I had to share with friends!

[Big Grin]
 
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
Read out loud to friend to much mutual enjoyment.
 
Posted by Doone (# 18470) on :
 
Just excellent!
 
Posted by Wesley J (# 6075) on :
 
That's my brend o'humour! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Wonderful stuff - best read out loud in the voice of Judd Hirsch or Jackie Mason!

[Overused]

IJ
 
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
Did anyone notice Sally Yates testifying before Congress?
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Well, POTUS certainly noticed.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
From Russia with Love could yet be the Donald's undoing.
He's still insisting it's all a hoax despite an awful lot of smoke rising under the boards of his Presidency.
 
Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :
 
He's just ok'd arming Syrian Kurds despite Turky's objections. Seems like a bad move.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
But it worked so well in Afghanistan!
 
Posted by Brenda Clough (# 18061) on :
 
He looooves sending in the military. People with tiny fingers have to compensate in every way they can.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
As he so often did - 50 years ago - Tom Lehrer strikes the right note:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFvxqQTh3m4

IJ
 
Posted by mr cheesy (# 3330) on :
 
The big-T just fired Comey, the chief of the FBI - apparently investigating Trump.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
It's little-t. Goes with the IQ.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
It's little-t. Goes with the IQ.

And anything else (hands???) that might be smaller than average.
[Snigger]
 
Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
Meanwhile it seems he's just shafted the people who try to decipher his brain farts [Ultra confused]
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
Israel has a way of taking care of people who diss them. God, are you listening?
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Israel has a way of taking care of people who diss them. God, are you listening?

You mean like the way they "take care" of Gaza?
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
Meanwhile it seems he's just shafted the people who try to decipher his brain farts [Ultra confused]

An absolute right to share facts? He wouldn't know a fact if it came up and bit him.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Israel has a way of taking care of people who diss them. God, are you listening?

You mean like the way they "take care" of Gaza?
Maybe Trump should plan a trip to Gaza.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
After watching a bit of Planet America last night on Trump's first international trip, where they compared and contrasted his behavior towards the leaders of NATO countries with his behavior towards the Russians, I found myself cussing and cursing those Americans who enabled the electoral college to enable this shambolic fool of a President. I felt myself lose my footing as the bedrock of the international order shifted underneath me.

Then, this morning, while continuing my comedic reverie into the works of Alexi Sayle, I found this:

quote:
"If you travel to the States ... they have a lot of different words than like what we use. For instance: they say 'elevator', we say 'lift'; they say 'drapes', we say 'curtains'; they say 'president', we say 'seriously deranged git!"
This joke was probably written in the 80's or 90's when Alexi was the king of alternative comedy, but it just felt so right for 2017.

I had to turn off Planet America because I got so upset. I might just write this quote out on a bit of paper and see if it will help me watch the rest.


Alexi Sayle Word Association

The above video contains gender stereotyping. Alexi Sayle also tends to swear as often as he uses conjunctions.
 
Posted by la vie en rouge (# 10688) on :
 
Think this fits better here than Purgatory:

Bwahahaha
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
If Garbage ends up in clink, I'll know there is a god.

BTW, the photo of him with Baby Trumpling shows that they both use the same tanning agent, if not other kinds of agent.

[Snigger]

IJ
 
Posted by RooK (# 1852) on :
 
I'm surprised with my own lack of imagination. Trump really is much worse than I had guessed possible.
#parisagreement
 
Posted by jedijudy (# 333) on :
 
RooK, Sir. If you go outside your front door, and see my eyeballs, please send them back to me by snail mail. I will gladly reimburse you.

When will the nightmare end?
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
I note that Amerika, as exemplified by your president and his cronies, is fast retreating into itself, as did the isolationist America Firsters in the period between the Great War and the European wars. It took a Japanese attack on a naval base in an American dependency to shake them out of it.

Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
 
Posted by fletcher christian (# 13919) on :
 
Oh...ok, that one trumps Brexit. I didn't think it would be possible, but yep, he's done it.

I've always said that now is the rise of the East and the fall of the West, I just never imagined it would come via the two leading lights of democracy for the last 80 years.
 
Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
I never thought I'd say this but...Go, Arnold!
 
Posted by Kelly Alves (# 2522) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I never thought I'd say this but...Go, Arnold!

I know, isn't it weird?
 
Posted by Uncle Pete (# 10422) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I never thought I'd say this but...Go, Arnold!

I must have missed something. Who is Arnold and what did he do?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
This chap, perhaps?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arnold_Schwarzenegger

Please to correct me if I'm wrong, Americans!

IJ
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
I had no idea either, but Google is our friend.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Uncle Pete:
quote:
Originally posted by Lyda*Rose:
I never thought I'd say this but...Go, Arnold!

