SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Trump is being urged by some advisers to formally address the nation and call for calm, while others have said he should condemn the rioting and looting more forcefully or risk losing middle-of-the-road voters in November, according to several sources familiar with the deliberations.
[...] During a staff call Friday, Trump's top domestic policy aide Brooke Rollins argued for a measured response to riots the night before, advice that was echoed by Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner. Several advisers feared, and hoped to avoid, another Charlottesville moment, when Trump was criticized after declaring in 2017 that "very fine people" were among the Nazi mobs that descended upon Charlottesville, Virginia.
[...] While aides like Kushner have pushed for a more restrained response, Trump is also hearing from several advisers who warned that by not condemning the protests after the death of Floyd, an unarmed 46-year-old black man, that turned into rioting and looting, he is risking losing some demographics that will be key to his election victory in November, like suburban women voters.
As Protests and Violence Spill Over, Trump Shrinks Back
The president spent Sunday out of sight, berating opponents on Twitter, even as some of his campaign advisers were recommending that he deliver a televised address to an anxious nation.
how the George Floyd protests left Donald Trump exposed
“Americans watching this address tonight have seen the recent images of violence in our streets and the chaos in our communities. Many have witnessed this violence personally, some have even been its victims. I have a message for all of you: the crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon – and I mean very soon – come to an end.”
These were the words of Donald Trump, not in May 2020 but July 2016, as he accepted the Republican presidential nomination at the national convention in Cleveland.
[...] Not even Trump’s harshest critics can blame him for a virus believed to have come from a market in the Chinese city of Wuhan, nor for an attendant economic collapse, nor for four centuries of slavery, segregation, police brutality and racial injustice.
But they can, and do, point to how he made a bad situation so much worse. The story of Trump’s presidency was arguably always leading to this moment, with its toxic mix of weak moral leadership, racial divisiveness, crass and vulgar rhetoric and an erosion of norms, institutions and trust in traditional information sources. Taken together, these ingredients created a tinderbox poised to explode when crises came.
Antifa: Trump says group will be designated 'terrorist organisation'
"It's ANTIFA and the Radical Left. Don't lay the blame on others!" Mr Trump tweeted on Saturday.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @04:40AM (80 children)
I don't, actually. I know him only from books and celluloid.
The first supreme dickhead I remember, from this life at least, was Tricky Dick's pardoner in chief. Mazda, I think that was his name.
No, Ford! Same shit, higher price. Anyhoo.
Trump has been torn between advisors from the beginning. And the swamp has been gunning for his advisors with everything they could muster the whole time. With their highest priority on the ones that were NOT fascists.
This is why a second term of Trump is likely to be far more catastrophic than the first.
This is why I became a Democrat. This is why I encouraged others to do it. To avoid that second term. To, hopefully, preserve the Republic.
And what are the Democrats offering? The worst possible candidate, did I hear that right?
Well, the worst one surviving. Tulsi was worth every penny I spent on her and MANY orders of magnitude more, just for dropping Harris in her tracks.
But Biden? Really?
He would drool in his chair while his advisors made the decisions. And his advisors, on average, inspire no more confidence in me than Trump's.
They are 100% "neo-liberal." For those that are not familiar, "neo-liberals" are not liberal, in any way shape or form. Depending on the year and other factors, they sometimes identify as "neo-conservatives" despite being also not conservative, in any way shape or form. Their agenda is "third way capitalism" and may be accurately envisioned as a mixture of the worst qualities of the European Union and the Chinese Communist party.
These are dark, dark times. Darker even than you paint them here.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Friday June 05 2020, @05:15AM (20 children)
Personal strategy: given an unavoidable choice between a passive fool and an active fool on "your side", always pick the passive fool.
At least you'll have less chances to land in a damaging situation that you have no control over it due to the action of a fool. All the others trying to compensate or take advantage of the fool are, at the very least, more predictable if not more rational.
The active fool will act chaotically; pick him 'for your team' only if you are an adrenaline junkie and like to live with the uncertainty of the next hour. Also keep in mind that the chances for something to go the way you like and/or need are slim: there are an infinite number of ways for the things to "go wrong" and just a handful (if any at all) ways for the things to "go well".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @05:22AM (8 children)
Fair enough, but I'm not convinced. At least the active fool stirs up opposition.
I don't want to see corporate America in charge of government America too. That's a worst case scenario, and that's what "both sides" are set on.
There must be a third side, at the least.
"All the others trying to compensate or take advantage of the fool are, at the very least, more predictable if not more rational."
They'll predictably enslave me and everyone I love.
A little unpredictability could hardly hurt then.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Friday June 05 2020, @05:37AM (1 child)
As long as you keep in mind it is likely the resulting chaos may hurt you and everyone you love, sure, go for it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @05:45AM
Yep, that sounds about right.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @02:00PM
Active fools just need to be pointed in the right direction, passive fools mess up when you really don't expect it.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @02:00PM (3 children)
I think we've had enough object lesson of "what happens when you put an idiot in charge." Can we please get back to something resembling rational leadership now?
