Politics, local-national-global-galactic

[Bartimaeus]

2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

It amazes me to no end. Forget for a moment that Trump did some seriously wrong stuff. And is getting away with it. Just set that aside. It amazes me that the Vice President's son, who knows s--t-all about energy is paid (according to some) $50k a month. to be on the Board of Directors of a foreign energy company he had no prior dealings with. Sure, international business was his business but none of it was in Europe and none of it was energy. Now the Republicans assume automatically it was dirty. The Democrats all assume it smells like rosewater. Nothing is ever wrong when my tribe does it, etc. But the mainstream media, whose job it is to be curious and shine the light of truth just looks the other way. 

It is not at all a stretch of logic to think maybe something was wrong. That maybe Ukraine was buying favors from the Obama admin by hiring the Vice President's son as a well paid ringer. Especially when a Ukrainian prosecutor looking into it is fired and the Vice President publically brags about demanding it. Is it really such a leap to think something is not on the up and up here?

Of course none of that justifies soliciting an investigation for electoral benefit. Nothing could have come of it. It was over. They got away with it. It just amazes me how so few question whether something wrong was done. It doesn't matter. There are few honest people between the Potomac and the Anacostia. 

Wait, what? I thought the Hunter Biden part of this was about Joe Biden getting fired the prosecutor that was maybe looking into prosecuting Hunter Biden, not about how Hunter Biden was hired in the first place. I'm sure the fact that Hunter Biden was hired was in no small part due to his father being who his father is, but unless there's actually some kind of evidence that Joe Biden deliberately and unduly used his office (or the influence thereof) to make it happen (as opposed to an independent decision in an attempt to buy undue influence made by an independent company, which it technically is even though I'm not sure how true that is in practice being a major energy company in Ukraine), that doesn't really seem like actionable reason to look into it.

Is the fact that it "something happened" really evidence in of itself? Not sure that I want that to start being our standard of evidence for starting investigations against political foes - the word "investigation" will soon lose all meaning. Personally, I am much more interested in the fired prosecutor side of things than how he was hired (cronyism is unfortunately a pretty worldwide standard to begin with anyways, though we should definitely hold our highest representatives and executives to a similarly high standard...I just think we need something more than "well, something happened" before we start investigations), as that story has been greatly confused. Though it should be noted that I am grossed out at the thought of voting for Biden this November, so I am not your target here to begin with.

Edited February 1, 2020 by Bartimaeus

[Gromnir]

hunter biden had no business getting the job with burisma. truth. bad optics.

however, conspiracy theory o' getting the prosecutor fired to somehow help biden's son is just complete and utter nonsense.  is questionable shokin, the corrupt ukrainian prosecutor, were even investigating burisma at the time he were fired, and is no evidence at all hunter biden were being targeted, so is weird how this story endures 'mongst the conservative radio crowd. 

funny thing is, the conspiracy theory mighta' been been more believable if biden had somehow undermined attempts to get shokin fired. IF joe biden had interfered with US efforts and european union demands to get shokin removed so as to keep a corrupt prosecutor in place, one who might be convinced to go easy on burisma just to protect his son's job, then we might have a story. but somehow the conservative radio ilk complete reverses plausible and implausible.

*shrug*

conspiracy theory nutters is just so weird. is absence o' evidence which sets their brains afire with suspicion. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah, that's what I was confused about. So Biden brags about getting Shokin fired, people interpret that to mean "Biden got prosecutor who was looking into his son fired!!!", but from what I very quickly read, Shokin had been starving the Burisma investigation and nothing about it seemed to be aimed at Hunter Biden himself, so none of that really adds up.

[ComradeYellow]

On 1/31/2020 at 4:30 AM, Maedhros said:

Of course, the times of today are being compared with the 90s, where the west came out of the Cold War with renewed optimism.

 

I'm not feeling that, only divisiveness as the Center deteriorates anf Left Wing and Right Wing alternatives seem ti be catching steam.  Which way will we go?  In any case I'm getting the impression that lots of the younger generations want some kind of viable alternative.

[Gromnir]

4 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

Ideally that is what a Representative should be doing. A Senator however is a different story. The 17 Amendment was a mistake I think. The US would be better served if the Senate were the representatives of the State governments. Plus that should invest voters more in the outcomes of their State legislature elections. 

