|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 13:21:05 GMT -5
Rep. Gibbs (R-Ohio) just set a new low for this one, by saying that Cohen saying these things while the president is overseas "trying to make this world safer" is "a new low." Really? That's the new low? As if Cohen himself plotted this hearing and scheduled it while the president is peacefully negotiating with the guy he called Little Rocket Man and threatened with nuclear force?
I know I'm repeating myself, but the theater is just ridiculous. You have to wonder whether these people, deep down, feel any shame at participating.
|
|
|
Post by filledeplage on Feb 27, 2019 13:40:24 GMT -5
Rep. Gibbs (R-Ohio) just set a new low for this one, by saying that Cohen saying these things while the president is overseas "trying to make this world safer" is "a new low." Really? That's the new low? As if Cohen himself plotted this hearing and scheduled it while the president is peacefully negotiating with the guy he called Little Rocket Man and threatened with nuclear force?
I know I'm repeating myself, but the theater is just ridiculous. You have to wonder whether these people, deep down, feel any shame at participating.
That was absolutely a little theatrical on Gibbs part, but Cohen is looking ahead to a Rule 35 motion for a reduction in sentence. He is the scariest, least ethical former lawyer, ever. Cohen took $1.2 mil from Novartis for 6 meetings, and Novartis considered him a person with WH access but unregistered lobbyist. He also took money from a bank in Kazakhstan that he did not report and was mandated to report. He was convicted of lying to Congress. Any client (pro bono or billionaire) should be able to trust his/her lawyer. One can always inquire into whether testimony has been incentivized, either for a reduction in sentence or a book or movie deal. It offers a big incentive to provide false testimony and he has already been convicted of lying to Congress. Anytime he wanted to dump Trump as a client - he could have withdrawn from the representation. He was disbarred NY Bar Assn. yesterday.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 13:40:32 GMT -5
Rep. Gibbs (R-Ohio) just set a new low for this one, by saying that Cohen saying these things while the president is overseas "trying to make this world safer" is "a new low." Really? That's the new low? As if Cohen himself plotted this hearing and scheduled it while the president is peacefully negotiating with the guy he called Little Rocket Man and threatened with nuclear force?
I know I'm repeating myself, but the theater is just ridiculous. You have to wonder whether these people, deep down, feel any shame at participating.
Its just bullshit deflection and political theater. So we can't talk about Trump's crimes ever while he's in office? Not only is that ridiculous but let's not pretend for one second that Republicans and FOX didnt do it to Obama all the damn time. I really hate to see anyone kicked while they're down, even if they're a "bad" person and even if I don't personally like them. So the end of the Gibbs questions really pissed me off on principle. Cohen was just sincerely expressing how he can never fully regain his reputation and Gibbs smugly cuts him off to say "oh you'll get your book deal, you;ll be fine." That kind of thing is just so unnecessary. I really hate this over-emphasis on book deals, as if that would make anything Cohen is saying inaccurate or unworthy of our attention. It's just character assassination and a deflection for their base. We'll see the rightwing talking heads, and maybe a certain friend of ours here, throwing that line around tonight. That's how the spin machine works.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 13:53:27 GMT -5
Not-so-veiled jab at Rep. Tlaib by Rep. Miller (who is otherwise repeating the same things every Republican has said so far).
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 14:10:24 GMT -5
"Thank you for continuing the narrative" ~ Michael Cohen to Republican Rep. Armstrong
"Mr Cohen, thank you for your patience. Our colleagues today are not upset because you lied for the president, they're upset because you STOPPED lying for the president." ~ Democratic Rep. Jamie Askin
^These two quotes summed up the entire hearing. Just republicans ignoring what Cohen is actually saying, or the fact that he was apparently good enough to be their own deputy finance chairman, in order to disparage his character endlessly. Even after he's already been disgraced and on his way to prison. Just hammering in those same talking points: book deals, "you're a bad boy so LALALA we can't hear you," "Liar Liar Pants on Fire!" And as we're already seeing, the peanut gallery laps it up, like always.
EDIT: Another great line that summed up my feelings on this shit show pretty well was Democratic Rep. Plaskett's "Thank God the Democrats can walk and chew gum at the same time." It came after about 5 instances of virtue-signaling monologues by the Republicans about "durr this is a waste of time! we can do other things!"
