Jump to content

U.S. Politics: Dining on Doritos with Derrida and Donald


lokisnow

Recommended Posts

Continue

 

this post was too good to pass up for thread title inspiration:

14 hours ago, OldGimletEye said:

Which group or groups are we talking about here?
Are we talking about white people, and particularly male white people, that feel they are being screwed as they are losing status relative to other groups? Its hard to have a lot of sympathy with this one.
Or we talking about the average Joe and Jane that feel like they have gotten a raw deal over the last 30 or 40 years? This one is pretty much true and needs to be addressed.

Hmm. Sounds like the rise of the Post Modernist conservative. That this sort of thing has taken hold on the right really ought not to be too surprising in hindsight.

To be honest, some on the left bear responsibility for this epistemological mess. I've never had much regard for the likes of Derrida, or Doritos, Tacos, or Nachos or whatever the hell his name was.  I'd like to "deconstruct" Doritos.


Yeah try reading their methodology and drop the conspiracy theorizing for just a minute.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Post-modernism has fuck shit-all to do with modern conservative double-think. Conservative mental disease has everything to do with propaganda psychology and the elites 'losing' their traditional handle on disenfranchisement (sabotaging the black vote with felonies for weed for instance, which doesn't work that well anymore now that more and more white people do it too, even with all of the culture war 'conservatives don't do drugs', 'racial profiling', 'property seizure' etc) and depending more and more on rural religion, rural racism, blatant pre-vote disenfranchisement where they control the levers of power, changing votes and brainwashing.

 

Well, not propaganda for long because i'm pretty sure resource wars against non-nuclear nations are in the cards this century. Canada, among the western nations especially needs to watch out and get a viable army and many nukes outside of umbrella of britain because fascist Russia and fascist America both wouldn't think twice of invading it for viable farmland (USA) and to deny it to the USA (Russia).

When everything south of Kansas is a hellscape, and plenty of refugees from South America are being murdered every day at the 'wall', America won't think twice of declaring war to the world, along with China and Russia. I  think we'll see bio-weapons deployed in a 'attempt' to capture resources and make 'things easier to manage' in terms of climate control/engineering. Nukes may or may not fly depending on the resources of the areas target and retaliation probability. Of course, internal extermination of 'minorities' (or even not minorities, cause professional army) will be in the cards too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Content about the Manafort trial, Gates's testimony etc., are pretty much all over the local media here, all day yesterday and today.

Thus alas, the first thing my eyes focused on after pulling together the tea things on this still very hot morning, after a very warm humid night, was this caption in the NY Times: 

Quote

Rick Gates Says He Committed Crimes With Paul Manafort

Eyes blurry, those bolded words were what they saw first.

Below this caption, the second section of the same story summed up the second section of the much longer article: 

Quote

Asked by prosecutors whether he was involved in any criminal activity with Mr. Manafort, Mr. Gates responded, “Yes.”


To my breakfast partner I say this sounds not so vaguely 'dirty.' Immediate respons, "Like they are admitting to having committed sodomy together." 

Then my eye lights on another story, on the other side of the sigital page and further down: Quote:

Quote

 

Ex-‘Manhattan Madam’ to Appear Before Grand Jury in Russia Investigation


 

She is going before the federal grand jury investigating the Russian ties and orange nazi's campaign to give testimony  concerning Roger Stone. She's the same upscale escort service owner who gave testimony on handling partners for Eliot Spitzer. (She ended up in Rikers for 4 months for her involvement with it.)

Along the way this weekend we learned that Manafort also pimped out his wife for access and favors of various sorts. 

And of course there's Russian honeypot, Butina . . . we can't even start on the orange nazi himself, with pee tapes and Russian prostitutes and all the rest. 

There is so much sex involved with these nazis. None of it about love or romance, but only transactional, in the most sleazy and creepy model possible. 

