View Full Version : Trumps: White Angry Middleclass
I seem to recall you once mentioning that during your transitional period you decided to give away a considerable portion of your net worth. As someone not particularly burdened by substantial wealth, I'm curious about how you determined how much to keep and whether you had a formal plan for converting assets into income.
I was a chicken. I kept enough that if I kept it in cash/low-yield-but-safe investments, I likely wouldn't even spend through the pile. The rest into a charitable instrument that I control, and that *can* pay salaries to its directors for their keen and prudent management/investment work. So if things went really south I could pay myself a salary, as long as it was "reasonable".
As far as a plan for assets-to-income, I invest in boring stocks that pay dividends, boring bonds that pay interest, boring real estate that produces rents, boring loans that produce interest, and sorta-boring businesses that produce profits.
I didn't strive to maximize my upside so much as to limit my downside so that I knew I'd always have a roof over my head and rice & beans to eat. If I had more expensive tastes (jets instead of Cessnas, huge yachts instead of tastefully-small yachts, ...) I might have kept more.
I have no idea how I'll vote. I keep changing my mind between writing in Bernie, voting third party, voting Hillary, and not voting. I promise I will never vote for Trump. He's acting too much like Hitler in the early 1930s.
I will vote Libertarian or Green as usual I suspect.
I will vote Libertarian or Green as usual I suspect.
Similar thoughts here, although a write-in is a real possibility this year.
Teacher Terry
6-21-16, 2:15pm
I will vote for Hillary because a write in is a wasted vote and Trump would be far worse and unthinkable.
I will vote for Hillary because a write in is a wasted vote and Trump would be far worse and unthinkable.Hillary says that if you're being investigated by the FBI you should be denied your Constitutional rights. I think if you're being investigated by the FBI you should be denied any opportunity at the Presidency, but maybe that's just me.
Hillary says that if you're being investigated by the FBI you should be denied your Constitutional rights. I think if you're being investigated by the FBI you should be denied any opportunity at the Presidency, but maybe that's just me.
If all it takes is some bureaucrat's suspicion, there's no limit to what the government can do to keep us "safe". Due process being the inefficient throwback to a simpler time that it is.
If all it takes is some bureaucrat's suspicion, there's no limit to what the government can do to keep us "safe". But that's the direction many in this country want to take us. I say never let them near the seats of any meaningful power.
Due process being the inefficient throwback to a simpler time that it is.Well, due process is what separates a Republic from a Democracy. The fabled 'Tyranny of the Majority' being the natural result. I honestly don't understand why people can't, or won't, grasp the concept.
ToomuchStuff
6-21-16, 2:55pm
I will vote for Hillary because a write in is a wasted vote and Trump would be far worse and unthinkable.
So speaking your mind, from write in, to a vote of no confidence is a wasted vote? Sounds like a lot of people died for nothing, then and we don't need that paper called the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution. (maybe we can get back all those dead soldiers)
Hillary says that if you're being investigated by the FBI you should be denied your Constitutional rights. I think if you're being investigated by the FBI you should be denied any opportunity at the Presidency, but maybe that's just me.
Guilty, before proven innocent?
Guilty, before proven innocent?
According to Hillary and the vast majority of the Democratic Party, Yes, although that's where the saving grace of due process historically comes into play.
Her guilt or innocence has nothing to do with my wish to deny her power. It's fear of how she has indicated she would use it.
Well, due process is what separates a Republic from a Democracy. The fabled 'Tyranny of the Majority' being the natural result. I honestly don't understand why people can't, or won't, grasp the concept.
That's what I like about our system. All the strange rules, traditions, checks and balances that tie us up in knots and frustrate the folks pushing the current fashion in what's good for us. That's my primary reason for hope in the current electoral cycle.
ToomuchStuff
6-21-16, 3:10pm
According to Hillary and the vast majority of the Democratic Party, Yes, although that's where the saving grace of due process historically comes into play.
Her guilt or innocence has nothing to do with my wish to deny her power. It's fear of how she has indicated she would use it.
Wasn't written well enough to separate the two.
Now with how much I have heard about Hillary being a liar (or other things), I understand the fear, but have to wonder how much of her "indications" if smoke, mirrors or other lies.
Now with how much I have heard about Hillary being a liar (or other things), I understand the fear, but have to wonder how much of her "indications" if smoke, mirrors or other lies.