As for Rand Paul I guess the apple fell farther from the tree than I thought. Or he just found integrity too expensive a trait to maintain.

 

4 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

Government loves one thing above all else... money. https://thehill.com/policy/finance/480851-global-digital-tax-talks-to-move-forward

Businesses have to EARN your money. They receive what you pay them willingly. You know P... P.... Profit (you have to imagine a millennial sneer spitting that word out). Governments just take it. By force even. Yet somehow some people find that virtuous. 

citizens united decision once again rears its ugly head. the super pacs spawned in a post citizens united  America has even senators scrambling to cozy up to any number o' interests, transparent trading integrity for campaign dollars needed to finance increasing expensive reelection campaigns. super pacs exist 'cause o' citizens united and super pacs is one o' the most terrible realities o' 2020 fed politics. 

mccain-feingold were a once in a generation bit o' legislation in that it had bipartisan support (though hardly universal support)and were fundamentally altering the political landscape in washington. took many congressmen, working against their personal interests, to get mccain-feingold passed. literal once-in-a-lifetime legislation.

the Court, in its naivety, appeared convinced disclosure requirements would counter the parade o' horribles imagined by supporters o' mccain-feingold and enumerated by J. stevens. the explosion o' dark money political contributions following the citizens united decision reveals just how wrong were the Justices o' the majority. 

terrible reality is it is unlikely Congress takes another shot at serious campaign finance reform in any o' our lifetimes. as we noted, mccain-feingold were a once-in-a-lifetime aberration o' Congressmen acting against interest. perhaps worse is recognition even if Congress did try again, the Court might obtuse refuse to look to reality and instead focus 'pon utopian views o' First Amendment standards regarding political speech.

HA! Good Fun!

[Elerond]

I find it bit funny how much more people bring up how Hunter Biden got high paying job in private company, without any other clear merit but, his father being vice president of US, considering current president's daughter and son of law work as high paying advisers in White House without any merit that show that they are qualified to work in such position. 

[Guard Dog]

Look guys I am sot saying there is definitely some shady stuff going on with Biden, Barisma, and the government of Ukraine. I am saying a lot of people who should be otherwise suspicious of such dismiss it out of hand. Mainly because of the political parties of the people involved.

[Guard Dog]

17 hours ago, Gromnir said:

 

citizens united decision once again rears its ugly head. the super pacs spawned in a post citizens united  America has even senators scrambling to cozy up to any number o' interests, transparent trading integrity for campaign dollars needed to finance increasing expensive reelection campaigns. super pacs exist 'cause o' citizens united and super pacs is one o' the most terrible realities o' 2020 fed politics. 

mccain-feingold were a once in a generation bit o' legislation in that it had bipartisan support (though hardly universal support)and were fundamentally altering the political landscape in washington. took many congressmen, working against their personal interests, to get mccain-feingold passed. literal once-in-a-lifetime legislation.

the Court, in its naivety, appeared convinced disclosure requirements would counter the parade o' horribles imagined by supporters o' mccain-feingold and enumerated by J. stevens. the explosion o' dark money political contributions following the citizens united decision reveals just how wrong were the Justices o' the majority. 

terrible reality is it is unlikely Congress takes another shot at serious campaign finance reform in any o' our lifetimes. as we noted, mccain-feingold were a once-in-a-lifetime aberration o' Congressmen acting against interest. perhaps worse is recognition even if Congress did try again, the Court might obtuse refuse to look to reality and instead focus 'pon utopian views o' First Amendment standards regarding political speech.

HA! Good Fun!

My memory of the exact reasoning for the finding of the majority in Citizens United is fading. And it's entirely too early for heavy reading. But in general I am 100% in favor of the guarantees of rights and liberties being interpreted as broadly as possible. Even if the outcome for doing so is a net negative. Clarence Thomas said the "Legal questions have objectively correct answers." Assume for a moment the majority decision was legally correct but led to a predictably bad effect on the politics of the country. As a judge where would you go? The objectively correct answer and damn the consequences or the "better for the country" answer and a deficient answer? It would be a hell of a choice to have to make. The latter means your are using the power of your seat to impose your will on people. Some justices were definitely OK with that. Stevens comes to mind. Most are not. 

