hntnhole Posted July 5 Report Posted July 5 5 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: The following is off the cuff, and not well thought out... If that's the case, you wear rather intelligent shirts (including the cuffs). 5 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: "nobody knows what i'm going to do," Including, crucially him. 5 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: To me it feels like, with Trump, the US has taken the route of joining the bully dictators in the world Agreed. To the Magaroid crowd, braggadocio, blaring insults, negativity in all it's hideous forms seems somehow attractive in a President. The underlying reasons could be manifest and many. A lack of curiosity about the world, other than how to demean it, is the hallmark of a disinterested, self-centered, self-focused bs artist, who's spent his 70-some years learning the craft of Circus Barker. ripping off every other person/entity he possibly can to inflate his own ego. I laughed when I read the phrase (bully pulpit - as if he'd ever been within shouting distance of an actual pulpit). 5 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: those kinds of rulers are good for the long term stability of the world Entirely agreed. Not the good of long term stability, not the individuals themselves, and certainly not the entire world. To these kinds of so-called Leaders, stability is to them, as kryptonite is to Superman, The more the population concentrates on the blaring trumpet of the day, the less they are likely to recognize the abject failures of the phony guy. 1 1 Quote
hntnhole Posted July 5 Report Posted July 5 4 hours ago, PozBearWI said: To some extent, maybe our challenge is recognizing where the insane genius gets his power I would say to a great extent; the more obvious it becomes, the easier to counter it. Pandering to the fears, anxieties of those citizens that have been less successful is easy as can be. It's inspiring them to a more productive thought-process, introducing programs to assist them, rather than push them even farther down would be far more humane than stirring the pots of hatreds. Yet, the clever conmen have always managed to figure out how to demean others, and thus seemingly make themselves attractive to the less-advantaged. Apparently, some more clever folks in the Administration have taught His Nibs that lesson: the most disadvantageous aspects of the Big Bullshit Bill won't even take effect until after the midterms. Clever, craven, and crass. 4 hours ago, PozBearWI said: It feels like we need fact checkers to check the fact checkers to check the "media" and help us slough off the crap to help us focus... I agree .... and here we are. This is why I enjoy BZ so much: we get to express our ideas, exchange viewpoints, consider and re-consider issues of the day. My only wish is, one day the subject of Government-studies will be re-introduced into our public schools. It's inexcusable that there aren't any required courses in that subject these days. It used to be called Civics, but that or any other name would be a huge investment in some measure of awareness in the general population. To the "Where is Cronkite" issue, where indeed is his bequeathment to the current crop of tv "personalities"? Look only to the current Cabinet the President has chosen to run the country. Dullards, drunks, whoremongers, insipid fools - to enure that none of them outshine His Nibs, scrambling only to earn his favor instead of offering him one scintilla of "wisdom". One could enlarge that conundrum to the Republikans in Congress as well. Yes-men/women to a one. Cowards, concerned only with ensuring the Presidential Mouth doesn't go after themselves. 5 hours ago, PozBearWI said: we need fact checkers to check the fact checkers to check the "media" and help us slough off the crap Or, more plainly put, honest, well-reasoned women and men. Some of the major media is more honest than others, but we're in a "truth-desert" these days. BUT - we get to come here to BZ to discuss and share with others, so that's at least something. 1 Quote
hntnhole Posted July 5 Report Posted July 5 3 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: who among us would have actually chosen either of those selections? Well, some of us did. She possess impeccable credentials, experience, intelligence, particularly compared to what she was running against. If her only "negative" possession was being a woman of color, and thus denied votes, then our country is in deeper trouble then we think. Her opponent possessed none of these attributes, "claiming" (read: lying about) all kinds of pseudo-impressive accomplishments, none of which has proven true. Insolvency, failure at numerous businesses, an obnoxious temperament, pandering to the populations unworthy fears instead of offering sound proposals beneficial to all citizens. Remarkably, many didn't even "bother" to vote at all. And, you're correct: any successful candidate for President must include the needs of all citizens, not merely of their own political party. 3 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: i don't think most Americans have much of a clue about what is in a 1000 page bill How could we? The great percentage of that unholy mess of a bill wasn't even read by most of our Representatives/Congressperson. And that is the fault of the media. Ever slow-to-learn, most Americans are too busy with their day-to-day responsibilities to study proposed bills in Congress. I would guess that there are enough Congresspersons who didn't read the entire bill (which is their damn job) to sink a ship. Plus, most Americans expect that their Congresspersons will actually do their jobs - before it it too late. That's been the expectation for 249 years, and has served us well. But this is a different day now. Giving the insanely-wealthy such inordinate monetary rewards is nothing short of an arrestable offence. 3 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: To me, it comes down to trust I agree. It used to be a valid assumption that we could trust those who we elect to Congress. Clearly, one of the parties has clearly been fucked into abject compliance with the Hater in Chief, to the point that care was taken in the voting process to make sure it would pass, so that a handful could vote "no" - assumedly an effort to help their re-election efforts. All the while, Goebbels was yammering on their cellphones, threatening this, that, and the next thing. Apparently, we citizens have made their jobs in Congress a little bit too cushy. If there's one lesson to be learned by the American Voters, it's trust no one. 4 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: They are also America Lets hope they all don't get sent to those ultra-heinous prisons in South America. 1 1 Quote
tallslenderguy Posted July 5 Author Report Posted July 5 50 minutes ago, hntnhole said: Well, some of us did. And i was among those who voted for Harris. To clarify, what i am saying is she was a last minute decision. I don't think i am alone in how big of a part money plays in choosing candidates for president, and we get to choose, realistically, from two. If we had a system where the playing field was level when it comes to campaign financing, i think it would make a big difference in the choices? Idk, i think it would allow (force?) Americans to be more engaged in the process of who becomes their representative. 1 Quote