"When people show you who they are, believe them..." ~ Maya Angelou
I will vote for Hillary because a write in is a wasted vote and Trump would be far worse and unthinkable.
The whole "wasted-vote" narrative is one that I will not buy into. It's constructed to channel thought and action, maintain the status quo, and to discourage thoughtful and effective participation in civic life.
"When people show you who they are, believe them..." ~ Maya Angelou
What do you do when they lecture you on inequality in a $12,000 Armani jacket?
What do you do when they lecture you on inequality in a $12,000 Armani jacket?
You took the words right out of my son's mouth--that's exactly what he said to me this weekend.
The whole "wasted-vote" narrative is one that I will not buy into. It's constructed to channel thought and action, maintain the status quo, and to discourage thoughtful and effective participation in civic life.
I would normally agree with the wasted vote theory or the a vote for X is really a vote for Y theory based on an assessment of the desirability of the most likely outcomes. However this year, given that the two most probable outcomes seem equally poisonous, I'm going to vote in such a way that, while it won't prevent the coming vileness will at least register a protest for future reference with the political system.
What do you do when they lecture you on inequality in a $12,000 Armani jacket?
Remember.
I would normally agree with the wasted vote theory or the a vote for X is really a vote for Y theory based on an assessment of the desirability of the most likely outcomes. However this year, given that the two most probable outcomes seem equally poisonous, I'm going to vote in such a way that, while it won't prevent the coming vileness will at least register a protest for future reference with the political system.
It's a games-theory problem, a modification of the classic prisoner's dilemma. If we each choose to "cooperate", we can elect someone great, but who "has no chance". If instead we "defect", we end up with the lesser of two evils.
The rational move is to cooperate, but people aren't rational.
Remember.
But there's so much to remember. The disappearing documents. The uncanny futures trading acumen. The braving of the Bosnian bullets. The Cheshire-cat emails. Wall Street story time. The wonderfully authentic accents. I can't keep it all straight.
It's a games-theory problem, a modification of the classic prisoner's dilemma. If we each choose to "cooperate", we can elect someone great, but who "has no chance". If instead we "defect", we end up with the lesser of two evils.
The rational move is to cooperate, but people aren't rational.
Normally, I proceed on the basis of William F Buckley's principle that you should always vote for the most conservative candidate with a reasonable chance of winning. That does not seem to be an option in 2016.
Teacher Terry
6-21-16, 4:15pm
The good thing is that in this country we are all free to vote for whomever we want and to disagree about if a vote is wasted or not.
According to Hillary and the vast majority of the Democratic Party, Yes, although that's where the saving grace of due process historically comes into play.
At this very moment, Democrats in Congress are holding a sit-in on the House floor to protest their inability to take away citizens rights without due process.
We may be seeing the birth of a new movement 'Occupy Congress'.
Ultralight
6-22-16, 1:17pm
At this very moment, Democrats in Congress are holding a sit-in on the House floor to protest their inability to take away citizens rights without due process.
We may be seeing the birth of a new movement 'Occupy Congress'.
You are either with them or you are with the...
You are either with them or you are with the...
sane?
Ultralight
6-22-16, 1:21pm
sane?
That is not how the Dems are framing it. You know who they are saying you are with, right?
That is not how the Dems are framing it. You know who they are saying you are with, right?
No, who?
ApatheticNoMore
6-22-16, 3:06pm
the communists of course
Ultralight
6-22-16, 3:08pm
the communists of course
No...
Ultralight
6-22-16, 3:35pm
Anyway, the sit-in is dramatic!
My prediction: The Repubs win this one.
Ahhh, terrorists right?
Janet Napolitano famously listed veterans and "right wing extremists" as potential terrorists several years ago during her tenure as head of DHS, so I'm not surprised.
What worries me about issues such as this is that politicians and bureaucrats reserve for themselves the ability to define what a "right wing extremist" is, identify as many as possible and then place them on lists which they intend to use as means for action against citizens. As a veteran, am I already on one of these lists?
Ahhh, terrorists right?
Janet Napolitano famously listed veterans and "right wing extremists" as potential terrorists several years ago during her tenure as head of DHS, so I'm not surprised.
What worries me about issues such as this is that politicians and bureaucrats reserve for themselves the ability to define what a "right wing extremist" is, identify as many as possible and then place them on lists which they intend to use as means for action against citizens. As a veteran, am I already on one of these lists?