No wonder seeing those captions about Gates and Manafort one's mind immediately shifts into dirty mode.  Honestly, my mind doesn't as a matter of course even think about this stuff, but here I am, doing that here. Sheesh.  This is what the Moral Majority has brought us to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't one of Trumps campaign manager a convicted pedophile (i say 'campaign manager' and not 'ex-campaign manager' because the Orange pedophile hasn't actually fired him).

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-15/nader-mueller-s-latest-cooperator-a-convicted-pedophile

 

Not to mention this shit-pretend human running for congress.

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/01/pedophile-white-supremacist-congressional-candidate/663215002/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Content about the Manafort trial, Gates's testimony etc., are pretty much all over the local media here, all day yesterday and today.

Thus alas, the first thing my eyes focused on after pulling together the tea things on this still very hot morning, after a very warm humid night, was this caption in the NY Times: 

Eyes blurry, those bolded words were what they saw first.

Below this caption, the second section of the same story summed up the second section of the much longer article: 


To my breakfast partner I say this sounds not so vaguely 'dirty.' Immediate respons, "Like they are admitting to having committed sodomy together." 

Then my eye lights on another story, on the other side of the sigital page and further down: Quote:

She is going before the federal grand jury investigating the Russian ties and orange nazi's campaign to give testimony  concerning Roger Stone. She's the same upscale escort service owner who gave testimony on handling partners for Eliot Spitzer. (She ended up in Rikers for 4 months for her involvement with it.)

Along the way this weekend we learned that Manafort also pimped out his wife for access and favors of various sorts. 

And of course there's Russian honeypot, Butina . . . we can't even start on the orange nazi himself, with pee tapes and Russian prostitutes and all the rest. 

There is so much sex involved with these nazis. None of it about love or romance, but only transactional, in the most sleazy and creepy model possible. 

No wonder seeing those captions about Gates and Manafort one's mind immediately shifts into dirty mode.  Honestly, my mind doesn't as a matter of course even think about this stuff, but here I am, doing that here. Sheesh.  This is what the Moral Majority has brought us to.

Hey man, it's all totally moral, as long as the Religious Right gets to personally control every woman's body in America within the next few years. That's their 30 pieces of silver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, sad to say, but Nazi Boy is at it again. It's said that Miller works 16 hours a day at his desk, coming up with vicious and evil immigration plans. And Trump barely glances at them before approving them. Normally a coming election would make even a Republican President pause at the comically evil plans of his minions, but Trump has been convinced that the more Nazi-like the plan is the more he will benefit in the 2018 election.

Also note this is an attack on Obamacare as well. Obviously Obamacare is a welfare program used by freeloading immigrants, why else was it included?

 

Now the Trump administration wants to limit citizenship for legal immigrants

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/now-trump-administration-wants-limit-citizenship-legal-immigrants-n897931

The most significant change to legal immigration in decades could affect millions of would-be citizens, say lawyers and advocates.

The Trump administration is expected to issue a proposal in coming weeks that would make it harder for legal immigrants to become citizens or get green cards if they have ever used a range of popular public welfare programs, including Obamacare, four sources with knowledge of the plan told NBC News.

The move, which would not need congressional approval, is part of White House senior adviser Stephen Miller's plan to limit the number of migrants who obtain legal status in the U.S. each year.

 

Details of the rulemaking proposal are still being finalized, but based on a recent draft seen last week and described to NBC News, immigrants living legally in the U.S. who have ever used or whose household members have ever used Obamacare, children's health insurance, food stamps and other benefits could be hindered from obtaining legal status in the U.S.

Immigration lawyers and advocates and public health researchers say it would be the biggest change to the legal immigration system in decades and estimate that more than 20 million immigrants could be affected. They say it would fall particularly hard on immigrants working jobs that don't pay enough to support their families.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Serious Callers Only said:

Post-modernism has fuck shit-all to do with modern conservative double-think. Conservative mental disease has everything to do with propaganda psychology and the elites 'losing' their traditional handle on disenfranchisement (sabotaging the black vote with felonies for weed for instance, which doesn't work that well anymore now that more and more white people do it too, even with all of the culture war 'conservatives don't do drugs', 'racial profiling', 'property seizure' etc) and depending more and more on rural religion, rural racism, blatant pre-vote disenfranchisement where they control the levers of power and brainwashing.