Roe is another one like it. It was decided on a principle of privacy that does not exist. But strike it down might be objectively correct but create a horrifying mess. Of course Congress could take the whole thing off the table and pass a law. Not that they have any appetite to wade into that murky water. But I bet the Court wishes they would. 

Edited February 2, 2020 by Guard Dog
spelling

[Bartimaeus]

4 hours ago, Elerond said:

I find it bit funny how much more people bring up how Hunter Biden got high paying job in private company, without any other clear merit but, his father being vice president of US, considering current president's daughter and son of law work as high paying advisers in White House without any merit that show that they are qualified to work in such position. 

Difference is Trump is clearly and obviously corrupt to his very core and everyone but maybe his cultists knows it (that and the people attempting to completely ignore virtually everything politics-related that they hear, which there are also a lot of these days) so it's kind of small potatoes relative to everything else. Trump is held to a different standard than everyone else just because of how much he's done and already gotten away with (it's part of his appeal, I guess!), whereas it's a lot easier to grasp onto the *one* thing Biden may have been corrupt about and repeat it until it virtually becomes a meme. And hey, Biden's a politician (a lately pretty unpleasant one at that, too) - I'm sure he's done corrupt things that we don't know about it, just like most politicians. Legalized bribery is still around at least, after all.

[Zoraptor]

The practical difference is that Trump employs his own family while Biden's son was employed by a foreign company. One's nepotism which certainly ain't great, but the other is at least potentially far more corrupt.

(Ivanka's position is unusual, but as I understand it not unprecedented; Hillary was an 'executive' 1st lady for a fair bit of Bill's presidency and was heavily involved in things like attempted medical reforms. Jared otoh is a waste of space, at best, and if he really got his business bailed out by Muhammed Bin Sawman that would be at very least equivalent to the Berisma situation, ie a very bad look, at minimum)

[ComradeYellow]

Trump and Biden are both the white trash candidates.  As in, they would rather get in bed with each other than deal with any kind of socio-economic and cultural overhaul. 

[Chilloutman]

is it not racism?

[ComradeYellow]

Just now, Chilloutman said:

is it not racism?

No not really, just telling it like it is.  Let's face it, the worst aspects of both candidates are in fact, white trash!  Not in their entirety, just when you crunch them down to their worst.  And what do all white trash have in common besides low iqs?  They absolutely hate Marxism and leftism of any shape or form.  Even the word triggers them, without any sort of understanding or comprehension of it.  Which leaves me with little choice but to label them as 'white trash'.

They brought it on themselves, I didn't start the fire.

[Chilloutman]

now I am sure its racist, also low level trolling

[Gorth]

1 hour ago, ComradeMaster said:

And what do all white trash have in common besides low iqs?

Nationalism... this appeal to the lower brain functions seems to be a universal thing. Maybe it appeals to some inner, tribal instinct in humans? World War I + II says hello.

Why work to improve  your lot in life when you can go out in a blaze of glory, sacrificing life and limb for the privilege of inflicting atrocities on your fellow man, because something as abstract as a country demands it of you?

 

(that was a trick question, the people that runs the country wants YOU to die for them, but it's an easier sell to the gullible masses who are all flag toting and anthem singing, switching off higher brain functions at the same time).

[Guard Dog]

I'm curious. What qualifies as "white trash" in your minds?

[Hurlshort]

4 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

I'm curious. What qualifies as "white trash" in your minds?

Budweiser.

[Guard Dog]

Just now, Hurlshot said:

Budweiser.

Better than Miller Lite!

[Gfted1]

Any parent that uses their power/influence/money to better their kids position should be sent directly to prison. 

[Guard Dog]

44 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Any parent that uses their power/influence/money to better their kids position should be sent directly to prison. 

Along with socialists apparently. I'd stay out of Montana ComradeMaster

https://time.com/5776337/montana-rodney-garcia-socialists-shot-jailed/

[Keyrock]

1 hour ago, Guard Dog said:

I'm curious. What qualifies as "white trash" in your minds?