I must have missed something. Who is Arnold and what did he do?
When Arnold started as governor of calif he began much like trump: exploiting flaws in the system to rise to a win based on celebrity. He tried to stomp all over the legislature and bully them to meeting his will much like trump. He was slapped down hard by both legislators and electorate. But then... He listened. Wonder of wonders: apologized! He was far from our best governor (and a far worse husband) but he improved with time
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Zappa:
Meanwhile it seems he's just shafted the people who try to decipher his brain farts [Ultra confused]

Does he not understand that his "absolute right" to do things is not in question? If you want someone to tell you their secrets, you agree not to tell those secrets to other people (even if you have the "absolute right" to do so.) If you go around blabbing about other people's secrets, what are the chances that they will continue to trust you with those secrets?
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Hmm.....could/would/should the Republicans (if there be any still concerned for their country and their world) put Arnie up as a rival papal-style Anti-President?

[Two face]

IJ
 
Posted by Carex (# 9643) on :
 
No, he's too liberal for the Republicans.

He even took the doors off his Hummer to reduce the weight and improve the gas mileage (though I'm not sure it made much difference considering the resulting aerodynamics.)
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Well, I suppose it's the thought that counts...

...but are there are no liberal (or even liberal-ish) Republicans?

IJ
 
Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on :
 
There's another rally and march on Saturday. I plan to be at the one in New York City.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
Arnold cannot be President because he was not born in the USA.
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
There is a range of political opinion within the Republican party, certainly, but the more extreme people are more likely to vote in primary elections.

Consider the last Republican primary, where the leading candidates were Trump and Cruz. The only candidate who attracted any kind of support that I might describe as "not a complete nutter" was John Kasich, and he's really not a moderate in any sense - he's just not batshit crazy.

[ 02. June 2017, 20:30: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Ah, but can he produce his birth certificate to prove that?

O wait a mo....

[Paranoid]

IJ
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
(Answering Miss Amanda's point re Arnie.....)

IJ
 
Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Ah, but can he produce his birth certificate to prove that?

Our local court system once asked me to prove that I wasn't American (I'd been summoned for jury duty, because they use the drivers license database to build their lists, but dirty foreigners aren't eligible.)

I briefly toyed with the idea of explaining to them why it wasn't possible for me to prove that I wasn't an American, before common sense got the better of me, and I proved to them that I was British, which seemed to satisfy them.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
Drat. That would have been fun.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
When I find myself in tweets of trouble
Mother Russia comes to me
Speaking words of Putin
Covfefe

(had to share!)
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
Arnold cannot be President because he was not born in the USA.

Some years back, there were Congressfolk who wanted to change that rule--just so Arnold could be president.
[Paranoid]

Fortunately, it didn't get very far.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
np--

[Killing me] Did you create that?
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
I had to turn off Planet America because I got so upset. I might just write this quote out on a bit of paper and see if it will help me watch the rest.

I caught up with it [a programme on Australian TV that takes a serious and humorous look at American politics] yesterday and it was terribly frustrating and upsetting. But informative viewing. Have to watch last night's.

You know...it pains me to say this but I was not so upset when he was elected...shocked, somewhat appalled given his comments on women and minorities, but not upset. I thought he'd be reined in and things may progress -- to the right, admittedly, but without much drama.

Each and every day I find myself growing more upset. And more annoyed at how I could've thought [hoped?] it could go any other way. And how I missed what an utter buffoon depriving some village of an idiot he is. I apologise for my extreme ignorance.
 
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:

. . . Each and every day I find myself growing more upset. . . .

I think I went into a sort of shock after the election -- I was paralyzed with dismay, then depression, and there are corners of my brain that still haven't quite accepted that this -- Charlie Pierce's description fits best --"vulgar talking yam" is not only in office, but is being robustly aided and abetted by members of a party my father supported all his life.

The only shred of hope I have left is the fact that these thugs are not actually governing with the consent of the governed.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
yeah, this happened to me too. I was very upset with a little under half of the American electorate, including people I knew. I couldn't comprehend how you could be a nice person and at the same time vote for that man. It really bought home to me just how little I share with those Americans. I have to close my eyes and think of my liberal friend from Sacramento to regain my equilibrium.

The same move to the right is evident here, and on similar issues. I'm fooling myself I'm sure, but I don't think it could happen in the same way here because we don't have a Presidential system.

I guess the main reason I don't want a move to the right is that I'll be hitting the aged care system in about 20 years, and I want it to be well-funded.
 
Posted by Ian Climacus (# 944) on :
 
This may make you smile.

[ 03. June 2017, 05:03: Message edited by: Ian Climacus ]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Ian--

quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
Each and every day I find myself growing more upset. And more annoyed at how I could've thought [hoped?] it could go any other way. And how I missed what an utter buffoon depriving some village of an idiot he is. I apologise for my extreme ignorance.

Thanks for this. [Smile] [Angel]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
Ian--

quote:
Originally posted by Ian Climacus:
This may make you smile.

[Big Grin] Is that a smallish soccer ball??
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Ohher:
I think I went into a sort of shock after the election -- I was paralyzed with dismay, then depression, and there are corners of my brain that still haven't quite accepted that this . . . vulgar talking yam is not only in office, but is being robustly aided and abetted by members of a party.

My sentiment precisely. I couldn't bear to watch the news for weeks after the election. I still can't bear to hear him talk. Thank God for the mute button. I refuse to accept that he is president. I refer to him as "the present occupant of the White House," not by the title that the Russians helped him usurp.
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
This video is priceless.
 
