POTUS Trump Thread

Health insurance rip off lying FDA big bankers buying
Fake computer crashes dining
Cloning while they're multiplying
Fashion shoots with Beck and Hanson
Courtney Love, and Marilyn Manson
You're all fakes
Run to your mansions
Come around
We'll kick your ass in

Postby tgk » Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:58 pm

can't wait to read the millions of emails of obama getting bad advice from rahm and bill daley
User avatar
tgk
 
Posts: 34603
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:45 pm
Location: Chicago

Postby Buzz Fledderjohn » Thu Feb 21, 2019 1:58 pm

easy wrote:Fuck it: We're doing 7G.


Image
User avatar
Buzz Fledderjohn
 
Posts: 22554
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:21 pm

Postby cartola » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:16 pm

How else will repubs win 2020 without 7g?
User avatar
cartola
 
Posts: 7739
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:36 pm
Location: The Garden of Earthly Delights

Postby coop » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:26 pm

User avatar
coop
 
Posts: 15734
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:29 am
Location: San Junipero

Postby Riverchrist » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:30 pm

tgk wrote:


User avatar
Riverchrist
 
Posts: 8801
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 5:07 pm
Location: Ohmtown

Postby Sweet Gregory Pectin » Thu Feb 21, 2019 2:40 pm

shooshis just cat scraps
User avatar
Sweet Gregory Pectin
 
Posts: 8508
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:00 pm
Location: What are: Really Funny?

Postby coop » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:09 pm



User avatar
coop
 
Posts: 15734
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:29 am
Location: San Junipero

Postby coop » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:10 pm

"within weeks"
User avatar
coop
 
Posts: 15734
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:29 am
Location: San Junipero

Postby snuggle » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:12 pm

Hundreds of weeks
User avatar
snuggle
 
Posts: 2326
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 7:17 pm

Postby easy » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:13 pm

what if roger stone is the Zodiac
User avatar
easy
does it
 
Posts: 555
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 2:07 pm

Postby snuggle » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:14 pm

Excited about the stone/orridge collab

The Hamberder Lady
User avatar
snuggle
 
Posts: 2326
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 7:17 pm

Postby coop » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:27 pm

User avatar
coop
 
Posts: 15734
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:29 am
Location: San Junipero

Postby the scofflaw » Thu Feb 21, 2019 3:41 pm

sure why not?
A novel by Chuck Palahniuk.
User avatar
the scofflaw
 
Posts: 10569
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:45 pm
Location: lexington

Postby Frank » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:01 pm

coop wrote:


hmm yes that is definitely a question
dog diarrhea in my beard
User avatar
Frank
 
Posts: 30027
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:34 pm
Location: :ahuh:

Postby Jake SPEED » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:01 pm

cartola wrote:Image


Looks like if Pence took off his glove and turned into a toon.
Jake SPEED
 
Posts: 341
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 11:21 pm

Postby worrywort » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:06 pm

User avatar
worrywort
 
Posts: 13020
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:31 pm
Location: california

Postby coop » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:06 pm

User avatar
coop
 
Posts: 15734
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:29 am
Location: San Junipero

Postby toots » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:12 pm

User avatar
toots
 
Posts: 4861
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:21 pm
Location: petroleum, IN

Postby Frank » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:19 pm

worrywort wrote:


it’s like they are doing their best to cause a recession
dog diarrhea in my beard
User avatar
Frank
 
Posts: 30027
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:34 pm
Location: :ahuh:

Postby mites » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:26 pm

in times of economic stress there's often additional racial resentment and xenophobia so it's a win win for them on that end!
User avatar
mites
 
Posts: 35731
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:41 pm
Location: Bmore

Postby loaf angel » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:26 pm

the Acosta-22 is what stumps all of the Q psychos
goldsoundz wrote:i'd bang that moron
User avatar
loaf angel
 
Posts: 35852
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:28 pm
Location: Jerklyn

Postby loaf angel » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:27 pm

"keep your enemies closer" is common bullshit response
goldsoundz wrote:i'd bang that moron
User avatar
loaf angel
 
Posts: 35852
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:28 pm
Location: Jerklyn

Postby Frank » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:30 pm

Stone making $47k/month is boggling my mind
dog diarrhea in my beard
User avatar
Frank
 