That spin really bugs me too. Oversight and accountability is part of your jobs. Your party had both houses and the Presidency for 2 years and all you did was pass a tax break for the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. You proudly and openly obstructed every action Obama tried to spearhead for EIGHT YEARS. Stop pretending as though you;d be super busy building a utopia if only Cohen didn't take two hours to answer questions about a corrupt man holding the highest office in our country.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 14:38:31 GMT -5
I'd imagine the president's counsel and aides are terrified at what the president might tweet or say in response to all of this.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 14:42:15 GMT -5
I'd imagine the president's counsel and aides are terrified at what the president might tweet or say in response to all of this. Maybe he'll openly threaten Cohen. Oh wait, Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz already did that last night.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 15:42:01 GMT -5
One thing I'm curious about is, considering Cohen shot down a few anti-Trump rumors, if we're told by our friends in the GOP not to believe anything he says because he's a liar, well ... does that mean we're to believe there WAS a love child, there WAS domestic violence against Melania, etc.?
The answer, of course, is no. Every charge, every claim, is to be taken in totality with all available evidence, and any of a person's various statements may be true or false regardless of whether previous ones were true or false. One's history should be taken into account, which is why Cohen ought not be taken at face value without corroborating evidence.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 15:52:03 GMT -5
One thing I'm curious about is, considering Cohen shot down a few anti-Trump rumors, if we're told by our friends in the GOP not to believe anything he says because he's a liar, well ... does that mean we're to believe there WAS a love child, there WAS domestic violence against Melania, etc.?
The answer, of course, is no. Every charge, every claim, is to be taken in totality with all available evidence, and any of a person's various statements may be true or false regardless of whether previous ones were true or false. One's history should be taken into account, which is why Cohen ought not be taken at face value without corroborating evidence.
Similarly, the fact that they're disparaging Cohen and making him out to be the absolute spawn of Satan also indirectly damages their idol, Trump. If this dirty, selfish lying cheat was good enough to be "billionaire" Trump's personal lawyer for ten years, what does that say about Trump? If he's really a billionaire, surely he could get someone else?
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 16:04:44 GMT -5
We've heard that story about a dozen times or more already, though. Every single person from his administration who was fired or quit, or every of his circle who has been convicted or pleaded guilty, suddenly went from being a genius and good person to being an idiot who never deserved the job in the first place. It's just an existence that is entirely in the moment.
It actually reminds me of a scene from the UK version of The Office, when David Brent is proudly telling his boss that he promised the staff there will be no "redundancies." She points out that it's going to be much worse when people are laid off and he's proven to have lied. He seems stunned by the concept, and blows it off: "They won't remember." There is no past, and there is no future. It's just about saying the thing in the moment that works in the moment.
The hearings are about to get going again. I admit, I'm a little nervous about the freshmen progressives yet to speak. I'm not a big fan of the darling/devil AOC, and especially don't like her penchant for misleading or fumbling details (and then refusing to give an inch when called out), and worry she's going to grandstand on some error.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 16:35:11 GMT -5
We've heard that story about a dozen times or more already, though. Every single person from his administration who was fired or quit, or every of his circle who has been convicted or pleaded guilty, suddenly went from being a genius and good person to being an idiot who never deserved the job in the first place. It's just an existence that is entirely in the moment.
It actually reminds me of a scene from the UK version of The Office, when David Brent is proudly telling his boss that he promised the staff there will be no "redundancies." She points out that it's going to be much worse when people are laid off and he's proven to have lied. He seems stunned by the concept, and blows it off: "They won't remember." There is no past, and there is no future. It's just about saying the thing in the moment that works in the moment.
The hearings are about to get going again. I admit, I'm a little nervous about the freshmen progressives yet to speak. I'm not a big fan of the darling/devil AOC, and especially don't like her penchant for misleading or fumbling details (and then refusing to give an inch when called out), and worry she's going to grandstand on some error.
Its so frustrating watching people do backflips to walk back their own statements from just a few weeks/months ago as soon as it's no longer popular in their own tribe. That one old lady republican congresswoman really pissed me off bringing up child separation and how it's "dear to [her] heart." Like get the hell out of here--if you really care, you should join Cohen in calling out this awful administration which has enacted that policy. It's complete virtue-signaling horseshit. If Trump himself goes down in flames, a month later you'll see his diehard fans pretend they never liked him anyway. They'd be quick to remind us "oh he was always a democrat" maybe even call him a socialist because that's the big buzzword signaling that a person is bad. Similarly, if tomorrow the Republicans championed universal healthcare, suddenly you'd have everyone on the right singing its praises and disparaging the Democrats for only offering Obamacare. (A policy that was the republican plan in the 90s and then became "socialist!!" the second he supported it.)