Wow. A new blacklist. Maybe they'll start putting fins on cars again too.
Wow. A new blacklist.
I don't know about a new blacklist. People keep talking about the No Fly list as a basis for denying rights, although that's not the list they'll actually use. The No Fly list has approximately 60,000 names on it. They'll use the Terror Watch List which has a million or so names on it.
I think when secret lists drawn up by faceless governmental officials are used to restrict law-abiding American citizens, why then the social contract this nation was founded on is well on its way to being void.
Probably not a direction folks want to go.
I am pretty impressed with how many of my local progressive neighbors are perfectly happy with the idea of using The List to direct governmental action against folks they disagree with though.
This'll be fun. Anyone remember what the lovely city of Sarajevo looked like just a few years after the '84 Winter Olympics? Or recall the fun social groups that sprung up in Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, ...?
I am pretty impressed with how many of my local progressive neighbors are perfectly happy with the idea of using The List to direct governmental action against folks they disagree with though.
"Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"
ToomuchStuff
6-23-16, 10:21am
At this very moment, Democrats in Congress are holding a sit-in on the House floor to protest their inability to take away citizens rights without due process.
We may be seeing the birth of a new movement 'Occupy Congress'.
In a case of Irony today, the nation decided lack of due process was ok, and the congressmen sitting in were taken into custody as terrorists.:laff:
My funny image of the day.
This is the Mace of the House. It is carried by the House's Sergeant At Arms, the chief law enforcement officer of the House. You can see from its design a reference to history that is quite appropriate.
Paul Irving should take up the Mace, do his job, and scatter the mob from the Floor.
http://www.old-picture.com/american-legacy/013/pictures/Representatives-House-Mace-of.jpg
Teacher Terry
6-23-16, 2:20pm
It doesn't seem like violence is an appropriate response to a non-violent sit in.
It doesn't seem like violence is an appropriate response to a non-violent sit in.If you're referring to the mace, it doesn't signify violence, it signifies authority. In theory, the Sergeant At Arms would simply present the mace to the unruly person and order would be restored, although that would require a sense of honor and decorum in the unruly person(s). Probably a complete waste of effort in this case.
Teacher Terry
6-23-16, 2:50pm
Thanks Alan for explaining.
Reminds me of the thread on this forum years ago about the sudden clearing out of the Occupy Wall Street protestors, and their tents and sleeping bags that were left behind.
Lots of harrumphing about the mess. But hardly a peep about the Wall St. banksters who put us on the precipice of a world-wide economic collapse and the "mess" they created. Many posters were oddly focused almost solely on those in the park.
Strange selective outrage, again.
ApatheticNoMore
6-24-16, 1:24am
Nah Occupy was grassroots like it or not. This is well astroturf ... but really it's not even astroturf, this is just a bunch of political theater that doesn't even PRETEND to have arisen from any of the actual citizens other than the political class.
Nah Occupy was grassroots like it or not. This is well astroturf ... but really it's not even astroturf, this is just a bunch of political theater that doesn't even PRETEND to have arisen from any of the actual citizens other than the political class.
I'm inclined to agree with you. This looked to be more in the nature of fundraising with a bit of virtue-signalling tossed in to me. I don't think there's a spontaneous mass movement out there yearning to sing "We shall overcome the Bill of Rights".
Ultralight
6-24-16, 9:03am
I think that the folks doing the sit-in really meant it. Like, they really think that making tougher laws will change the situation.
Sure, they will try to make some cash too. But I think they really mean it. I doubt the whole diabolical conspiracy theory that they just want to take rights away from people.
I think that the folks doing the sit-in really meant it. Like, they really think that making tougher laws will change the situation.
Sure, they will try to make some cash too. But I think they really mean it. I doubt the whole diabolical conspiracy theory that they just want to take rights away from people.
The new government powers they were demanding would have done nothing to prevent the Orlando tragedy had they been in place. They were just looking to capitalize on the situation to get a little media attention.
Ultralight
6-24-16, 9:26am
The new government powers they were demanding would have done nothing to prevent the Orlando tragedy had they been in place.
I suspect that they think the new power they wanted would have done something.
I suspect that they think the new power they wanted would have done something.
I suspect that they are cynically exploiting a tragedy.