Where in the Trump rhetoric or actions have you ever seen a sign that he is resisting the corporate takeover of societal power?
Yes, but the majority of U.S. voters can barely comprehend one choice: Us vs. Them - asking for a nuanced evaluation of multiple candidates is like asking Mr. Ed [wikipedia.org] for a philosophical dissertation on the pros and cons of philanthropic intervention in third world economies.
All evidence of the past 14 days to the contrary?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @02:19PM (1 child)
Wow, just how far back do you think you can go?
I mean, great idea, if you can pull it off. Write-in campaigns for President really have the deck stacked against them though.
"Where in the Trump rhetoric or actions have you ever seen a sign that he is resisting the corporate takeover of societal power?"
Trump personally? Not really. But the executive order is more than many of his predecessors ever did.
"Yes, but the majority of U.S. voters can barely comprehend one choice: Us vs. Them - asking for a nuanced evaluation of multiple candidates is like asking Mr. Ed [wikipedia.org] for a philosophical dissertation on the pros and cons of philanthropic intervention in third world economies."
The MSM and the Prussian schools work tirelessly to achieve that effect, but despite all their abuse people aren't quite as dumb as they want them to be. People are waking up.
"All evidence of the past 14 days to the contrary?"
All evidence? Do you mean to say you think everything bad that's happened over the last two weeks was Trump?
Cause that would be a little crazy, if that's really what you're saying. It's not like the states the Democrats control are doing any better than the rest of the country - quite the opposite. Democratic governors prohibit demonstrations that disagree with them, because covid - but encourage everyone to get out and protest against Trump, forget covid!
You still can't see what's going on?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @02:58PM
Yes. EVERYTHING bad in the last couple of weeks can be directly traced to Trump's completely fucking up the national response to the murder by suffocation of a suspect. EVERYTHING.
Just like everything since January in Covid is completely Trump's fault for completely fucking up the national response to that.
And it is still continuing, as he endorses by retweet a letter equating all protestors to terrorists.
But that aside: Stupid man wants to claim he has absolute authority to do anything he wants to, then he gets absolute responsibility for everything that is taking place whether or not he actually has the authority. QED.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @07:36PM
Not to derail discussion too much, but that's really unfair to Mr. Ed. Seriously, have you watched the show? Mr. Ed may have been a horse, but he was ten times more intelligent than any of the other (human) characters there. Over the course of the series, Ed wins trivia questions on multiple quiz shows, is apparently an amazing chess player, and even outsmarts an international spy ring on multiple occasions. I mean, they tried to give Ed an intelligence test where there were two carrots, one of which was plugged up to an electric current. Ed sees how the test is run, unplugs the machine, and eats both carrots.
I doubt he'd be an expert on "pros and cons of philanthropic interventions," but I'd put more faith in the potential insightfulness of Mr. Ed's answer to such a question than 99% of the American public.
(Score: 2) by bussdriver on Friday June 05 2020, @06:09PM
Active Fools are MORE harmful; directly, their incompetence makes it difficult to manage, yes; however, large complex organizations are actually run by managers because a genius can't have enough time in the day to micromanage everything (let alone effectively.) Corruption is running rampant and we hardly even know as all the information overload, chaos, and distractions generated by the fool! Biden will not be able to recreate the level of smoke screen this fool has; plus the public doesn't even suspect anything clever when a fool is the "leader" (at least with Bush many saw him as the figurehead he was... the public thinks Trump is in charge and too incompetent for real permanent harm... while he has done more permanent damage than anybody in history.)
I've been against Biden since the 1st attempt to run for president. He is Mitt Romney if he was a democrat. Politically they are closer than probably any dem was to biden. Look it up at politicalcompass.org (BTW, a non US website) for now and back in 2012 for Romney.
There hasn't been a real choice since Carter; the last unapproved president. Yeah, Bernie etc. well you got to see what happens if somebody unapproved even gets close. They'd have killed him before he got in office or started a civil war like Lincolns presumed victory started (not his fault.)
I'll volunteer for Biden. The nation's demise is coming (all democracies fall to despotism) but I'd rather it die like the UK's empire or better, the Roman empire (which took longer to die than the USA is old) than turn into WW4, with the USA on the side of fascism this time.... remember fascism by it's nature is nationalistic so it won't use foreign terms and identities - it's use local themes. Hell, this "fool" is going to label anybody who strongly opposes fascism a terrorist! How clear does it have to get??? You can't fight corporate slavery when you are now an antifa terrorist.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday June 05 2020, @08:26AM (7 children)
The problem is, there is no such thing as a passive fool. What you wind up with is active fools working behind the scenes. Remember the Shrub? While he wasn't totally passive, he was all too often a puppet for people like Cheney, who worked behind the scenes to fan the flames of war.
With someone like Trump, you can see what he's thinking (if you can call it that). There aren't many surprised or hidden maneuvers - at best, his actual actions are a bit disguised, because they're buried in the blather. With Biden, you would never be sure who was behind the curtain, or what their goals and motivations were.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. By selecting Biden, the Democrats have virtually guaranteed Trump's re-election.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Friday June 05 2020, @02:57PM (4 children)
Just 'cause he's Tweeting racist garbage and inciting more violence on Twitter does not mean he is being honest or transparent.
