Jump to content

US Politics: A Mickey Mouse Operation


DMC

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

I wouldn’t call it apathy, birthday girl. Just tune out people who want to shame you over your sex life. It’s shockingly effective. I wish more people would realize this.

 

30 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Easier said than done for many people depending on their personality. And also because of cultural and social factors I'm sure the percentage of men who can easily "just tune this out" is way higher than the percentage for women. 

Yes, definitely easier said than done, especially when people can still lose their job or be denied housing based on their sex lives.  If you're a straight cis and monogamous it may be easy.  It's shockingly privileged.  I wish more people would realize this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ormond said:

Easier said than done for many people depending on their personality. And also because of cultural and social factors I'm sure the percentage of men who can easily "just tune this out" is way higher than the percentage for women. 

I think it has less to do with personality and more to do with the conditioning society subjects us to. Just see various tribes across the world, be it in South America, Africa or Australia. And yes, in another post I hinted that this mindset impacts men differently than women, but it really doesn’t have to be that way.

28 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

I think the number of photos the husband posted is a big indicator of what a POS he is. It was also done to indicate how evil and wicked she was, IMO, because a decent woman might allow one or two pictures be taken but only a wanton liberal bitch would allow so many pictures to be taken, right?

I’m still not sure the number matters (and I haven’t seen it reported that he has released 700 pics). Releasing just one shows he’s an awful person. Like I said before, I’ve got numerous pics of women I’ve been with and I’d never make them public. It’s just wrong. And no, I don’t think he’s trying to make her seem wicked. He just wants to humiliate her. And that gets to the point I’m making, don’t let it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gaston de Foix said:

In large part, yes.  The Daily Mail published these photos purely for the purpose of titillation.  If this was a British citizen, they would have been bound by the ECHR right to respect for family life,  But the worst of British journalism and American free-speech absolutism has led to her resignation. 

I agree with you as it happens, just snatching low hanging fruit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's an endless puff piece about -- Chelsea Clinton, at the top of this issue of NY Magazine.  Why?  I tell ya, I tried to read it -- it may be the longest magazine piece I've seen anywhere in years.  Even skimming as I took to doing because you know it's just that boring -- the end just kept not arriving.  O Lord!  She's as bad as her mom.  Plus, you know, she's had some cosmetic surgical work done. Why?

https://www.thecut.com/2019/10/chelsea-clinton-is-figuring-out-her-own-life-now.html#_ga=2.75830486.2138915060.1572373948-1237207529.1572373948

There is NO reason for this piece except ... to fish?  Nydia Valázquez is retiring. The very moment this was announced speculation began in certain spots that Chelsea was the logical

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nydia_Velázquez

replacement.  O please no!  She's got all her mother's negatives and then some.  I wish Chelsea a long and happy life, but far away from the political arena.  We never want to hear the name 'Clinton' and election and politics again!  But the puffery gushes at how much both Chelsea and Hillary are beloved everywhere!  The article is at least as much about Hillary as Chelsea, because really, there isn't anything to say about her.  Even the puffery could find no there there to make.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As was obvious, because, u no, per usual most of the elements in the bedbug's announcement that Baghdadi's death had been accomplished (barely, due to the mess he'd made of the operation by pulling the US troops out without warning) were out and out lies.  For one thing there was nothing there for him to hear -- there was no audio.  Also, projection, big time, the crying whining begging.