Ultralight
6-24-16, 9:42am
I suspect that they are cynically exploiting a tragedy.
Liberals say the same thing of conservatives. Who is correct? Perhaps both liberals and conservatives?
ToomuchStuff
6-24-16, 9:51am
The new government powers they were demanding would have done nothing to prevent the Orlando tragedy had they been in place. They were just looking to capitalize on the situation to get a little media attention.
I turned on the TV last night saw Sanders on Colbert. I didn't catch the whole interview, so I may have missed something(s), but he discussed the sit in and said he couldn't explain it to people if they didn't want someone to fly, why would they want them to have a gun (paraphrased). My immediate reaction was he didn't understand the difference between a right and a privilege, and they were looking for something like a Patriot act, rights suspension bill. (hoping to get people to call for it and give up their rights out of fear)
I'm inclined to agree with you. This looked to be more in the nature of fundraising with a bit of virtue-signalling tossed in to me. I don't think there's a spontaneous mass movement out there yearning to sing "We shall overcome the Bill of Rights".
I agree, but only because the majority of people are not thinking of it from a Bill of Rights perspective, but from the desire to achieve a particular outcome, regardless of the consequences. Our politicians, who should know better, seem to have no problem with the idea of trampling the Bill of Rights in order to appear responsive. We've seen it with the First Amendment when they went after equal time requirements on talk radio and with the attempt to block a movie critical of Hillary Clinton prior to the 2008 election. We're seeing it now with the attempt to invalidate the Second Amendment by suppressing citizens Fifth Amendment right to due process, all in an effort to achieve a specific outcome without any concern for the un-intended consequences.
I do not trust politicians, they are not stewards of our liberty, they are fascists. Especially the liberal/progressive ones.
Ultralight
6-24-16, 10:26am
...politicians, they are not stewards of our liberty, they are fascists. Especially the liberal/progressive ones.
Not hyperbolic in the slightest.
Not hyperbolic in the slightest.
No, actually not. One party has been the driving force for all recent challenges to constitutionally protected liberties.
Ultralight
6-24-16, 10:53am
No, actually not. One party has been the driving force for all recent challenges to constitutionally protected liberties.
Which party was into this stuff from 2000 to 2008?
Which party was into this stuff from 2000 to 2008?The same.
Ultralight
6-24-16, 10:57am
The same.
Oooookay.
Williamsmith
10-13-16, 9:03am
Twenty-five days left and this morning I still hadn't decided who to vote for. To be honest I haven't been thinking about it much. For some reason, hearing even the mention of EITHER candidate causes Parkinson's like symptoms. My eyes cross, I spill coffee all over myself as my right hand begins to tremor, under the stress.......I swallow my spit and cough uncontrollably. I grab my wife's private parts and make rude comments about her anatomy. In April, I filed for a tax extension and forgot all about it until now .........now I am thinking about filing for bankruptcy and I am financially sound!
So this morning I was determined to make a decision. After all, I'm getting sick of destroying all the campaign ad mailings for Hillary that have come in the mail. Just don't want the wife making rash decisions on propaganda before she talks to me about who to vote for. Well, certainly not the Hildabeast. And as much as I want to believe Donald can hold it together for four years and make us a Very Very Great Nation Again......well he is a gazillionaire and a really really bad one at that. The way I look at it, he became rich despite himself.
Well, there's the Libertarian Gary Johnson. Gary knows a lot about New Mexico.....maybe too much because he knows nothing of the rest of the world.
Okay, how about Jill Stein and the Greens. A leftist secular Jew who graduated from Harvard. Nothing snobbier than a Harvard grad. Not much in common with the son of a mill worker who cheated his way through state college. I care about the earth and all but I'm not militaristic about climate change. And I'd like the military to at least be able to defend us from attack.
Now here's a guy to get excited about.....Constitutional Party Darell Castle. Whoa! He is a personal injury attorney....next!
Ah. The Independent Party Candidate... Evan McMullin. I'm Independent. He's even got an attractive running mate. Mindy. Geez, all I can think of is Mork and Mindy now. For a guy who claims the country is hungry for new ideas.....he sure does have a lot of tired old ones. Think I'll pass.
Lets see, Social, Reform, Socialist Workers Party, Approval, Revoluntionary, Prohibition, Americas, Pacifist, Nutrition Party..... LEGAL MARIJUANA NOW PARTY - Dan Vacek.