How many NDAs does he have?
Where are those Tax Returns?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @03:38PM
Didn't you hear? The Senate completely vindicated him.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @06:14PM (2 children)
tweeting racist garbage? yeah, if whites don't bend the knee and let stupid fucking monkeys burn their businesses down or "jog" through their neighborhoods breaking into houses at will, they're racists bastards. why are you such a lying, whiney little bitch?
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday June 05 2020, @07:23PM (1 child)
I'm not the one hiding in bunkers and putting a wall around the whitehouse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:55AM
At least he's getting his wall even if it's just around the whitehouse.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @06:20PM (1 child)
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-campaign-meetings-white-house [foxnews.com]
https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/ [270towin.com]
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/03/joe-biden-trump-poll-monmouth-298470 [politico.com]
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/ [fivethirtyeight.com]
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday June 05 2020, @07:25PM
Shhh!
Don't tell them about 2018 either!
I love that picture of Trump holding the bible upside down. Can you even fucking imagine if Obama had pulled that one?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @10:37AM (1 child)
Alternate strategy: use the primaries to avoid the possibility of having to choose between two fools. If your final choice comes down to two fools, vote blank or invalid. Wasting a vote is better than actively supporting a fool.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Friday June 05 2020, @11:18PM
So there are only going to be two candidates on the ballots with absolutely no alternative?
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @03:07PM
That's true when you are the one leading. It is the opposite when you want to pick a leader.
Rookie mistake, tbh.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DrkShadow on Friday June 05 2020, @07:02AM (23 children)
Maybe, just maybe, vote for a decent candidate. A candidate that you actually like and agree with.
Maybe, just maybe, when people determine that their votes aren't "thrown away" by not voting for one of the reality-tv-show candidates, _others_ will vote for decent candidates, _too_.
But not at first. Not without a demonstration. Not without an example. And probably not while they're so taught what to vote for and how to vote - perhaps not even this _generation_ of people will see the better end result.
It will take time, absolutely, and in the mean time there will be people elected that you don't like or approve of. (Really, how is that different from people that you don't approve of or like being elected?) Discipline, perseverence, knowing rhat you're doing right, with an end goal that _later_, we'll have elected someone to office that knows their head from their ass and cares about the voting public. Someday - but certainly not next election, nor the next.
Or you can just vote for someone terrible who is hell-bent on screwing up this country to the maximum extent that will benefit them. That's easy. I mean hey, who am I to tell you what to do.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Friday June 05 2020, @08:23AM (1 child)
Paraphrasing, I think Eugene Debs: I'd rather vote for what I want and not get it, then vote for what I don't want and get that.
(Score: 2) by fido_dogstoyevsky on Friday June 05 2020, @11:21PM
Because that's the only way you have any chance of getting what you want.
It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by VacuumTube on Friday June 05 2020, @11:01AM
I would agree with this strategy except that we have a pretty good idea about what we get either way. If we stay with things the way they are, we'll likely end up with:
- Another few $trillion in tax-cuts for wealthy corporations and individuals resulting in more huge increases in the national debt
- Cuts in the pathetic skeleton of a health care system we have at present for the poor and middle class
- Additional conservative lifetime appointments to the Supreme and other Courts
- An emerging dictator will gain additional power
If we go the other way, we'll probably have:
- Meager improvements in Obama Care and Medicaid
- Appointments of liberal-ish judges to the Courts, which should help to limit the effects of what's been done in the last four years
- Modest improvements in environmental policies
- Some improvement in application of the rule of law
- Other modest improvements that will leave the country in slightly better shape than we're in at present.
Neither strategy is ideal, and both play into the hands of groups that don't have the best interests of the country as a goal. But the choice is a no-contest decision for most of us.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @11:02AM (3 children)
We might lose the election voting for a third party candidate, and we might have 4 more years of shit. But if enough of us start voting for third party candidates, then the D's and the R's will see their funding evaporate and the other candidates will have better chances in the next election and the election after that. If enough third party candidates make it into the House of Representatives or the Senate then we can pressure them to establish real changes to how our officials are elected or how our government is run. We may even get a third party president into office before this whole process is done, although whether he or she is working for the people or has already been placed in the pocket of corporate interests will have to be seen.
Whether you consider yourself a liberal or conservative, realize the state of the country and that your actions can have more of an impact than 'just this election'. Losing a battle is bad, but continuing the status quo for another term means nothing will change and the war itself will be lost. I hope each and every one of you will bear that in mind while deciding who to vote for in the upcoming election. If you need examples that what I am saying is true, just look to the history of the united states since the founding of the union in 1784^H7 (how many of you thought 1776 was when the Union was founded? Hint: It was originally a confederation, and even that was years after the Declaration!)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @01:34AM (2 children)
Sorry that was what we tried on 2016, and now we know how bad Trump is so the lesser of two evils it is! I think the younger generation might have had some early wisdome shaken besten i to their heads so we can push on every election for the next decade. Hopefully push through candidates that will repear the Patriot act, enact election reforms, limit mass surveillance, remove citizen's united, put back the fairness doctrine, and some other stuff we need.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:06PM
Formerly-Democrat-Republican-"Billionaire" isn't exactly the same as a third party candidate. In fact, it's almost the opposite.