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 16:43:42 GMT -5
Yes, as I said in one of my early posts on this topic today, one of the worst parts of this is that the actual situation could legitimately be reversed and it would play out the same. Trump could just as well have run as a Democrat (because seriously, does anyone believe he has any political ideology or thought-out positions on anything, to say nothing of partisan loyalty?). If he had, and these same allegations were out there (which they would have been), Republicans would be doing what we know they're happy to do, which is hold hearings (Benghazi, anyone?), while Democrats would be saying it's a waste of taxpayers' time and money.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 16:46:52 GMT -5
AOC is actually being very measured and asking on point questions--no grandstanding whatsoever. Compare that to literally every single Republican screaming like a maniac so they can get good soundbites in at FOX later tonight. If AOC had done that she'd have been ripped apart as a "PMSing female" or "juvenile snowflake."
Also, the GOP hits a new low trying to use unsubstantiated tweets as evidence against Cohen. What a crazy world this is.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 16:49:41 GMT -5
AOC did a good job. I have to give her that. She was on point and substantive, and her questioning was productive (because obviously getting more people who can corroborate, or conflict with, his testimony is important).
The tweets were absurd. "Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, but BeerDude1993 said 'fuck this jackoff cohen.' I move to put this in the record."
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 16:56:57 GMT -5
Tlaib brings the fireworks...
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 17:02:34 GMT -5
Tlaib brings the fireworks... Yeah, that really got under Meadows skin.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 17:04:41 GMT -5
Her non-apology apology wasn't especially believable, either. I'm sorry, but if you're going to call guy a racist, you better mean it. And to me it sure sounded like that's what she said.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 17:16:09 GMT -5
Her non-apology apology wasn't especially believable, either. I'm sorry, but if you're going to call guy a racist, you better mean it. And to me it sure sounded like that's what she said. I understand why she felt the need to call that shit out. If you're a member of a certain group and someone is clearly out of line I understand firsthand the overwhelming desire to speak up. However I don't think that was a good look for her--and for Meadows either. A lot of people on FOX and online are unfortunately going to take that whole moment as proof of "snowflake libtards" and PC pandering. Unfortunately when you're a politician you kind of have to rise above certain disparagements and throw shade in a way that's classy and/or plausibly deniable. I think the gold standard is Danica Roem, a state legislator for Virginia who did not sink to the level of her opponent--who refused to debate her, made a point of calling her a man (she's transgender) and spent his campaign focusing on bathroom bills. Danica, rather than focus on arguing the trans angle and calling him a -phobe or -ist, focused on universal issues that appealed to everyone. And she won. On election night, she was asked if she had anything to say to her defeated opponent. Rather than rub it in his face or make it a big thing about how historic her victory is, she just said "he's my constituent now, and I don't make a point to disparage my own constituents." Classy, but with a clear undertone. That should be the gold standard for how rising young progressives following in the wake of Bernie should conduct ourselves, in my opinion.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 17:21:01 GMT -5
Also, you gotta love how they entered in a vanity fair, salon and I believe Washington Post article into the record. If a Democrat had done so against Trump they'd be shrieking it's "fake news!!" I had a certain someone use that line on me all the time when I used sources like that. It's all lies until it suits your narrative and then suddenly it's congressional record worthy.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 17:33:37 GMT -5
I know Ive been posting a lot about this. Sorry The closing remarks by Chairman Cummings was fantastic. That's a speech that ought to be remembered and discussed by decent Americans going forth. I plan on ripping the testimony off CSPAN and posting his speech on my YouTube channel tonight for anyone interested. I actually sympathized with Michael Cohen, perhaps against my better judgment. He deserves jail time for sure, but I do sincerely believe he's sorry and would choose a different direction if he could go back. His humorous quips in the face of a 4-hour long session of berating insults and loud, angry rants by the GOP endeared him to me. It must hurt to realize these people he got mixed up with care so little about him as a person that the instant he's no longer useful or speaking the narrative, he's persona non grata. They threatened him and his family openly, called him every bad name they could think of and are happy to hang him out to dry. No honor among thieves.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 18:03:49 GMT -5