Posts: 30027
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 4:34 pm
Location: :ahuh:

Postby mites » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:39 pm

Frank wrote:Stone making $47k/month is boggling my mind

he's having a hard time paying rent and putting food on the table plz be respectful
User avatar
mites
 
Posts: 35731
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:41 pm
Location: Bmore

Postby Milquetoaster Strudels » Thu Feb 21, 2019 4:58 pm

coop wrote:

:twisted: my favorite genre of Trump stories are the ones that really underscore what a pathetic loser he is
User avatar
Milquetoaster Strudels
 
Posts: 11812
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Postby rik pik » Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:07 pm

badhat wrote:
joe wrote:
grindrdaddy wrote:not to pull a glenn greenwald, but i kinda think the historian dude made a mistake with tucker. like i think tucker sucks really bad and should largely not be taken seriously, but he's seems to be getting more into his socially conservative/fiscally liberal kinda thing. historian dude should have gone along with tucker awhile longer and gotten off some better and more detailed stuff about economic inequality and taxes before dropping the heat.


tucker carlson is a white supremacist. if you are going to appear on his show it should be to take him down a peg


did this thread cover the fact that Davos hero might be kinda racist too?

sorry if i missed it (thread)



(tldr: skip to the bottom to see how, 5 years ago, rutger bregman wrote about being embarrassed about his zwarte piet stuff from 2 years before that.)

i've been decently aware of rutger bregman's writing & podcasts in the past couple years (paying member of De Correspondent; which recently launched in USA btw). so when i read this post & tweet yesterday, that ran quite counter to what i know about his work & politics. i thought if i got the time, i'll try 'n dig up some data and post it. but rutger bregman made that a bit easier for me: today he published an article titled Why I decided to publish my interview with Fox News' Tucker Carlson. i threw it into gtranslate (translation not optimal here and there):

Last Monday, February 11, I was interviewed by the influential presenter Tucker Carlson of the American television channel Fox News. The interview was not broadcast, after which I decided to release a recording myself. These were my considerations.

Why did I decide to make my interview with Tucker Carlson of Fox News public

Last month I was a guest at the World Economic Forum, the annual meeting of the global elite in the Swiss ski resort of Davos. During a panel on the 'costs of inequality' I noticed that a lot of things were discussed during the conference, except for the one topic that really should be discussed. Taxes.

My speech
View my speech in Davos here back. was viewed a lot, after which interview requests from all over the world poured in. One of those requests came from the American Tucker Carlson, currently the most popular presenter of the radical right-wing television channel Fox News. Carlson wanted to congratulate me on my speech, in which I thought the 'globalist elites' had looked so good.

I doubted whether I should respond to the request. I am - softly - not a fan of Carlson and Fox News and did not want to have me put on their cart. In his television programs, Carlson approaches his guests very aggressively and constantly spreads lies about immigrants. Neo-Nazis do not just walk away with him.

Moreover, my criticism of the billionaires in Davos was just as good for Carlson and Fox News. The channel is in the hands of the wealthy Murdoch family, led by media tycoon Rupert Murdoch (1931), who is on good terms with Donald Trump. Carlson has been a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, an American think tank funded by billionaires and has been advocating for lower taxes and a smaller government.

Eventually, I decided to accept the interview request, but I also agreed to point out Carlson's hypocrisy. At two o'clock in the evening (eight o'clock in the evening in New York) I sat nervously in an Amsterdam studio, ready for the conversation. It ended in an abuse by Carlson, who was clearly not amused by my criticism.

Fox News decided not to broadcast the interview, but I myself had a recording of the conversation. Then I was dubing or I would make it public. The fact that I did this in the end has everything to do with the subject that, in my opinion, should be at the top of the political agenda.

This does not detract from the fact that there were practical questions (will they take me to court?) And also substantive doubts. At least one thing I should have done better. When Carlson asked me how he was influenced by the Murdochs and other billionaires, I should have actually quoted the American linguist Noam Chomsky. Years ago, when Chomsky received a similar question, he replied:

"I'm sure you believe what you say. But what I am saying is that if you had believed something else, you would not have been where you are now. "

Carlson naturally does not follow daily dictations of the Murdochs. But if he did not have the same ultra-right view of the world and was prepared to proclaim it, he would never have gotten that job as a Fox News anchor.