(Score: 2) by VacuumTube on Monday June 08 2020, @02:19PM
It's not a sure thing no matter what we do. But at this point the chances of electing a third party candidate are almost non-existent, so like it or not a vote for such a person increases the likelihood that the next four years will be as bad--and more likely worse--than those we've just experienced.
(Score: 4, Informative) by HiThere on Friday June 05 2020, @12:20PM (10 children)
Unfortunately, with a plurality wins all voting system, you *are* throwing away your vote when you vote for a minor candidate. You *are* voicing opposition, but both of the major parties can, and do, ignore that. The system is such that when one of the two major parties disintegrates, the remaining major party will split into a new pair of major parties. This has been how it has worked since at least the 1860's.
If you analyze the vote systematically you can determine that the options of a minor party either joining the current pair or replacing one of them is nearly impossible. Even Teddy Roosevelt couldn't make his "Bull Moose" party a go, and he was a popular ex-president who was able to capture a larger share of the vote than any other "independent" candidate in the history of the country.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @02:17PM (9 children)
So are we just supposed to live with it and chose between D and R forever? Frankly, I'm not convinced.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday June 05 2020, @02:47PM (3 children)
Instant Runoff Voting (or some other proportional/ranked choice voting reform)
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday June 05 2020, @05:09PM
IRV is actually a pretty horrible voting system. Someone did a mathematical analysis of it a while back, comparing to other voting systems, and it comes up with some bizarre results in many scenarios. I'm all for switching to another voting system, but IRV would be the last of my picks there.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:11AM
IRV has the advantage that it's easier to explain, and it *is* better than the current system. My preference is Condorcet, but it's rather difficult to explain.
There is *NO* perfect voting system. Every single one will, under some circumstances, produce an undesirable result. But IRV is a lot better than plurality rules.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:11PM
As long as that means it's a vote for which candidate gets to instantly run off a cliff, I'm all for it.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday June 05 2020, @04:50PM (1 child)
Yes, that's really the only thing you can do as long as you have a Plurality voting system. The only way to fix this is to change the voting system. Somehow, I don't see Americans staging mass protests demanding an Approval or Condorcet voting system anytime soon.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @08:56PM
Fortunately, you don't have to stage protests [wikipedia.org]:
If you can get it in the ballot, people *will* vote for it.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @05:13PM (1 child)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @06:06AM
In my Province, the right wing party has died a few times, they just move to the new party and take it over. The current right wing party is the "Liberal Party of BC", in no way related to the "Liberal Party of Canada" as a few elections back, a lot of people voted 3rd party. The time before that, we actually had proportional representation for one election, the old Conservative party got replaced by Social Credit, who immediately went back to first past the post and replaced the Conservative.
Federally, there has been mergers, way back the Progressive Party managed to come in 2nd at one point, eventually they merged with the Conservative Party and became the Progressive Conservative Party (PC). More recently, the Reform Party appeared on the far right and eventually merged with the PC's to become the new Conservative Party of Canada and governed for a decade.
The left seems to splinter and stay splintered here, with 3 Federal parties that Americans would call extreme left and one right wing party.
One thing that helps here is that the Provincial elections are divorced from the Federal elections, so new parties can and do appear at the Provincial level and sometimes move into the Federal level.
(Score: 2) by VacuumTube on Monday June 08 2020, @02:22PM
Not at all. But the cost of taking a stand this year is far too high.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @02:03PM (2 children)
The primaries are over, the people have spoken, all the decent candidates have already lost. What we're left with is a choice between Dumb and Dumber.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @03:41PM (1 child)
The Presidential debates are going to be THE WORST in living memory. I'd be surprized if either of them remembers their own name let alone the other guy's.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday June 05 2020, @07:28PM
Yep, Biden will mention a phonograph and Trump will literally take a shit on stage. And y'all will be right here saying they're both the exact same.
(Score: 2) by hendrikboom on Friday June 05 2020, @04:29PM
The way to get credible third-party candidates is to have a preferential ballot with instant run-off.
That way no one need be afraid of wasting their vote by voting for their first choice.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @06:29PM
If you want to see more varieties of ideas/political voices/parties, work toward implementing ranked-choice voting (RCV) [wikipedia.org] in your community, as has been done in more than 20 places in the US already.
This allows you to not "waste" your vote on the "lesser of two evils," since you get to pick (ranked in order of your preference) multiple candidates for a particular office.
However, this requires you* (unless, of course, you're in Maine or New York City or any of the other places which have implemented this) to get up off your fat, lazy ass and *do* something. If you don't (whether that be advocating RCV or volunteering/support for other candidates), then you're not being constructive, just whinging.