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
This video is priceless.

That is simply wonderful. Thank you so much for this! [Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me]
 
Posted by Ohher (# 18607) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
This video is priceless.

That might make an opera lover of me yet. [Overused]
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
This video is priceless.

That is simply wonderful. Thank you so much for this! [Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me] [Killing me]
Ditto! And they even thought to put the US flag in the distress-signal position (upside down).

Slight tangent: Loan company JT Wentworth has TV ads in various musical genres--including opera on a city bus, which I love.
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
The Weather Channel went after Trump on climate change (from Pop Sugar)! [Big Grin]
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
The future site of the trumpy presidential library.

Another 'had to share' - if we don't laugh we cry.

"A thing is funny when - in some way that is not actually offensive or frightening - it upsets the established order. Every joke is a tiny revolution." -- George Orwell wrote that in his essay "Funny, But Not Vulgar", except trumpy is vulgar, but not funny.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
The future site of the trumpy presidential library.

Well, we won't have to worry about any books getting ruined -- I doubt that he owns any (other than hundreds of copies of the ones he "wrote").
 
Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
But what about copies of his tax returns? Oh, wait, he probably shredded them.
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
Picking up on the "vulgar but not funny" idea, though, I thought it vulgar AND funny:

He is "President Donald Fuck".

Rurn out the lights and lock the door, and beware of bigly IQ president donald fuck.
 
Posted by sabine (# 3861) on :
 
I'm deep cleaning my house today while I listen to former FBI Director Coney's testimony. The two activities just seemed to go together. [Snigger]

sabine
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
It does remind me of Watergate. Was it John Dean who testified at one point, amongst others?
 
Posted by Soror Magna (# 9881) on :
 
Since I'm in the Pacific time zone, I couldn't drink while watching Comey's testimony. But it was still fun.

Lowlight: John McCain reverting to angry old man on the porch.

Highlight: "I hope you can let this go" is just hoping. Nothing wrong with hoping. Just like "That's a really nice business you have there ... it would be a shame if anything happened to it" is compliments and good wishes.
 
Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
The future site of the trumpy presidential library.

Well, we won't have to worry about any books getting ruined -- I doubt that he owns any (other than hundreds of copies of the ones he "wrote").
Reminds me of an old Utah Phillips joke about (then-US Vice President) Spiro Agnew: "He had a fire the other day. A great tragedy. His library burned down. He lost both books. He wasn't even finished coloring one of them."
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Bump!
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
They plan on reproducing?

Match-making site for trumpy fans.

Maybe we should pray for them and offer them condolences?
 
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :
 
Anderson Cooper reveals the true balance between Trumpton compassion and Trumpton self-interest.

"We cry BS!"

Take him away from a teleprompter and the egomania erupts.

As does my [Projectile]
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
The patriotic dating site for supporters of the Orange Lord of New Mordor might actually be a Good Thing, in that the resultant inbreeding would soon result in extinction.

No?

[Two face]

IJ
 
Posted by Pangolin Guerre (# 18686) on :
 
Actually, there was apiece in The Times last week (two weeks ago?) that in a psychological test, those of conservative inclination were more physically attractive than those to the left. Also, I have it on good authority that the sex at the Republican conventions is pretty great.

Inbreeding, perhaps, but a lot of fun getting there.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
The smell of pure blood is in the air.

At least two trumpiites dating eachother wouldn’t likely waste valuable humping time discussing politics.
 
Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :
 
I read that the photo of love struck Trumpies on the dating website had to be replaced because the male turned out to be a convicted sex offender.

I’m surprised they didn’t leverage that discovery into a Unique Selling Point.
 
Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :
 
Sorry for the double post.

Trump Dating Site
 
Posted by Golden Key (# 1468) on :
 
If they hook up with the Paranormal Dating site, perhaps we could get the nastier Trumpites out of this world?
[Biased]

Though I wouldn't wish the Trumpites on the Paranormal crowd.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by LutheranChik:
I read that the photo of love struck Trumpies on the dating website had to be replaced because the male turned out to be a convicted sex offender.

I’m surprised they didn’t leverage that discovery into a Unique Selling Point.

Indeed.
— Lonely Heart 💘 seeks fun times. Looking to grab pussy and possibly more— [Axe murder]
 
Posted by jbohn (# 8753) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
Though I wouldn't wish the Trumpites on the Paranormal crowd.

I'd be a bit worried about cross-pollination...
 
Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :
 
Hmmm. Have we got ANYTHING transcendently, inclusively subversive to say? Or are we so ignorant and powerless that all we can do is frightened liberal locker room, echo chamber 'satire'?

What we didn't learn from Dubbyer, we aren't applying in spades to Trump.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Negative attention is what got him power.
He can play the luvvies like a stradivarius.
 
Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on :
 
And we liberal luvvies fall for it every time. We deliver on care/harm, fairness/cheating whinges on behalf of minorities at the expense of those same moral foundations and all the rest in moral conservatives.
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0