Be charitable because I'm sure I'll fuck this up.

I think a lot of this relates to the end of the cold war.  For decades, you had all this energy and effort dedicated to fearing and hating "the other", in this case: the Soviet Union.  Then in a flash it was gone.  What do you do with all that energy? you find something (anything) else to attack.  Subversion in your own country? Why not?  And if it exists only in your mind, even better, because the strength of the enemy is limited only by your imagination.  Throw a few cynical pundits into the mix who see a lifetime of massive paydays by feeding into this flow, and you get to where we are now.  As I said before, my problem with conservatives isn't conservatism.  It's that so many conservatives are not tethered to reality.  The fringe has come to occupy the center.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/lets-just-say-it-the-republicans-are-the-problem/2012/04/27/gIQAxCVUlT_story.html?utm_term=.c202ff09420c

Quote

 

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition.

When one party moves this far from the mainstream, it makes it nearly impossible for the political system to deal constructively with the country’s challenges.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

It’s way too early to know if he will get charged with a crime or not, but even some conservative legal analysts are saying it’s possible that he committed a crime. That said, is there anyone who seriously thinks he wouldn’t get pardoned the moment after he gets convicted, should that happen?

I've been saying for well over a year now Trump will go nuclear on the Mueller investigation if and only if they go after his family.  After that I don't know happens, all hell breaks loose.

6 hours ago, SpaceForce Tywin et al. said:

He didn’t create it as much as he fostered it for a time. Gingrich should probably be credited with creating it, and McCain kicked it into overdrive when he tapped Palin to be his VP nominee.

I agree and tend to identify the 94 elections as the point asymmetrical polarization began in earnest, but in actuality it's all arbitrary and a constant (d)evolution.  Rove was preceded by the Gingrich era, which was preceded by Lee Atwater, which was preceded by the Ford administration run by a couple young staffers named Rumsfeld and Cheney, which was preceded by Nixon and Haldeman, etcetera, etcetera.

3 hours ago, Kalbear said:

So my current theory is that Trump certainly didn't violate any laws himself by any of his actions with the Russians - including the Trump Tower meeting. Or if he did, the laws are fairly minor.

However, I suspect strongly that he has violated several laws in personal financing, tax fraud, and other fun stuff. And he is absolutely terrified that Mueller will follow some of the financial strings and nail him on it, just like he did Manafort. 

What laws Trump originally violated isn't really the point.  Nixon didn't originally violate any laws either.  It's obstruction that is the case, as it was for Watergate.  It's both laughably absurd and entirely predictable that Trump is repeating history in that regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Serious Callers Only said:

The really interesting question about this guy is not that he exists, or that he is running for office, but whether he's got any donors? I can imagine his sexual politics is even too extreme for regular Nazis who would normally throw money at him for his gun and race politics.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually about that post, it was the wrong 'campaign manager', there was another pedo (i'm pretty sure this admin must have meet at pedophile parties with human sacrifice straight out of De Sade):

http://thesource.com/2018/02/11/donald-trumps-former-campaign-manger-tim-nolan-sentence-to-twenty-years-in-prison-for-child-sex-trafficking/

 

even the article supports it with yet another one:

Quote

Nolan is not the first former Donald Trump campaign manager to get in trouble for child sex charges. Late last year, former Oklahoma campaign chair Ralph Shortey pleaded guilty to child sex trafficking after he was caught in a hotel room with an underage boy.

Pizzagate probably just more projection and perfectly documented by Russians no doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy fucking shit.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/08/infowars-reporter-tries-fact-check-claim-facebook-private-company-gets-utterly-humiliated/

She...She broadcasted this to the earth. She...