*This is a general "you," not specifically "you," drkshadow. Although you, specifically, are a member of that set.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @07:26AM (3 children)
Not so much "advisors" as conspiracy theorists and family members. Corey? Flynn? Hannity? Bannon? Alex Jones? Bolton? DeVos? Kellyannie? What do you call people with no expertise or rational thought, who tell you stuff?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @11:06AM
> What do you call people with no expertise or rational thought, who tell you stuff?
Rasputin? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grigori_Rasputin [wikipedia.org]
Didn't work out too well for the Tsar.
I just noticed the name resemblance to Trumps buddy Putin...
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @12:52PM
> What do you call people with no expertise or rational thought, who tell you stuff?
Boss.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @04:55PM
You forgot his most trusted advisors: Trump, Trump, and Trump. But none of those still counts nearly as much as Trump.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @01:47PM (21 children)
This has been the nature of the U.S. Presidency ever since the star of "Bedtime for Bonzo" took office.
Historically, I've been much more impressed with the change in condition of the country after 8 years of Clinton's advisors, and 8 years of Obama's advisors than I have after 8 years of Bush Jr.'s leash holders, or 4 years of Trump's advisors. The 12 years of Reagan/Bush Sr. were pretty good/impressive, but I got the distinct impression that they were gambling - bigtime - and happened to win; while I approve of the outcome, I do not have confidence in the team and when they've had power since then the results have been much worse.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @03:29PM (17 children)
The opposite of my assessment. I would say evil/impressive.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @05:00PM (1 child)
Yes but Lawful Evil, as opposed to the current Chaotic Evil. Maybe someday we can get back to the more preferable Neutral Evil or even more hopefully Lawful Neutral.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @05:11PM
No, none of these guys were lawful in the slightest.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @05:16PM (14 children)
Evil is often a matter of perspective.
Good or evil, they brought a kind of end to the Cold War.
I didn't get to tour the entire USSR in 1990, but I did take a 5 day bike tour of East Germany along the B5 from Boizenburg to Berlin in the summer and I can say: those people were MUCH better off overall after the Cold War ended - not 100% in all areas, but most things have dramatically improved for them in the last 30 years.
Also, as far as evil goes in the Bushes, I far prefer Bush Senior's evil expedition to Iraq/Kuwait as opposed to Junior's "Mission Accomplished" in Afghanistan/Iraq.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @06:03PM (13 children)
The Soviet Union was dismantled from within, because it simply wasn't capable of providing for its people.
"Also, as far as evil goes in the Bushes, I far prefer Bush Senior's evil expedition to Iraq/Kuwait as opposed to Junior's "Mission Accomplished" in Afghanistan/Iraq."
I hesitate to start splitting hairs so fine as to argue that one mass murderer is preferable to another, as a general rule.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @06:26PM (12 children)
Reagan himself, of course not. "Star Wars'" massive funding of basic military research like high energy laser weapons, and other escalations that started in 1980 after Reagan took office - they didn't "crush the USSR" - but they did hasten, and perhaps even bring about its fall. If instead we had continued SALT and other Cold War cost containment measures, the USSR might have brought down the Iron Curtain in a more controlled fashion and it might even persist in some form today. That might have been a better outcome for the people of central Russia, but not the border states.
Mass murder, in response to an unlawful invasion - usurpation of sovereignty, with a quick decisive: in-out-done, minimal collateral damage outside the military is orders of magnitude better than protracted violent occupations like Afghanistan (Russia and US), Iraq II, Vietnam, Korea, etc.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @06:43PM (1 child)
I completely disagree. The USSR was failing long before the 1980s.
In fact, in an essay by Robert Heinlein (don't remember the title, but published in the anthology "Expanded Universe" [wikipedia.org]), he predicted the fall of the USSR within 50 years in 1960!
As I recall, Heinlein's thesis rested on a variety of economic indicators (including the price and availability of bread, the number of cargo ships in the harbors of Moscow and a bunch of other stuff), collected during a holiday he took with his wife in Russia, not any sort of arms race.
If that was obvious to a layman back then, presumably it wasn't difficult to figure out by those with expertise, even back then. That the US decided to focus on the USSR as a boogeyman, even though they were clearly dying, says more about the US than it does about the USSR.
Reagan/G.H.W. Bush? Secret negotiations with the Iranians to keep the US Embassy hostages in custody until after he took office? Iran-Contra? Trading guns for hashish (then selling that hashish in the US -- and thank goodness! Great stuff that Afghani hash!) with the Mujahadeen? There are so many examples of those guys doing flatly *illegal* shit, we could have a whole front-page article just about that.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @08:16PM
What I'm saying is: I agree with Heinlein. Absent radical aggressive policy maneuvers by the Reagan/Bush admin in the 1980s, the USSR would probably have come apart within 30 years, instead of 10. At the time I was pretty solidly opposed to what they were clearly doing, but 30 years later I can see a fair amount of good that came from it and how "business as usual" might have been quite a bit worse for a lot of people.
The price of bread in East Germany was 10 phennig per kilo in 1990, I heard that it had recently been raised from 5 phennig per kilo. Conversions from East Marks to West Marks are nearly meaningless, but even giving the East Mark a 1:1 with West Marks at the time, bread was less than US$0.04 per pound, at a time when "free market" bread in the US and Europe was basically $1 per pound. Rent and basic utilities were similarly controlled to crazy-low prices, but apparently getting permission to change apartments was a decades long ordeal.