Yes, as I said in one of my early posts on this topic today, one of the worst parts of this is that the actual situation could legitimately be reversed and it would play out the same. Trump could just as well have run as a Democrat (because seriously, does anyone believe he has any political ideology or thought-out positions on anything, to say nothing of partisan loyalty?). If he had, and these same allegations were out there (which they would have been), Republicans would be doing what we know they're happy to do, which is hold hearings (Benghazi, anyone?), while Democrats would be saying it's a waste of taxpayers' time and money. I agreed with you 100% until the last sentence. Look, I'm no Democratic loyalist by any means. I love some of their older voices, from FDR and LBJ to Huey Long and McGovern. But for me the party completely fell apart ideologically since the Clinton years and I'm happy to call them out on it. But this whole "both sides are the same" outlook is overly simplistic nonsense. The fact is Democrats are much better at holding their own to a certain standard. They forced Al Franken to resign because he jokingly cupped a woman's breast in a picture. Republicans scream "fake news" at Trump's glaring corruption and collusion, and even just at this hearing they're all calling him a great guy when he's on tape bragging about sexually assaulting married women. I do think some of my fellow Democrats were very hypocritical or disengenuous in supporting Hillary last cycle considering all her crimes and baggage. And yet even then, most I knew openly agreed they only supported her because they considered stopping Trump to be *that* important.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 27, 2019 18:57:55 GMT -5
I think the gold standard is Danica Roem, a state legislator for Virginia who did not sink to the level of her opponent--who refused to debate her, made a point of calling her a man (she's transgender) and spent his campaign focusing on bathroom bills. Danica, rather than focus on arguing the trans angle and calling him a -phobe or -ist, focused on universal issues that appealed to everyone. And she won. On election night, she was asked if she had anything to say to her defeated opponent. Rather than rub it in his face or make it a big thing about how historic her victory is, she just said "he's my constituent now, and I don't make a point to disparage my own constituents." Classy, but with a clear undertone. That should be the gold standard for how rising young progressives following in the wake of Bernie should conduct ourselves, in my opinion. I agree one hundred percent with your closing sentiment (and love the anecdote from Virginia). I absolutely believe the standard should be as close to unimpeachable behavior as is possible. And I don't mean (nor do I mean to suggest you mean) "calling-out culture" pharisaiac flawlessness, big shows of one's own goodness mostly just to point out the wrongs of other people. I mean more like Lincoln's "with malice toward none, with charity for all" kind of thing. Even if it means partisan disadvantage, just because it's the right thing to do. I also believe (without evidence) that the citizenry at large would respond positively to that kind of behavior, if given the chance. I would like to see a more gracious group of people in office.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 27, 2019 23:14:10 GMT -5
I think the gold standard is Danica Roem, a state legislator for Virginia who did not sink to the level of her opponent--who refused to debate her, made a point of calling her a man (she's transgender) and spent his campaign focusing on bathroom bills. Danica, rather than focus on arguing the trans angle and calling him a -phobe or -ist, focused on universal issues that appealed to everyone. And she won. On election night, she was asked if she had anything to say to her defeated opponent. Rather than rub it in his face or make it a big thing about how historic her victory is, she just said "he's my constituent now, and I don't make a point to disparage my own constituents." Classy, but with a clear undertone. That should be the gold standard for how rising young progressives following in the wake of Bernie should conduct ourselves, in my opinion. I agree one hundred percent with your closing sentiment (and love the anecdote from Virginia). I absolutely believe the standard should be as close to unimpeachable behavior as is possible. And I don't mean (nor do I mean to suggest you mean) "calling-out culture" pharisaiac flawlessness, big shows of one's own goodness mostly just to point out the wrongs of other people. I mean more like Lincoln's "with malice toward none, with charity for all" kind of thing. Even if it means partisan disadvantage, just because it's the right thing to do. I also believe (without evidence) that the citizenry at large would respond positively to that kind of behavior, if given the chance. I would like to see a more gracious group of people in office. In a perfect world I would absolutely 100% agree with you. But unfortunately that's not the world we live in. I wish politics could be a civil, friendly discussion of different ideologies where we used facts and reason to determine the best way to move towards a sparkling utopia. However, the rightwing under Murdoch and radio figures like Rush Limbaugh have created a vicious spin machine which has whipped its followers into a perpetually angry, spiteful mob. Their ideology used to be conservatism and fiscal responsibility once upon a time but since Reagan it's become all about sabotaging government programs to "prove" they don't work and then privatizing everything. Since the Obama years it's been endless obstructionism and reactionary policies. For those who don't know the term, that means moving backwards. I'm going to be accused of bias here fairly or not, but there's just no equivalent infrastructure on the left. I know blanket statements like "both sides are equal" looks more fair and reasonable at a glance but when you take in the big picture it's just not so. To demonstrate what I mean, let's consider a few points here:
--Mitch McConnell met with all the Congressional republicans early in Obama's term and stated very plainly that their goal was to make Obama a one-term President. To obstruct everything he tried to do, lest a democrat get any credit for fixing the mess Bush created. ( We had a surplus, good standing abroad and no surveillance state before Bush. I hate Clinton too, for other reasons, but the fact is Bush indisputably created a mess.) Then when they get both houses of Congress AND the Presidency they accomplish absolutely nothing of substance to improve the lives of their constituents. Trump promised infrastructure repairs--one of the things I agreed with him about--and I guarantee that would have gotten Democratic support ( not that they'd need Dems to pass it) so why didn't he? --McConnell stole a Supreme Court seat by refusing to even hold a hearing or vote on Garland, a nominee which Republicans themselves said they liked UNTIL OBAMA PICKED HIM. The same happened with a lot of lower level court appointments too. Similarly, Ted Cruz led a shutdown of the government out of spite over Obamacare, which the Republicans happily went along with. Remember that Obamacare was literally the Republican plan until Obama picked it up. --Trump proudly, openly boasted about shutting the government down on video. There was a budget that passed the Senate which Paul Ryan refused to hold a vote on. Republicans created the longest shutdown in history because Trump wanted to waste billions in taxpayer money to build a useless wall which won't stop illegals ( who mostly overstay their visas) or drugs from coming in. People were out of work for a month when most Americans live paycheck to paycheck. McConnell refused to hold a new vote to re-approve the same exact budget they'd previously agreed to in the Senate. The last shutdown, the longest in US history mind you, is 100% on the Republicans any way you slice it. --The Republicans elected and continue to support Trump. By now his many failings as an administrator, his crimes ( even ignoring the Russian collusion) and repugnant character are well known so I won't repeat them. That in and of itself is despicable at this point. But when Obama was president these people were happy to disparage him every day over the most asinine things--wearing a tan suit, using Dijon mustard, didn't wear a tie/wife wore sleeveless dresses. Now they disparage AOC over dancing in a video from college and whatever else they can think of. Now, I have my misgivings with some of Obama's actions as president, certainly. And I'll admit AOC has fudged the numbers in some statements. But this isn't me lashing out because "my team" was attacked. This is me lashing out at these blatant double standards and bald faced hypocrisies consistently coming from one side alone. It was the same when Bush was president; I recall the phrase "respect the office"/"with us or against us" being thrown around a lot at objectors to his war crimes and surveillance state. --As a certain poster here is evidence of, we cannot have rational discussions anymore because anything they find inconvenient to their narrative is "fake news." They'll gladly believe baseless conspiracies from Alex Jones like PP selling baby organs, Pizzagate, colleges brainwashing students to be socialist and Obama born in Kenya. But somehow the time-honored and reputable outlets such as the Washington Post and New York Times are fake news. Now at this hearing just today we got a new soundbite, "fake witness." Trump has also continuously fostered an atmosphere of distrust and anger towards the free press since his candidacy began, calling them "enemies of the people." --We literally have had neo-nazi rallies in the last few years, spurred on by the rhetoric of the President. They killed someone in Charlottesville. David Duke and other figures of these white supremacist organizations have openly supported and praised Trump. He has NEVER disavowed any of them, never distances himself, never condemned white supremacy or nazism. Our government is also literally separating children from their legally asylum seeking parents and putting them in concentration camps. ( And even if the parents did come illegally, NOTHING justifies that horror.) We are a hairs length away from becoming an honest to god nazi regime in America even as we speak. I don't care how inflammatory that may sound, it's the truth when you consider the actual tenets of fascism and nazism and what we're doing now. ( And if any of you think I'm wrong by saying this, then you tell me where the line is exactly. Because if it's not concentration camps and needlessly traumatizing children for life I sure don't know what is. I mean, do we need to wait until they're literally being gassed in the camps before we're allowed to point out the similarities?) --We have one party that has made it their mission to continuously attack the weakest members of society. If it's not racial dogwhistles and policies which disproportionately affect racial minorities then it's outright gay bashing until the Supreme Court finally dragged us into the 21st century. Now that they lost their old punching bag, we in the trans community have to endure endless