Miller High Life. Years ago I would have also wrote Pabst Blue Ribbon, but the hipsters stole that from the white trash folk.

[Malcador]

2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

I'm curious. What qualifies as "white trash" in your minds?

Hockey fans.

[Gromnir]

On 2/2/2020 at 5:36 AM, Guard Dog said:

 

Roe is another one like it. It was decided on a principle of privacy that does not exist. But strike it down might be objectively correct but create a horrifying mess. 

might not be as convincing as you believe to rando lump Court decisions together which depend 'pon complete different jurisprudential reasoning. is little basis to analogize the two cases.

however, we will observe how dumping the entire fail on citizens is an oversimplification as is hardly a single case which has broken campaign finance. and sure, it resonates as fair that if michael bloomberg or some other billionaire may spend hundreds o' millions o' dollars on a commercial/film temporal proximate to primaries, is no reason a corporation composed o' less wealthy people should be prevented from doing so. the thing is, citizens reasoning depends on twin pillars o' anticipated disclosure requirements and the existence o' corruption laws. is not citizens but rather a complete different line o' cases which undercut traditional notions o' campaign finance corruption and made so outright bribery is actual required to trigger corruption protections. furthermore, Congress could enact meaningful disclosure laws. immediate following citizens there were a push to enact such legislation, but it failed. citizens is not the only problem, but invocation o' the particular fraught decision is convenient shorthand when lamenting current state o' campaign finance and the Court's complicity in the problems which plague election spending.

idealized notions o' free speech w/o any recognition o' realities has never been the Court's mo. after all, were 100 years o' cases which citizens functional overturned, cases which warned o' the obvious dangers o' faceless corporations and anonymous donors generating war chests to functional buy elections while simultaneous avoiding tax and disclosure laws. ignore reality has never been an admirable trait in a Justice. 

ok, now let's talk 'bout SCOTUS recent gerrymandering decisions...

HA! Good Fun!

[BruceVC]

10 hours ago, ComradeMaster said:

No not really, just telling it like it is.  Let's face it, the worst aspects of both candidates are in fact, white trash!  Not in their entirety, just when you crunch them down to their worst.  And what do all white trash have in common besides low iqs?  They absolutely hate Marxism and leftism of any shape or form.  Even the word triggers them, without any sort of understanding or comprehension of it.  Which leaves me with little choice but to label them as 'white trash'.

They brought it on themselves, I didn't start the fire.

People dont need to hate Marxism. You can see how it has failed to become  a relevant alternative to Capitalism or the free market., you can see how the genesis of Communism was created by people who had real criticism for there government....but there is the problem. Russia had an appalling government, the Russian monarchy wasn't competent on a number of levels and fundamentally failed to transform the lives of there citizens... Tzar Nicholos was a terrible leader and wasted millions of Russian lives in the First World War

So the Communist manifesto was ostensibly about a better way of government but it was a comparison to a flawed and corrupt monarchy .....so Communism was always going to fail because of what Lenin thought was the normal way of government  

[ComradeYellow]

36 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

People dont need to hate Marxism. You can see how it has failed to become  a relevant alternative to Capitalism or the free market., you can see how the genesis of Communism was created by people who had real criticism for there government....but there is the problem. Russia had an appalling government, the Russian monarchy wasn't competent on a number of levels and fundamentally failed to transform the lives of there citizens... Tzar Nicholos was a terrible leader and wasted millions of Russian lives in the First World War

So the Communist manifesto was ostensibly about a better way of government but it was a comparison to a flawed and corrupt monarchy .....so Communism was always going to fail because of what Lenin thought was the normal way of government  

But the thing here is, some form of state sector in the economy is a great thing, and corporations should not dictate government policy, which is how the U.S. government functions.  It's basically fascism.  Government should be above the private sector and offer some jobs themselves.

There is a huge sector of the U.S. population, mainly in the south, which thinks Karl Marx means Satan, even though the United States, down to brass tacks, is technically a mixed economy (much of U.S. farming is controlled by the fed).

Also, Russian Fake News indicates they're stepping in the right direction, perhaps we could take notes from them?

https://thesaker.is/the-new-russian-government-a-much-needed-evolution-but-not-a-revolution/