All the news outlets are reporting that that those involved know there was no way for him to know anything.  He's a big fat liar and knows nothing, Impeach him and lock him up in Guantánamo now!

~~~~~~~~~~~

As far as those who say about Hill to cover her ears and eyes and say lalala -- this stuff is as hurtful and traumatic as physical hurts and traumas.  This is why African Americans tend to die of heart trouble so much earlier than their white counterparts -- the constant stresses of language and action to which they are subjected.  Women are subjected to that same sort of stress, which white middle class guy have no idea.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone is curious about the spin of the right wing disinformation sphere on Colonel Vindman, (the latest witness for the impeachment inquiry, a career military man who was wounded in Iraq and is the first person who was actually listening in on the Trump-Zelensky phone call to testify) the attempts to smear Vindman started last night on the Laura Ingraham show, (before Vindman even testified they felt the need to smear him, how curious) where Ingraham and her guest spent time trying to say how terrible it was that Vindman was showing no loyalty to Trump, that he was loyal only to Ukraine because he was born there, and he may in fact be a Ukrainian spy committing espionage against the President.

There are no limits to how low they’ll stoop to defend Agent Orange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Paladin of Ice said:

the attempts to smear Vindman started last night on the Laura Ingraham show, (before Vindman even testified they felt the need to smear him, how curious) where Ingraham and her guest spent time trying to say how terrible it was that Vindman was showing no loyalty to Trump, that he was loyal only to Ukraine because he was born there, and he may in fact be a Ukrainian spy committing espionage against the President.

That guest would be John Yoo - the guy who wrote the Torture Memo in 2002.  Now he's claiming he didn't accuse Vindman of espionage - you see, all he said was "some people might call that espionage."  Totally different.  How ridiculous is this?  Even Liz Cheney finds it abhorrent:

Quote

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), one of the most hawkish Republicans in the House and a member of the House Armed Services Committee, said it would be “shameful” to question Vindman’s loyalty or patriotism to the country.

Cheney wasn’t even pressed by reporters on the topic; in her opening remarks during a weekly leadership news conference in the Capitol, she went out of her way to decry the attacks on Vindman, including the outlandish theory that he was a potential spy working against the United States.

“We need to show that we are better than that as a nation,” said Cheney, the third-ranking House Republican. “We’re talking about decorated veterans who have served this nation, who put their lives on the line. And it is shameful to question their patriotism, their love of this nation, and we should not be involved in this process.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DMC said:

That guest would be John Yoo - the guy who wrote the Torture Memo in 2002.  Now he's claiming he didn't accuse Vindman of espionage - you see, all he said was "some people might call that espionage."  Totally different.  How ridiculous is this?  Even Liz Cheney finds it abhorrent:

Liz Cheney then goes on to complain about the impeachment process and more or less find it invalid so who gives a fuck what Liz Cheney thinks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mexal said:

Liz Cheney then goes on to complain about the impeachment process and more or less find it invalid so who gives a fuck what Liz Cheney thinks.

As that link details, lots of Republicans are refusing to attack Vindman.  Doesn't change the fact they're still gonna vote against impeachment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DMC said:

As that link details, lots of Republicans are refusing to attack Vindman.  Doesn't change the fact they're still gonna vote against impeachment.

My point is it doesn't matter. If they defend Vindman but completely ignore the substance what he's saying because "impeachment process", then it's more a talking point to show support for the military more than anything else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mexal said:

My point is it doesn't matter. If they defend Vindman but completely ignore the substance what he's saying because "impeachment process", then it's more a talking point to show support for the military more than anything else. 

I'm not really disagreeing with your point.  My point is even most of the congressional GOP leadership appears to agree attacking Vindman in such a way is dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not rising again, just never gone; and they can't wait.  And you know, the Yankees won't fight back ....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-civil-war/trump-tweet-political-divisions-fuel-rising-discourse-about-new-u-s-civil-war-idUSKBN1X812B

"Trump tweet, political divisions fuel rising discourse about new U.S. civil war -"

Quote

 