I'm not going to link to the tweet, but a link is embedded in the article.  If you want, check out the responses.  They are so predictably brutal I almost feel sorry for this person.

BTW, am I the only one who thinks following these threads is like drinking out of a fire hose?

Thanks, Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DMC said:

I've been saying for well over a year now Trump will go nuclear on the Mueller investigation if and only if they go after his family.  After that I don't know happens, all hell breaks loose.

I agree and tend to identify the 94 elections as the point asymmetrical polarization began in earnest, but in actuality it's all arbitrary and a constant (d)evolution.  Rove was preceded by the Gingrich era, which was preceded by Lee Atwater, which was preceded by the Ford administration run by a couple young staffers named Rumsfeld and Cheney, which was preceded by Nixon and Haldeman, etcetera, etcetera.

What laws Trump originally violated isn't really the point.  Nixon didn't originally violate any laws either.  It's obstruction that is the case, as it was for Watergate.  It's both laughably absurd and entirely predictable that Trump is repeating history in that regard.

What if Mueller goes after Kushner? Does that count as family enough for him to go off?

Yeah, I've long wondered about the source of the crazy in the Republican party. I'm not sure if it goes back to a single person. I used to blame it on Joe McCarthy, but it seems to go back much further than that and pops up here and there through out American history. The Reaganites just had a strong lid on it a long time. For example, J Edgar Hoover was a pretty nutty Republican and was using government agencies to hunt amarchists and communists in the US around 1910. The crazy seems to be strongly tied to anti-communism, or at least it used to be. Note, Palin calling Obama a socialist during the camaign.

Also, there has long been this protectionist, racist, nationalist wing in the Republican party. Lindbergh and America First, and so on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

What if Mueller goes after Kushner? Does that count as family enough for him to go off?

Yes.  Perhaps even more than his dumb sons, because Kushner is working in an official capacity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Yeah, I've long wondered about the source of the crazy in the Republican party. I'm not sure if it goes back to a single person. I used to blame it on Joe McCarthy, but it seems to go back much further than that and pops up here and there through out American history. The Reaganites just had a strong lid on it a long time. For example, J Edgar Hoover was a pretty nutty Republican and was using government agencies to hunt amarchists and communists in the US around 1910. The crazy seems to be strongly tied to anti-communism, or at least it used to be. Note, Palin calling Obama a socialist during the camaign.

To be fair, American politics was a competition between white men until pretty recently.  Legally since 1920, but that's why FDR was able to hold a coalition that included Southern racists with unions, intellectual liberals, and African Americans.  The realignment precipitated by the the Civil Rights Era changed all that as ideological homogeneity became the norm for each party rather than the previous coalition building.

23 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

Also, there has long been this protectionist, racist, nationalist wing in the Republican party. Lindbergh and America First, and so on.

The John Birch Society was founded in 1958.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DMC said:

To be fair, American politics was a competition between white men until pretty recently.  Legally since 1920, but that's why FDR was able to hold a coalition that included Southern racists with unions, intellectual liberals, and African Americans.  The realignment precipitated by the the Civil Rights Era changed all that as ideological homogeneity became the norm for each party rather than the previous coalition building.

The John Birch Society was founded in 1958.

Fred Koch, Father of Charles and David was one of the founding members.  Joe McCarthy was a Democrat. 

Edit: the first Red Scare predates McCarthy, to the 10's and 20's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DMC said:

I agree and tend to identify the 94 elections as the point asymmetrical polarization began in earnest, but in actuality it's all arbitrary and a constant (d)evolution.  Rove was preceded by the Gingrich era, which was preceded by Lee Atwater, which was preceded by the Ford administration run by a couple young staffers named Rumsfeld and Cheney, which was preceded by Nixon and Haldeman, etcetera, etcetera.

Wasn't there a connection between Rove and Atwater back in the day?  Something to do with the College Republicans back in the 70's or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...