Finally, I wondered if I had not been too conceited and brutal during the interview. Whether it was not rude to interrupt Carlson so firmly. This is not normally the way I want to have conversations.

The consideration that ultimately played a decisive role was that the conversation was about a subject that should be in the news every day: the gaping prosperity gap. Fox News has been able to divert attention from this enormous inequality for years, also with stories in which immigrants are the scapegoat. That turned out to be a very lucrative business model.

I think this video can help to keep the really important topics on the agenda. Namely: the corrupting effect of money in American politics, the extreme inequality in the world today, and the large-scale tax avoidance by the richest. I'm curious what you think.


this exchange in the comments section of the article also lays out his thinking:

random user's comment:
Perhaps this was not the most tactical move. And I do not know if Fox's audience is learning from it. Some will harden because you take off their hero. Some see how your hard but neatly worded words are "parsed" with a scheldt cannonade.

Personally, I think you can just have honest criticism of people and confront them, especially people with a public function.

I hope that more people - but if necessary via this video - will see your performance on Davos. Because that was just right.

rutger bregman's response:
I think it is how you think political change works. I believe that it is very important who determines the agenda. Which topics are discussed at all. If such a movie like this goes viral, then it's not going for a while about eg Islam / integration / immigration and so on (which, for example, always happens when someone like a Wilders does an abject proposal again), but in my opinion much more important topics such as inequality and tax avoidance.

Think also that Americans look at this movie differently because Carlson is much better known.


beyond this week's events: i know that in general he just hammers on taxes & broader socialist policies being the key to improving things. but i thought, lemme see what he has actually written about racial issues. i first found this 2018 article about debunking right-wing assertions in NL/europe that refugees commit crimes more often. then, i found the issue that this tweet must be related to. in 2016 his podcast had an episode called "racism". the About for that episode:

About five years ago, Rutger Bregman wrote another column in which he argued that the outrage about Black Pete had to be over. I quote: "We do not do racism and should not let ourselves be talked into by American nerve sufferers."

Rutger is now deeply ashamed of that (something he wrote about a column about earlier). Because if something has turned out in recent years, it is that racism is alive and kicking. And that we - two insanely white men - often have a blind spot for that.

This is why this time a conversation about racism with cultural anthropologist and correspondent Microrevolutions Sinan Çankaya.


the column referred to in there is a 2013 article of his titled "Freedom of changing opinion":

You do not encounter them often: people who have changed their opinion. Or rather, people who admit that they have changed their opinion. Where most opinions are ventilated - in politics and journalism - it happens as well as never.

It is strange. Voters float like never before and the world is changing faster than ever. But admit that we change our opinion? Are you crazy.

Yet we do it constantly. What once was healthy cosmopolitanism is now a twisted europhilia. What once was multicultural tolerance is now the naivety of the nineties. The PvdA of today is the VVD of the past and the VVD now rubs against positions where Hans Janmaat was still convicted.

"You have changed your mind" - it sounds like a reproach. But is it not precisely the intention of every decent debate? What do we have about a democracy that revels in the ventilation and consumption of our own opinion? Oh well, the freedom of expression, we can not get enough of it. 'The right to make a sound', the philosopher Stanley Fish once said. But what really comes under fire is the freedom of change of opinion.

"The problem with this world is that the fools and fanatics are always so sure of themselves, and the sages so full of doubts," wrote the British thinker Bertrand Russell years ago. You would say that openly changing opinions is a sign of strength, even intellectual courage. (Russell set a good example when the young philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein chopped up his life's work.)

Nevertheless, we prefer not to change our opinion. And if you have to, then preferably noiseless. We do not admit it, do not write it down. I thought: let me dig in my own archive. Where have I actually changed my mind?

Do not be scared, but Zwarte Piet immediately surfaced. At the end of 2011, I wrote that he is "black as hell because he is coming out of the chimney." I thought the 'grumble about racism' was heavily exaggerated: just a nice tradition, fun for the kids and no more nagging. It was one of my first columns in a newspaper and called many (negative) reactions - mission succeeded, you would say.

I have now changed my mind. What a bad piece.