....“It would be all guerrilla warfare, not this open field-style kind of thing,” he said, gesturing at the reenactment of the 1864 Battle of Cedar Creek in Middletown, Virginia, earlier this month. “I would probably be an officer in that effort.”

Piercy, 62, is one of the motorcycle riders known as the “mechanized cavalry” of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, which has an estimated 30,000 members and describes itself as a “non-political heritage organization” that preserves the history and legacy of soldiers in the pro-slavery Confederacy in the 1861-1865 Civil War.

He is also a fierce supporter of President Donald Trump.

As Democrats push to impeach Trump and controversy rages over whether to remove monuments to Confederate generals like Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson, Piercy warned a new civil war is brewing.

“You look into rural areas, and we’re not seen, but there’s a lot of us that’ll come out of these hills if it keeps getting worse. Probably every Sons of Confederate Veterans member out there....

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DMC said:

Hey, the Yankees have enough problems to deal with this offseason.  Give em a break.

Ya, broke back broke.  Sad, sad, sad.  But the fanz will still boo the bedbug, so there's that.  I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/27/2019 at 10:23 PM, Week said:

So you crawled out from under the bridge to complain that the reporting about Cheeto Mussolini's 225th golf outing (upwards of $110m spent - mostly on his own properties) was incorrectly reported to be at the same time as another event that was actually 2 hours later. Thank you for your service. Feel free to chime in when you have something of substance to talk with about. Perhaps extorting a foreign government for political dirt on an enemy or covering up that act by putting the transcript in the code-level secure system and then continued obstruction of Justice by threatening whistleblowers and career diplomats. Any thoughts?

https://trumpgolfcount.com/

Adding:

https://deadspin.com/donald-trump-gets-boos-lock-him-up-chants-at-world-s-1839403261 

"Lock him up"

@Frog Eater

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/vindmans-firsthand-account-of-trump-call-puts-gop-in-bind-emboldens-democrats/2019/10/29/fa110294-fa5e-11e9-8190-6be4deb56e01_story.html

Corroborated by a decorated Army officer (also - not surprising - claiming the edited transcript omits additional references to Burisma and Biden). Anything relevant to say about Trump's criminal behavior or do you still have your tighty (formerly)whites in a twist over the timing of the staged photo?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/10/29/president-trump-may-have-violated-criminal-provisions-hatch-act/

"It’s a felony to order federal government workers to further a partisan political campaign"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Zorral said:

Not rising again, just never gone; and they can't wait.  And you know, the Yankees won't fight back ....

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-civil-war/trump-tweet-political-divisions-fuel-rising-discourse-about-new-u-s-civil-war-idUSKBN1X812B

"Trump tweet, political divisions fuel rising discourse about new U.S. civil war -"

 

 

I am not an expert, but I do wonder how if they take down the electronic infrastructure in 'liberal minded cities' it would affect the ability for all these 65 year old bikers to communicate with each other.  Wouldn't shutting down the wifi over a large area stop their ability to coordinate over 4chan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, SkynJay said:

I am not an expert, but I do wonder how if they take down the electronic infrastructure in 'liberal minded cities' it would affect the ability for all these 65 year old bikers to communicate with each other.  Wouldn't shutting down the wifi over a large area stop their ability to coordinate over 4chan?

"Republicans would swallow poo if they could figure out a way to make liberals smell their breath."  That quote started as a joke, but is starting to look painfully accurate for a portion of "the base." 

Its quite horrifying to see people advocating literal terrorism publicly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tulsi Gabbard's plans a campaign against Hillary Clinton.

This is a pay wall piece, so unless a subscriber one can't see it all --

https://www.wsj.com/articles/i-can-defeat-trump-and-the-clinton-doctrine-11572389508

however, the ever helpful Jonathan Chait provides a run-down on the more largely accessible NY Magazine site here:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/10/tulsi-gabbard-third-party-campaign-russia-spoiler.html

Because, you know, this country's condition isn't crazy enough yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Raja said:

Edit - This is less of a deal than I thought, I thought they had set up a public hearing already as opposed to him saying he's game for testifying publicly.

Presumably most of the people that have testified will testify in the public hearings.  The only reason they may not is because the Dems may want to limit witnesses due to time constraints (well, not really constraints, but they definitely want a vote on articles of impeachment by Christmas).

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...