slanderous attacks and being used as political pawns. If we're not being called bathroom predators and denied the right to urinate safely in public, we're losing our right to serve our own country. In over half of the states, LGBT people don't have federally recognized civil rights and can be fired or evicted on a whim with no protections. Obama tried to smooth over this problem with executive orders...which Trump has since rolled back. --At this very hearing today, we had one side that was at least seeking answers and trying to learn from the man before them, however flawed he may be as a person. And we had one side spend the entire time pointlessly showboating, yelling, fishing for soundbites to look badass back home. AOC, a freshman people accuse on grandstanding asked pointed relevant questions. The other Dems did too even if some of their questions weren't always the best. --Just as one example of someone on the left trying to have a reasonable conversation while getting completely misrepresented and defamed...Sandra Fluke. She testified before a congressional panel about the absurdity of banning birth control on religious grounds ( by the way, guess which side pushes THAT sexist nonsense) about how some women need birth control for other reasons, like ovarian cysts. She didn't blame-game or speak in an inflammatory or partisan manner, merely stated that fact for consideration. And what happens? The rightwing media, specifically Rush Limbaugh in this case, go off on an insane, long, hateful rant about how she's a slut that just wants birth control so she can have crazy unprotected sex. That is a complete disgrace. And it's not an isolated incident either, just the first example that comes to mind for me. --Watching all the old debates and speeches I noticed something. Republicans are far more disingenuous and openly disparaging to the Democrats. If you think I'm wrong, I challenge you to look at anything from the HW Bush era ( including when he was VP.) At a Republican primary debate from '88 he called having a gay son a humiliation. He called the DNC a "temple of doom." He used the inaugural address ( meant to unify the country) as an excuse to grandstand about partisan, contentious issues like the drug war and abortion. I can tell you with confidence that NO other president has ever stooped that low. He gave a speech slot to Pat Buchanan in '92 who proceeded to call Democrats "cross-dressers" among other insults and declared a "cultural war" against them. The VP, Dan Quayle, called out every Democratic Presidential candidate from McGovern as well as Ted Kennedy to be booed by the audience one by one. They chanted "Ted Must Go" and this is over 20 years before "lock her up." It's been like that at the RNC for a long time. In recent years the dems openly criticize the republican candidate too, but republicans opened the seal and democrats are never even close to getting as nasty with it. --A republican congressman, Jason Smith, yelled "go back to puerto rico" to a sitting US congressman of hispanic decent. This happened as the latter had the floor and was speaking. When the democrats in attendance demanded to know who shouted the insult, the republicans played dumb to shield their comrade. Even ten years earlier, another Republican congressman yelled "you lie!" at Obama at his first State of the Union address. For as much as democrats hate Trump, nobody has ever done anything like that to him from the left. --Both Nixon and Reagan illegally met with Vietnam and Iran respectively to make secret deals that would help them win the elections. Nixon promised the Viet cong a better deal if they waited until he was President. Reagan convinced them to hold the hostages until he could win so he'd get the "win" of their release in his term. Obama wanted to tell voters about the Russian collusion going on during the 2016 election but Mitch McConnell refused to make a bipartisan statement and threatened to call it baseless propaganda if Obama did so alone. A North Carolina election recently had to redone due to vote tampering. ( This next claim is speculative and should be taken with a massive grain of salt, but for whatever it's worth Anonymous claimed that Republicans had tried to rig the 2012 election for Romney, and would have succeeded if Anonymous themselves hadn't also hacked voting machines in favor of Obama. I'm not saying I believe that last claim, but even without it there's a clear trend of Republicans not respecting the democratic process.) I could keep going, but you get the point. If that's not enough I can find more examples, and if anyone questions the truth of any point raised, I can provide sources. These are just the first instances off the top of my head about why a civil discussion with Republicans is impossible these days. Maybe individual republican laypeople might be reasonable. And to be fair, I did make progress with Jason and Tom back in the old days of PSF. I recall having even-tempered disagreements and that was great. But as a whole, the Republican party has shifted so far to the right and made it a literal mission never to work with democrats. They created a spin network that keeps their followers living in a different reality from the rest of the world, one where Trump is a blameless saint and AOC is a devil-spawn ( as opposed to being a flawed but well-meaning young woman learning the swing of things in Congress.) Democrats may not be perfect--far from it--but there's nothing like that going on with the left. I challenge anyone to prove me otherwise; show me anything "the left" has done in