Party Slogan- Free the Weed and Free the People!
Thats It. Now I don't even have to watch the third debate.
http://youtu.be/tuMDG5RvdXs
Your ballot sounds much more fun than mine. Other than the four biggies for president all we have is Gloria Estella La Riva and Dennis J. Banks of the "Peace and Freedom" party.
I do, however, probably have more ballot initiatives to distract me from the presidential insanity than you do. Between the city and state the two voter guides total 554 pages of what will undoubtedly be delightful, page turning reading! I can just imagine my Amazon reviews. "Couldn't put it down! ... Had to find out how the story ended."
.
So this morning I was determined to make a decision. After all, I'm getting sick of destroying all the campaign ad mailings for Hillary that have come in the mail. Just don't want the wife making rash decisions on propaganda before she talks to me about who to vote for...
http://youtu.be/tuMDG5RvdXs
Hummmm....perhaps you can find time to go over this with the little woman while you are tying her shoes...
sweetana3
10-21-16, 4:54pm
554 pages!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Just knew it was CA. We had two poorly written and explained initiatives(?). One was for a change to our state constitution. I could not understand how it was written so NO. The other was for a questionable tax increase again No. If they could write better or explain it better in earlier publications, maybe.
I am thankful that we have already voted.
In Wisconsin they have a web site where you can enter your address and see the ballot. We have a Workers World Party and an American Delta Party candidate, along with the usual suspects. I'll probably just write in Evan McMullin. We have a pool going on turnout in our county. One camp says it will be very low due to general voter disgust. The other says it will be very high due to the desire to offset a seemingly inevitable Clinton victory with down-ballot victories (we're a very Republican county that went heavily for Cruz in the primary).
In my town we drove over to get a dog license and there was the ballot up in the window of the door. The office never seems to be open, but it was good to b e able to see the ballot. I was interested to see you could vote straight party for at least 6 parties.
Williamsmith
10-31-16, 10:30am
If I may be serious now. It is astounding how silent this forum is regarding the raging fire approaching the Clinton bid for Presidency. And the threat to our Constitutional Republic that looms in the future. Well, to be honest, that threat has long past and morphed into a takeover driven by socialist dabblings of the so called well read and educated elite.
Clinton has been walked to the end of the plank and serious players are defecting. Why do Clintonites talk so much about Trump? Have they nothing idealistic to discuss about the hope for the future of a Clinton term in office? Of course not. There never has been. And now Trump is on the precipice of a historical upset. Do you image that might feed his ego?
Would Clintons running mate Mr. Kaine be competent to run a government bogged down by an extended indictment and impeachment of a President? Could she even govern effectively at all?
Do you think Trumplodites will be emboldened to push ideas to action? Your country is on fire. Easily, the worst two Presidential candidates of all time. But yet, one is really worse than the other for our continued existence. Seems to me, lots of sideline observers are making their choice. The rust belt awakens and the west coast trembles.
frugal-one
10-31-16, 10:40am
Also, wondering why Clinton does not elicit talk of the fraud scheme by Trump with Trump University? His trial will be in November. Too bad it is not sooner! Also, interested in more talk of Trump's ties with Putin. He is the scary one IMO.
Interesting to see how others in the world talk about our elections.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35356941
Why do Clintonites talk so much about Trump?
Wouldn't you, in their position? Trump is the fleshly incarnation of the monstrous caricature the Democrats have been pushing for years. You don't easily turn down a gift like that. Especially if it also helps distract from your own unsavory history.
JaneV2.0
10-31-16, 11:53am
Millions of emails critical to an ongoing investigation went missing during the Bush administration and hardly an eyebrow was raised. Many Bush staffers operated from private email servers run by the RNC. Newsweek says it well:
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-furor-hypocrisy-right-493120
Millions of emails critical to an ongoing investigation went missing during the Bush administration and hardly an eyebrow was raised. Many Bush staffers operated from private email servers run by the RNC. Newsweek says it well:
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-furor-hypocrisy-right-493120
Well that tears it. I'm not voting for Bush next week.
And I'm not voting for Bill Clinton. If only Trump could understand that.