I also walk happily along with the herd, because public opinion about Zwarte Piet seems to shift in its entirety. You can find it trivial, that annual joke about a children's party, but it is also a good example of how putting things on the agenda, making opinions and protesting makes sense. When Quinsy Gario ('Zwarte Piet is Racisme') was arrested two years ago, this resulted in a few messages in the margin. Meanwhile, the front pages are full of his story.

This is also the case with much larger debates, about the emancipation of women, the rise of homosexual tolerance and the success of Pim Fortuyn. Or think of the arrival of the smoking ban - first 'patronizing', now quite popular - or the growing attention for animal suffering. I would not be surprised if the views of the Party for the Animals would be widely shared in about thirty years. That's how it goes: ideas of dangers that are dangerous to the state can just become the new political correctness.

Words are deeds, thinking is doing. Milton Friedman, one of the founders of neoliberalism, understood that like no other. "We have to develop alternatives, keep them alive and make them available," he wrote. "Until the politically impossible becomes politically inevitable." Anyone who wants to change the world should not start with the poll of Maurice de Hond, but must realize that we can change our minds constantly, radically. It is a form of politics - and journalism - that we need more than ever. Especially in these times of 'crisis'.

One of the most exciting things about De Correspondent is that it puts our opinions on even smoother ice. Not only from the readers, also from the authors. For example, from day one, I was amazed at the quantity and quality of the reactions. That was a bit of a swallow. Because yes: I still find it exciting to publish. On the day of a piece I often wake up early, I watch too much on Twitter and I keep asking the same questions through my mind. Are there any spelling mistakes? Have I made a big mistake? The smallest point of criticism comes faster than the biggest compliment.

But that is fine, Friedman would say. Our biggest challenge is to build a platform together that is not the difference, but the change of opinion is central. Not because we are capricious tongues, but simply because we want to understand the world better - maybe even change it. Or as the economist John Maynard Keynes wrote:

'If the facts change, I change my opinion. What are you doing?'
please, stop, fueling my silent rage
User avatar
rik pik
 
Posts: 635
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 7:21 pm

Postby Big Oil » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:06 pm

incoherent grunting wrote:
delgriffith wrote:
Big Oil wrote:so I guess the executive branch just unilaterally asserting a U.S. citizen is not a U.S. citizen and denying them entry is going to pass largely uncommented on by our shit discourse huh

This is so fucked.

is this better or worse than extrajudicial execution by drone?

unequivocally worse and equating them is dumb
User avatar
Big Oil
 
Posts: 7100
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:59 pm

Postby Big Oil » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:22 pm

Feech La Manna wrote:

Obama... he sucks


Feech La Manna wrote:That's some "why do we need libraries when google exists" shit


guy forget wrote:Yeah it’s bad

I'm curious to hear guy's take on this, because as someone who has also spent literally years of my life in archives and saw the dividends of mass digitization over the course of my grad school career I think digitization is unequivocally a good thing and helps democratize access in a major way, so I'm baffled by these reactions. You shouldn't need a grant or the largesse of some research university and months or years of spare time to access historical sources. The article raises a few what-if scenarios about access to related documents and the potential for bad organization, but of course there are potential pitfalls and those ones would be present regardless of digitization (most physical archives are astonishingly poorly organized!).
User avatar
Big Oil
 
Posts: 7100
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2016 2:59 pm

Postby chowder julius » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:29 pm

most of his materials are probably born digital anyway
Image
User avatar
chowder julius
sweet girl fucking with an evil sorcerer
 
Posts: 16637
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 3:45 pm
Location: banned in dc

Postby chowder julius » Thu Feb 21, 2019 7:29 pm

wasn't there supposed to be a branch of the chicago public library on site?
Image
User avatar
chowder julius
sweet girl fucking with an evil sorcerer
 
Posts: 16637
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 3:45 pm
Location: banned in dc

PreviousNext

Return to Mamma Mia... Here We Go Again....

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bluemovers, doublethink0, Drinky, Eyeball Kid, head gardener, hit record, Hot Carl, Julius Sumner Miller, launchpad, Link, marble, mcwop23, minerals, NegativeCapability, Night porter, nocents, pony, Prof. Horatio Hufnagel, rankoutsider, shred igniter, Wrong Titus, Zardoz