The thing about food in East Germany was: it wasn't traded for money in stores - good food changed hands in the black market. About all you could buy for money was (usually) that bread, sometimes some really really bad sausage, maybe lemon drink in a bottle. In 5 days, I encountered a dozen markets that were basically empty except for one or at most two of those items, plus one very very busy little store that had about as much selection as a picked over gas-station quickie mart in the U.S. (still, orders of magnitude more than the other "stores.") Still, the two private homes I stayed in, and even the youth hostels, had much better food available for guests - but they couldn't articulate where to buy it, you knew someone who knew someone and it wasn't traded for money.
Yep, Iran-Contra, Ollie North, if anybody cared that should have been enough to flush every Republican out of the House and Senate... apparently we don't actually care - I think we should, but what I think doesn't count for a lot come November.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @06:54PM (4 children)
Mises beat Heinlein to it by decades, but then again he was the greatest living Economist of his time, rather than a Science Fiction writer.
But the calculation problem doomed the USSR from the beginning, and the collapse was always inevitable. External threats are as likely to have delayed it as hastened it - the spectre of a foreign enemy is often useful like that.
"Mass murder, in response to an unlawful invasion"
A propagandists soundbite that bears little resemblance to the actual situation.
If Bush really had a problem with the invasion of Kuwait, he might have instructed his ambassador on the scene to refrain from green-lighting it. Might have even put some pressure on the Emir to agree to arbitration.
It was just another fake news war. Remember the Kuwaiti babies in incubators that never existed?
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @08:21PM (2 children)
What I'm saying is: I agree with Heinlein. Absent radical aggressive policy maneuvers by the Reagan/Bush admin in the 1980s, the USSR would probably have come apart within 30 years, instead of 10. At the time I was pretty solidly opposed to what they were clearly doing, but 30 years later I can see a fair amount of good that came from it and how "business as usual" might have been quite a bit worse for a lot of people.
The price of bread in East Germany was 10 phennig per kilo in 1990, I heard that it had recently been raised from 5 phennig per kilo. Conversions from East Marks to West Marks are nearly meaningless, but even giving the East Mark a 1:1 with West Marks at the time, bread was less than US$0.04 per pound, at a time when "free market" bread in the US and Europe was basically $1 per pound. Rent and basic utilities were similarly controlled to crazy-low prices, but apparently getting permission to change apartments was a decades long ordeal.
The thing about food in East Germany was: it wasn't traded for money in stores - good food changed hands in the black market. About all you could buy for money was (usually) that bread, sometimes some really really bad sausage, maybe lemon drink in a bottle. In 5 days, I encountered a dozen markets that were basically empty except for one or at most two of those items, plus one very very busy little store that had about as much selection as a picked over gas-station quickie mart in the U.S. (still, orders of magnitude more than the other "stores.") Still, the two private homes I stayed in, and even the youth hostels, had much better food available for guests - but they couldn't articulate where to buy it, you knew someone who knew someone and it wasn't traded for money.
Yep, Iran-Contra, Ollie North, if anybody cared that should have been enough to flush every Republican out of the House and Senate... apparently we don't actually care - I think we should, but what I think doesn't count for a lot come November.
There's so little that we can actually trust in the news / blogosphere - I prefer to disregard the wilder side of speculations.
Things we actually do know: there was an invasion (who told who it was O.K. will always remain a speculation) - there was a response - the response was both successful and impressively cleanly executed (no, I'm not forgetting Gulf War Syndrome... just comparing Gulf War I to the other overseas quagmire disasters.)
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @08:50PM
"Yep, Iran-Contra, Ollie North, if anybody cared that should have been enough to flush every Republican out of the House and Senate... apparently we don't actually care"
The power of mass media and lies. Only many years later did the details become more widely known, and if you ask the average person on the street they wouldn't be able to tell you much about it.
We need true transparent oversight and an educated public that can at least grasp the basics of such stories.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday June 05 2020, @11:09PM
I'd say Heinlein simply overestimated their longevity. By the time Reagan came to power they were spent. Instead of fielding more weapons they were only able to lay out more decoys. Their economy was moribund, their people hungry. They were putting on a brave face but they would likely have collapsed shortly no matter what he did or didn't do.
"Things we actually do know: there was an invasion (who told who it was O.K. will always remain a speculation)"
Nope, wikileaks published the cables. https://news.antiwar.com/2011/01/02/glaspie-memo-leaked-us-dealings-with-iraq-ahead-of-1990-invasion-of-kuwait-detailed/
"there was a response"
"A response" you say? Let's make a little analogy here.
Your having trouble with your neighbor. He's undermining your property lines stealing from you, and refuses to negotiate, refuses arbitration, just thumbs his nose at you and dares you to stop him. You come talk with me, I live all the way across town but I'm heavily armed and I talk to both of you; sometimes I even have this neighbor of yours come over and shoot in my range, as you've also done on occasion. You're worried that if you get into it with this neighbor I might come in on his side; but I reassure you that I have "no position" on the issue, it's between y'all.