But I think jane's point was that all the faux moral outrage the right has about Clinton's emails comes off as tired political jockeying and not some sort of honestly righteous concern.
frugal-one
10-31-16, 2:38pm
Millions of emails critical to an ongoing investigation went missing during the Bush administration and hardly an eyebrow was raised. Many Bush staffers operated from private email servers run by the RNC. Newsweek says it well:
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-furor-hypocrisy-right-493120
Thanks.. passed the newsweek article along.
And I'm not voting for Bill Clinton. If only Trump could understand that.
I've been quite interested to see the dreadful slut-shaming of Melania Trump during this election cycle. Seems a foolish approach, given Hillary's choice of spouse.
I've been quite interested to see the dreadful slut-shaming of Melania Trump during this election cycle. Seems a foolish approach, given Hillary's choice of spouse.
I don't think it's right to attack women for their choice of husbands.
To err is Huma.
If there are any slut-shaming fingers being pointed, it should be at The Donald. Is there such a descriptor for shaming males who act out sexually? Bueller?
iris lilies
10-31-16, 4:28pm
Millions of emails critical to an ongoing investigation went missing during the Bush administration and hardly an eyebrow was raised. Many Bush staffers operated from private email servers run by the RNC. Newsweek says it well:
http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-furor-hypocrisy-right-493120
In the immortal words of PDQ XYZ, former SLN member: Bush isnt the President now. Try to get over it.
It makes me laugh every time I use it, thanks PDQ!
iris lilies
10-31-16, 4:45pm
While I am still confident that Hillary will squeek by and take the White House, I am completely disgusted that the Democrats cannot put up a candidate to stomp all over the orange boob. Her turn indeed. Screw that.
It's clear there's a double standard where Republicans are concerned; that's what I was pointing out. I shouldn't have to explain it.
In the immortal words of PDQ XYZ, former SLN member: Bush isnt the President now. Try to get over it.
It makes me laugh every time I use it, thanks PDQ!
Only if the republicans start showing the same level of unconcern about hillary's emails as they did bush's thugs' emails.
Only if the republicans start showing the same level of unconcern about hillary's emails as they did bush's thugs' emails.
That's very true. Through this entire campaign, I have not heard a single mention of Teapot Dome. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Only if the republicans start showing the same level of unconcern about hillary's emails as they did bush's thugs' emails.
I've said that for a long time. They count on Americans' amnesia on these things, then practice SO/Selective Outrage on the exact same issue.
iris lilies
11-1-16, 9:12am
I will be annoyed at the Trumpites if he wins the popular vote and loses the electoral college votes, and then we have to endure their whining about the unfairness of the electoral college. It happens each time the college doesn't go someone's way.
OK, this triggered my sense of humour. Does a Trump supporter or Trumpite suffer from the disease known as Trumpitis? Sorry but I had to...
I will be annoyed at the Trumpites if he wins the popular vote and loses the electoral college votes, and then we have to endure their whining about the unfairness of the electoral college. It happens each time the college doesn't go someone's way.
I suppose we could just admit that nothing anyone in government does matters in any real semse beyond its partisan mud slinging value and be done with the discussion. It seems that that's the argument being made here.
I think the argument is that the sins of the present aren't excused by the sins of the past.
Or maybe it's that Republicans are awful people.
Or maybe it's that Republicans would rather criticize their opposition than themselves; unlike the pure and pristine Democrats?
I think the argument is that the sins of the present aren't excused by the sins of the past.
Andrew Jackson ignored treaties, and forced Native Americans to move off their land for "progress".
So it's OK that Obama is following the same path in Standing Rock. No need to criticize.
And heck, both Presidents are Democrats, so there's that.
I think the argument is that the sins of the present aren't excused by the sins of the past.
Or maybe it's that Republicans are awful people.
Or maybe it's that Republicans would rather criticize their opposition than themselves; unlike the pure and pristine Democrats?
No, I think my argument is that if you weren't outraged when your team did it in the past then any criticism when the other team is currently doing it come across as the obvious partisan grandstanding that it is and nothing more.
No, I think my argument is that if you weren't outraged when your team did it in the past then any criticism when the other team is currently doing it come across as the obvious partisan grandstanding that it is and nothing more.
And there's no place for partisan grandstanding in partisan politics.
Indeed. People are certainly free to grandstand. But others are equally free to call it out for what it is. And i suppose the grandstanding people are also free to fake outrage at being called out on their grandstanding. But their crocodile tears are about about as believable as Trump's claims of a rigged election.