hntnhole Posted July 6 Report Posted July 6 (edited) 22 hours ago, tallslenderguy said: (force?) We part ways on that particular issue. Nations - even great ones - fade when a sizable portion of citizens of a Republic turn away from paying attention to the things that matter, either by sheer laziness in civic duty, or malign intentions. I can't imagine a way to "force" citizens of any nation to pay attention, care, when a majority of those citizens have lost interest in working towards that "More Perfect Union". It seems that everyone that doesn't quite fit the "ideal" is being denigrated, from those imported centuries ago as "property" to refugees from extreme poverty or denigration elsewhere in the world, on and on. Worse, when those citizens no longer care who sits in the White House, pandering to their fears and insecurities. I suppose the most appropriate phrase would be We're at a Crossroads. And, that outcome can only be decided by the citizens, (discounting an actual coup). Cleverly, the Administration has covered the worst of their tracks by commencing the most egregious repressions until after the midterms, thus appearing (to those not paying attention) that nothing all that disgusting is scheduled to take place until it's themselves that feel the boot of repression crushing their balls. (one last thing: I would have been stunned had you done otherwise) Edited July 6 by hntnhole the oblique reference 1 Quote
PozBearWI Posted July 7 Report Posted July 7 Considering the 24 election, our system has determined the election won by Trump. And at least in the local election (where I am a poll worker); it appears unlikely the Dominion voting machine we use to tally paper ballots was in sync for valid ballots in and counted; I didn't sort them by Donnie, Kamala and other myself. So I can't attest to the accuracy. I'm sure many of us have some awareness of at least exploration by some on whether Elon and his networks enabled a loophole. To me that sounds sort of flat earther. Then too; the actions of ICE and HHS are deeply concerning. And the disconnect has me at least glad that someone is exploring the "did Elon somehow influence how votes were counted". Resistance to Donnie and his cult antics seems to be rising; and so, time will tell right? Quote
hntnhole Posted July 7 Report Posted July 7 5 hours ago, PozBearWI said: whether Elon and his networks enabled a loophole An interesting hypothesis, and it hadn't occurred to me. Other than his uncountable wealth, we really don't know that much about him. I am still thanking friends in WI for handing him that solid defeat, but I don't really know that much about him either. I am, however, looking forward to his attempt to start a replacement political party for the R's, now that they're steeping in total, abject shame. All that's happened so far is the announcement of forming a new political party, and if money can do that, he'll get his new political party. Interestingly, he seems to sense that the Congressional R's have shamed themselves so clearly, so deeply, almost the entirety of the R's in the Senate, that they seem merely opaque shadows of human beings, politically-speaking. Quote
PozBearWI Posted July 7 Report Posted July 7 @hntnhole indeed and well phrased; an interesting hypothesis. If anything comes of those studying, I'll be interested to read their data and rationale. I'm a poll worker and am pretty close to how it all works. Having had a career in logic; and knowing how many reviews have occurred, including some hand recounts in my state; I am not counting on it being proven true. So yeah, interesting hypothesis. A couple of "maybe logically possible" but with no other corroborating data, not counting on it. I was surprised and disappointed when grandpa Joe said "yes" for a second term. Was it a pissing match of two old guys (not far off from being peers of mine; we're within four years of each other)? There's been a bit too much of that; and not the fun way in my generation. The strongest candidate in any race, is the one who shows themself to be the most capable of drawing together an effective team. And only a few do well at that. IMO the sweet spot for presidents would be the 50 to 70 window. Combined with a demonstrated ability to work through complex facts with trustworthy advisors to make the many difficult decisions that go with any leadership job. But unlike CEO's presidents also set or reflect the moral compass (historically). And maybe that is exactly where we are collectively. Too much Game of Thrones and Hunger Games worldview that we are all competitors. 1 Quote
hntnhole Posted July 8 Report Posted July 8 20 hours ago, PozBearWI said: I was surprised and disappointed when grandpa Joe said "yes" for a second term As was I. I have come to believe that Jill (and other family members, perhaps) was most responsible for pushing her husband to run for a second term. More, I think it was out of her love for him, that she couldn't accept what was so clear to others. But, it happened, that page has been turned now, and I don't disparage what she did out of love for her husband. Sadly, I'm no stranger to enduring the intellectual / physical decline of a loved one from that hellish malady; it's the worst nightmare possible. I don't have enemies, but if I did, I would never wish that tragedy on anyone, for any reason. Quote
hntnhole Posted July 8 Report Posted July 8 Interestingly, the PM of Israel has just visited the White House, and not a whisper in the major media about what transpired. I know Hamas is / was demanding their usual, and Netanyahu was still stirring that pot, but oddly, nothing is being reported. Was it a wasted opportunity? Or are there some nasty surprises up someone's sleeve(s) ..... Quote
hntnhole Posted 23 hours ago Report Posted 23 hours ago While we here in the US are consumed with all the Epstein fallout, tragically there are those in Gaza that are consumed - literally - by hunger, and they number in the thousands. Little kids are starving to death. Older folks are starving to death. Everyone is starving. to. death. How the Israeli's can tolerate this insult to humanity is beyond me. Is generations upon generations of hatred the only answer now? Netanyahu deserves to starve, right along with the Gazans. If the President weren't so wrapped up in his desperate attempts to get through his latest mess, maybe he'd have a moment to call Nettie up and set him straight, but that would be asking the ignorant to inform the depraved. The US could have prevented all of this with a swift kick in the balls to the PM of Israel a long time ago. Can we at least - at the very least - help feed the starving millions over there? No, apparently the Odious One is oblivious to anyone other than his own fat overweight self. Not since Vietnam have I been so ashamed of my country. 2 Quote
Recommended Posts