So then you go back again to negotiate, again get nothing but the middle finger, and now reassured I won't be jumping in you go ahead and confront this troublesome neighbor - and then I just jump right in anyway.
A response? A response from halfway across town, from someone who's not involved and proclaimed no desire to become involved... not a response. Just a trap.
"the response was both successful and impressively cleanly executed"
Tens of thousands of men were murdered, "impressive" in a sense but certainly nothing to emulate.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:18AM
This explains so much about Arik. Like how he is khallow's sockpuppet. Or the other way around. Or maybe they mutually sockpuppet each other. But that is just too weird to even contemplate.
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @06:21AM (4 children)
You are talking about Kuwait illegally taking Iraq's oil right when you refer to "unlawful invasion"? To me, they seem to have got away with it. Shame about those 100,000 conscripts who died. Same with the Kurds and the children who couldn't get medicine to punish Saddam. At least the Saudi's mission to make sure women couldn't get educated or expose their legs, arms or faces was successful.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:19PM (3 children)
My impression of the region, based in part on family who worked there in the 1950s, is that it has been an ongoing clusterfuck of atrocities (in no small part rooted in the usual suspects of imperialism, arbitrary national boundaries drawn with the object of weakening the resulting countries through destabilization, and propped up puppet leaders) with gradual movement toward stability from 1960-1990 when the so-called "New World Order" was attempted to be imposed, sort of like a game of musical chairs where the adult in the room stops the music and the children are expected to stop running in circles. Until Bush Jr crashed the party it seemed to be working.
All of these things are a matter of perspective, not only position but especially time. At the time Iraq invaded Kuwait, that was something seen as unacceptable by many - I was in Germany at the time and they were all a-twitter about how terrible it was, but powerless to do anything. Of course, their perspective on the world is a little different - their newspaper called out Hurricane Bertha as the first storm of the season, I tried to explain how that wasn't possible because of the way storms are named, but the Germans insisted that the newspaper was correct (possible that "storm" was their translation of "Hurricane" - missing the distinction with "Tropical Storm".)
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @04:48PM (2 children)
I think your impression is mostly correct. It was a cluster fuck for various reasons, some directly tied to WWI. Their whole culture is also foreign to us. No traditions like free speech or representative government which led to the weird state of affairs that countries like Iraq were actually somewhat free, at least as long as you stayed clear of politics. Women were free to show their knees and elbows, get educated and go to work for example of a type of freedom. Meanwhile the absolute monarchs seemed to be worse at dictatorship with their religious overtones.
Here in Canada, the whole Kuwait thing didn't seem that bad, it's not like Kuwait was a free country, there was evidence that Kuwait was sideways drilling to steal Iraq's oil and Saddam did ask the Americans for permission to invade. It was a shit show but their business at the time.
As your comment about the Germans interpretation of storm/hurricane shows, just using a different language changes peoples perspectives.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday June 06 2020, @07:24PM (1 child)
Here, now, 30 years after the fact, is the first time that the idea that Saddam asked permission to invade Kuwait from the U.S. and was granted any kind of permission to do so has crossed my awareness. If such a thing was done, one would presume it would be very highly classified - any release of "secrets" from that level would seem to be as likely to be fabrication as not, but it's really impossible to know. I returned to the US about a month after the invasion started, and had a friend from Jordan - his father owned "the" chicken ranch in Jordan, apparently was pretty well off to send his son overseas to University, anyway - he spent his nights on shortwave radio trying to get the "real news" about what was going on over there - very different perspective on events than we had.
When you mash up all the perspectives that were available to me, some things remain fairly constant: Iraq invaded Kuwait, set a bunch of oil rigs on fire. U.S. troops invaded Kuwait/Iraq and threw their weight around to highly lethal effect with ridiculously low U.S. casualties (I think the death rate in combat actually dropped as compared to training...), and pretty minimal collateral damage. The fires got put out eventually, a bunch of U.S. soldiers returned home without visible injuries like missing limbs, but screwed up nonetheless. And the region was relatively quiet for about 10 years - quite a long time for that part of the world.
Now if we've actually been invaded by aliens and they are in control of our leadership, lizard people if you will, then it's quite possible that the lizard people had an argument over the distribution of oil resources and this back and forth was a little family squabble between the top lizard people currently ruling Earth. I have zero evidence to support this, besides a few bizarre Hollywood productions that may have been released in order to fictionalize the truth, but, then, if it really is true: we'd never know, would we?
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday June 06 2020, @11:06PM
Well, about America not caring about Iraq invading Kuwait, we have are the transcripts from the Bush library and the Margaret Thatcher foundation, which I'd think are trustworthy. There's also a slightly different version from the NY Times.
One quote from the Bush library,
so not exactly permission but the implication that America would not react as it did. More here, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/April_Glaspie#Meetings_with_Saddam_Hussein [wikipedia.org]
DDG has lots of other links, https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Saddam+permission+to+invade+Iraq&t=seamonkey&ia=web [duckduckgo.com] for example.