Indeed. People are certainly free to grandstand. But others are equally free to call it out for what it is. And i suppose the grandstanding people are also free to fake outrage at being called out on their grandstanding. But their crocodile tears are about about as believable as Trump's claims of a rigged election.
And as long as the First Amendment is allowed to continue unmolested, Pots will be free to call Kettles black.
I will grant you that the Sanders' camp complaints of election-rigging were much more credible than the Trump peoples'.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/james-comey-congress-emails_us_581f8ff5e4b0aac62485196a?ncid=engmodushp mg00000003
And now, two days before the election we learn that the latest email hoohah was just bullcrap. Hopefully this reaults in the end of Comey's tenure at the FBI.
ApatheticNoMore
11-6-16, 6:12pm
And now, two days before the election we learn that the latest email hoohah was just bullcrap. Hopefully this reaults in the end of Comey's tenure at the FBI.
or dropping the charges is bullcrap. As we have no way of knowing who is pulling whose strings (and on what tarmac), did the Obama administration and the Attorney General have a talk with Comey? We know those people are partisans. Was Comey trying to push the election toward Trump (look we know most of the powers that be want Hillary including the vast majority of the intelligence apparatus and including many Republicans, but Comey might well be wanting a Republican in office, we know he has R sympathies and has mostly worked for Rs). It's all so much parsing motive and hidden things we do not see, which seem unknowable to me.
All we know is: laws are for the little people. The powers that be get away with things the little people go to jail for.
Ultralight
11-6-16, 7:04pm
All we know is: laws are for the little people. The powers that be get away with things the little people go to jail for.
But the little people also have football, cheap beer, sitcoms, and romance novels.
But the little people also have football, cheap beer, sitcoms, and romance novels.
""No shoving there now!" shouted the Deputy Sub-Bursar in a fury. He slammed down he lid of his cash-box. "I shall stop the distribution unless I have good behaviour."
The Deltas muttered, jostled one another a little, and then were still. The threat had been effective. Deprivation of soma-appalling thought!
"That's better," said the young man, and reopened his cash-box.
Ultralight
11-6-16, 7:16pm
""No shoving there now!" shouted the Deputy Sub-Bursar in a fury. He slammed down he lid of his cash-box. "I shall stop the distribution unless I have good behaviour."
The Deltas muttered, jostled one another a little, and then were still. The threat had been effective. Deprivation of soma-appalling thought!
"That's better," said the young man, and reopened his cash-box.
!Splat!
frugal-one
11-6-16, 8:21pm
[QUOTE=ApatheticNoMore;256489]or dropping the charges is bullcrap. As we have no way of knowing who is pulling whose strings (and on what tarmac), did the Obama administration and the Attorney General have a talk with Comey? We know those people are partisans. Was Comey trying to push the election toward Trump (look we know most of the powers that be want Hillary including the vast majority of the intelligence apparatus and including many Republicans, but Comey might well be wanting a Republican in office, we know he has R sympathies and has mostly worked for Rs). It's all so much parsing motive and hidden things we do not see, which seem unknowable to me.
-------------------------
Trump should also be sited. It has been reported to the FBI that he has ties with Russia. No wonder he praises Putin!
-------------------------
Trump should also be sited. It has been reported to the FBI that he has ties with Russia. No wonder he praises Putin!
I love this NeoMcCarthyism that the progressives have come up with for this election cycle, it's just hilarious!
http://www.filmposters.com/images/posters/11247.jpg
or dropping the charges is bullcrap. As we have no way of knowing who is pulling whose strings (and on what tarmac), did the Obama administration and the Attorney General have a talk with Comey? We know those people are partisans. Was Comey trying to push the election toward Trump (look we know most of the powers that be want Hillary including the vast majority of the intelligence apparatus and including many Republicans, but Comey might well be wanting a Republican in office, we know he has R sympathies and has mostly worked for Rs). It's all so much parsing motive and hidden things we do not see, which seem unknowable to me.
All we know is: laws are for the little people. The powers that be get away with things the little people go to jail for.