modern America which comes anywhere near the scope and magnitude of these misdeeds. So the point is, just rolling over and playing nice with people like that isn't noble or even smart. It's just letting yourself be bullied without defending your own honor. ( And speaking from experience, ignoring a bully doesn't stop them, it only eggs them on to escalate the abuse.) It's letting the overton window slide even further to the right in an age where nazis are normal while reforms based on successful European countries is "disturbing" and "communism." Being nice with these people isn't going to lead to some kind of perfect utopia because they're not interested in progress much less compromise or decency. They want to win. They want "librul tears" and disparaging minorities in perpetuity. For some of us, our very right to exist and human dignity are at stake. For all of us, our livelihoods are at stake as people can't make ends meet, wealth disparity has never been worse, our infrastructure is crumbling and we don't have healthcare. One party, flawed as they may be, are at least trying to fix these issues. The other uses hatred of women/minorities and religious pandering as a smokescreen while they rob the treasury and rescind labor/consumer protections to make the 1% even richer. If you don't believe me look up the Southern Strategy and Moral Majority strategies of Nixon and Reagan, the electoral coalition upon which the modern rightwing is built. We are well beyond making nice. We passed that goal about ten years ago. It's time to fight back NOW before it's too late. The planet can't wait another 50 years for us to try reasoning with bigots and the willfully ignorant. ( What party is it that's denying climate change and rolling back environmental protections again?)
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 28, 2019 2:47:06 GMT -5
The Cap'n I know that earlier response isn't exactly what you had in mind. So I'll offer an addendum. Just hoping and praying isn't going to get anywhere, and frankly when most people talk about compromise it seems like the onus is ALWAYS on democrats to do so. Based on the list provided above, as well as the fact that FDR and McGovern would be defamed as commie radicals today ( while our democrats look like the republicans of the pre-Reagan era) I hold firm that if anyone needs to cross the aisle and start the change it has to be republicans this time. Can you honestly see that happening? Do you really think the same republicans who worship Trump and hang "liar liar pants on fire" signs during a congressional hearing are really gonna meet us halfway if we tried? ( Remember the Obama years?) Exactly. In order to get politics back to a place of civility we're going to need a few reforms to pass. 1) So, first of all, we need new viable parties. When you only have two options it's inevitably going to devolve into an "us vs them" mentality. Even just a third party would upset the balance of power enough that it'd force compromise. Why? Because if you're obstructionist and shit all over the others, you get left out in the cold while the other two compromise to get their reforms passed. It changes up that one way binary status quo. This prevents tenuously allied factions of society ( fiscal conservatives/religious fundies/racists on one side, Centrists/Feminists/Democratic Socialists on the other) from being forced into these abnormal coalitions. This means no longer having to swallow your values to vote for someone you hate just so someone you hate MORE doesn't win. This way each faction can be more honest, active and influential without getting shouted down or shamed into falling in line within their own party. 2) But for this to even have a chance of happening, we need to get rid of First Past the Post voting. FPTP insures there can only ever be two parties, because risking a vote for the underdog up-and-comer means injuring your second favorite party's chance to win. If a new Progressive Party came up the pike in our current system, promising green infrastructure and healthcare and Universal Basic Income I'd want to vote for them. But if I risk it, everyone else even remotely close to me on the spectrum has to hop on board too or else all we've done is sabotage the Democrats. Then the party most diametrically opposed to me wins, the new third party dies out due to lack of power in government and demoralized followers. It has happened hundreds of times and will again in the future until we change the way we vote. I strongly recommend Range Voting based on my research into the topic, but literally anything would be an improvement. 3) We need to reform the media. Break up the monopolies ( six companies own all the mainstream media in the US) and reinstate the Fairness doctrine. Say that if you call yourself news you need to either present all sides or use verifiable sources ( academic research, scholarly articles, peer-reviewed scientific studies, etc.) You'd have some people throwing a fit and using free speech as a defense but at some point we're going to have to recognize that there are negatives of free speech and we'll have to determine which is more important. I've seen the garbage they air on FOX or CNN these days--it's all talking heads shouting over each other and regurgitating buzz-words, pushing the narrative of their side. Nobody can learn much less analyze what's going on with that kind of thinly veiled obfuscation. However, realistically I dont think even this would solve the problem since a lot of misinformation and echo-chambering occurs online. Trying to regulate the "good" websites will be like playing wack a mole. 4) We need to fix living conditions for people. When times are bad--and make no mistake, they are for most Americans--people resort to rallying around their tribe and attacking the other. It's what our primitive instincts demand of us. If wages were good, student debt didn't cripple people's futures out the gate, the planet weren't dying and our infrastructure were something to be proud of, do you think we'd be lashing out at each other so harshly? Probably not, because if things are good there's not as much to complain about. A fantastic documentary hosted by a former secretary of the interior goes into this--Inequality for All. Highly recommend it. 5) We need a public place where people can interact with others again. We spend so much time at these jobs we hate, then come home so exhausted we veg out on the couch watching TV until we fall asleep. We meet more and more people online and don't get the emotional reinforcement that comes from face-to-face interaction. Online, people are more likely to be nasty for no reason, plus our genuine attempts at communication are more easily misunderstood. We need a new modern equivalent to what the Roman baths used to be--a communal area where people could go and hang out for awhile. Nowadays, in the Late Capitalism era, everything cost money; there's nowhere you can really go to just chill in public for awhile if you're not spending a bunch of money and/or already meeting someone you know there. Maybe shopping malls used to fill that niche to a limited extent, but now with online shopping those are gone too. 6) We need real education. Our schools should produce people who value critical thinking and the scientific method as opposed to dogma and blind allegiance to authority. We have to reform the curricula of our schools, and move away from Educational Essentialism. One alternative to the way we organize schools now is Democratic Education, but my preferred is Progressive Education. Then there's Educational Perennialism which may be a good compromise. Like with FPTP, literally anything is better than the way we organize our schools now--it's terrible for the students AND the teachers. When we raise people who are actually interested in searching for the objective truth, who question authority and know the actual goddamn definitions of political science terms like "socialism" we might get a decent discourse again. 7) Personally, I'd argue that we need Universal Basic Income as that would solve a lot of these issues all at once. Without having to work shitty dead end jobs just to stay alive, people would have the time and means to see loved ones more often. They'd have the leisure time to go outside more often (it's boring being couped up forever). They'd have the freedom to pursue more education (even if it means just reading more articles or listening to more lectures online) and their creative endeavors since they wouldn't have to waste time working jobs they hate. Without work sucking out so much of our energy, people would be more likely to get involved with politics since, like the elderly, now they have the time to give a shit. I'll admit upfront this last one is more of my personal solution as opposed an objective need I think we could all agree with. With the automation crisis looming it will be a necessity unless someone else thinks of a better solution besides "everyone will just magically get a new job." And really, shouldn't a world where robots do all the work nobody else wants to do be the longterm goal of society? Why have we become so entrapped by this one ideology, unrestrained Capitalism, that we no longer have any imagination or drive to make a better world where man is free? The thing is though, the party standing in the way of all these things is the Republicans. They're the ones who cut the budget for education. They're the ones pushing for Laissez Faire Capitalism where everything is privatized and the poor are denied aid, healthcare or even basic human dignity. They're the ones who buy into these bullshit conspiracy theories wholesale because someone on a YouTube channel called "Verum Media" told them to. ( I'll admit bias and echo-chambers goes both ways, but I maintain no disinformation machine in America is as prevalent or successful as the Murdoch media empire.) The election reform though, I will grant is 100% on both parties, and luckily getting that one thing passed will make other reforms exponentially easier. So as a result, we're right back where we were in my first post--we need to fight the hardcore rightwing on these issues and get reforms passed in as many of these categories as possible. You do that, and given enough time a more balanced, respectful discourse will follow. But caving in, meeting in the middle every time they push harder, that's not a long term solution it's a short-term placation. That was the Clinton Third Way, this triangulation/meet in the middle BS. Again, Obama sincerely tried to do that his whole two terms and they spit in his face--now we have Trump and the Republicans are more inflammatory than they've ever been. We have to fight back now because we're dealing with people who will never be decent to anyone who's not ordained by FOX news and has an "R" next to their name. I know at least one person is going to take exception to these posts, probably accuse me of hating anyone who disagrees with me again, but it's true.
|
|
|
Post by The Cap'n on Feb 28, 2019 8:17:40 GMT -5
That’s a lot to wake up to 😀
Response will have to wait until after work. But I hear you.
|
|