Afghanistan too, where America asked for Bin Laden, Afganistan asked for evidence before extraditing and America then invaded rather then going the legal route.
As for the first Iraq war, I thought those 100,00 conscripts getting murdered by America and then America stopping was pretty shitty. Saddam was not a nice man and the way those conscripts were conscripted was the regular army showed up in a village, gathered all the men together, took one and shot him dead to show they were serious, and conscripted the rest for cannon fodder. America really let the Kurds down too in the aftermath, promising support and then not doing it. That's the America for you. Best propaganda machine ever, and it consists of private industry.
(Score: 2) by bussdriver on Friday June 05 2020, @06:20PM (2 children)
The Reagan/Bush short term gains created the Bush mess that resulted in him LOSING, creating a bogus war (Saddam basically asked permission 1st, look what bush's ambassador to Iraq said) and then needing Clinton's cleanup crew to turn things around. Even so, the corporate take over was essentially complete after Reagan, who was an actual corporate spokesperson (for a military weapons maker... no surprise he did the bidding of the military industrial complex.) Clinton was a "new" democrat an actual term back in the day that didn't mean sell out (but it was.) Throw the people some bones and let all the jobs go away - both sides have been doing that since. The Dems appologetically argue it's the way of the modern world they must play in while the Repukes strongly advocate for it and how it'll trickle down on you...
One side thinks being pissed on is rain, and the other tries to get you an umbrella.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday June 05 2020, @06:38PM (1 child)
I agree, none of 'em are good. Reagan accidentally set my Granny up for life with his insane interest rates just after she got her lump-sum teacher's retirement - I think she tripled her retirement fund in 10 years or something insane like that, just by putting it in insured 5 year CDs. Meanwhile, everybody trying to buy a new house was completely screwed, and even the price of housing was restrained far below baseline inflation by the inability to get financing. My student loans came with an 8% APR, but luckily they ran interest free all the way through grad school and I was able to pay them off relatively quickly on graduation.
Trickle down was a huge insult, but I was more concerned about being forced to sign up for selective service at a time when the only open jobs on the market were for nuclear technicians.
It has been past time for a revolution - the man under the tinfoil hat might suggest that this whole "BLM" thing is a diversion from the real issues that "Occupy Wall Street" tried to bring to light. Get the economy fixed and the "black disadvantages" will mostly disappear. Also: reinstate federal oversight of anti-segregation laws at a local level - that shit has gone on long enough, it's time for Bubba to be told: no, you can't break the law just because your daddy (and his daddy and his daddy and his daddy...) did.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:20AM
That is exactly what they are telling those white racist crackers down in Georgia!! Cain't jus' go shootin' joggers, Billybob!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @03:12PM (5 children)
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @03:46PM (4 children)
You forgot the mental breakdown mid-way through the first line.
There's a famous saying in Texas - fool me once, shame on..... oh man, that acid is kicking in... oh shit, some people are watching me. FUCK! FUCK!! Gonna have to say something... I'm gonna go with.... uh, you?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @03:59PM (3 children)
I thought it was: "Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice... You ain't gon' fool me twice!"
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday June 05 2020, @04:09PM (2 children)
That was the Bush, not the Dick. The Bush had a different Dick as the VP.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @12:22AM (1 child)
What? They have mastered penile transplantation? Wow, a removeable Dick.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 06 2020, @09:07PM
That technology has been available for a while [youtube.com].
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday June 05 2020, @04:08PM
Yes, it will be. And the third term is guaranteed to be even worse.
Yes.
Ancient eons ago. Different millennium. Long ago swept away in the sands of time. I was in summer camp, missing reading about 7400 series TTL, soon to start 7th grade when it was announced that (the) Dick resigned from office, with a prayer for our country.
Yes. Just like the Republicans offering the worst possible candidate -- while always and ever blaming the other side for their choice of candidate.
If all is to be fair, the whole world should blame Republicans that Biden is the Democratic nominee. Because that makes so much sense that each other side is to blame for each other side's horrible choices. Personal responsibility. The buck stops somewhere (usually aerospace contractors or lobbyists).
If it is what I suggest, you can't circumvent it. The evangelical right may be right about one thing, but in a way that would shock them. Maybe Trump is the man God put in office, as judgement upon the country, including themselves. Just suggesting.
If Trump loses, I will be relieved, somewhat, temporarily, but bracing for something else maybe? What happened?
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @05:34PM
If you really want that, get on the train.
Quality of candidate (at least for me) is one who can beat jackass. Et Voila!
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-campaign-meetings-white-house [foxnews.com]
https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/ [270towin.com]
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/03/joe-biden-trump-poll-monmouth-298470 [politico.com]
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/ [fivethirtyeight.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday June 05 2020, @05:34PM
If you really want that, get on the train.
Quality of candidate (at least for me) is one who can beat jackass. Et Voila!
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-campaign-meetings-white-house [foxnews.com]
https://www.270towin.com/2020-polls-biden-trump/ [270towin.com]
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/03/joe-biden-trump-poll-monmouth-298470 [politico.com]
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/ [fivethirtyeight.com]