If there was anything new in those emails I doubt J Edgar Comey would have been willing to have his arm twisted to the point of throwing away his career the way he did this morning. He gave in to republican arm twisting and acted as a partisan hack a week ago and today he paid the price. I fully expect that sometime in January/early February he'll announce that he wants to "spend more time with his family"
flowerseverywhere
11-8-16, 8:05am
If there was anything new in those emails I doubt J Edgar Comey would have been willing to have his arm twisted to the point of throwing away his career the way he did this morning. He gave in to republican arm twisting and acted as a partisan hack a week ago and today he paid the price. I fully expect that sometime in January/early February he'll announce that he wants to "spend more time with his family"
he got himself into a dammed if you do, damned if you don't position. it will be interesting to see what happens to Christie and Guilianni after all this. And the Maine governor with the voter suppression accusations.
he got himself into a dammed if you do, damned if you don't position. it will be interesting to see what happens to Christie and Guilianni after all this. And the Maine governor with the voter suppression accusations.
It was a situation entirely of his own making. The only reason to make the announcement he made two weeks ago was purely political, and it backfired in the most spectacular way.
It was a situation entirely of his own making. The only reason to make the announcement he made two weeks ago was purely political, and it backfired in the most spectacular way.I disagree. He had promised to keep Congress informed of any changes in the investigation, and he did. The response to his notification was political, although there appears to be no damage done other than both sides of the political divide making him the scapegoat.
If I were him, I'd be well and truly pissed that the Justice Department forced him into this mess through the discovery of the Attorney General's tête-à-tête with Bill on a secluded runway.
I don't think Comey was politcally motivated at all. I also don't think that they could get through that many emails before the election, in such a short time-- 1 per second, they estimated, so I still don't know why that went down as it did. But it seems to me Comey obligated by law to do what he did by reopening. Do not have a clue why he released the statement he did on Sunday.
Do not have a clue why he released the statement he did on Sunday.I suspect the pressure on him to close the investigation prior to the election was mega intense, whether the investigation was completed or not.
Williamsmith
11-9-16, 12:20am
Im your average white middleclass male. I make up well over half of the country especially if you include my influence over family and friends. And I am angry.
I am embarrassed that our country has lost its standing amongst other powerful nations.
I am sick of special interests getting special treatment.
I consider urban America to be a war zone and no one is doing anything about it.
I hate the media for constantly attacking our law enforcement and undermining authority in the public square.
I am sick that my kids are going to be worse off than I was at their age.
I think we have gone in the wrong direction for so many years that the establishment needs a shock and drastic measures are called for.
I am willing to create chaos so as to restore order and reclaim my place in this country.
I am tired of checking my words before I speak them just because I may offend someone who needs to just get on with their lives.
I am ready for real change and I'm not going to be like the poor and expect it or like the very rich and purchase it.......no I am going to demand it and make it so.
I believe our condition calls for drastic measures and I am tired of sitting on the sidelines.
I am angry that I have to work to let people come here and enjoy all the benefits,for free.
So I am backing a man who isn't afraid to offend some and who will really put the people who caused this on notice.
I am angry and my guy will make you feel uncomfortable.
So what are you going to do about it?
It's ok people.......The Wall Won't be All That Big.
https://youtu.be/Iv6C8q_8hJU
ToomuchStuff
11-9-16, 11:35am
It's ok people.......The Wall Won't be All That Big.
https://youtu.be/Iv6C8q_8hJU
I think this is what you were wanting to link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yq_sQKGuiW8
Speaking of walls - has Canada started discussion on building one yet? I guess their immigration website crashed this morning.
Speaking of walls - has Canada started discussion on building one yet? I guess their immigration website crashed this morning.
It could be our version of the Mariel Boatlift. Thousands of b-list celebrities and disappointed statists washing up on the beaches around Thunder Bay demanding asylum and extra foam on their lattes.
Folks seem to forget that Canada has to approve them!
Folks seem to forget that Canada has to approve them!
Canada is pretty friendly to immigrants who show up with cash, who are in good health, and who can speak French.
I've been looking at Canadian real estate for the past 12 months, quite seriously. Not Trump/Clinton dependent, funny though that would be. They have some very interesting tax rules concerning capital gains, and if WA State implements a state income tax, as a retiree it will be much more reasonable for me to be Canadian. With the current real estate prices there, I could also set aside a fair bit of extra cash when I "downsize" from here.
That poutine stuff is turning out to be more of a challenge than I thought, though.
Al Sharpton, for example, is probably someone Canada wouldn't want. Hell, Mexico probably wouldn't want him either.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.