Jump to content

washparkhorn

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    9845
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by washparkhorn

  1. 13 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

    What does "getting shit under control" mean?

    Both Liz and Bernie release funding plans for all their stuff. They suffer from the brain disease of budget neutrality and are obsessed with making sure all the dollars are accounted for. It's one of their many flaws and I love grandma and grandpa anyway as much as I want them to come out and say, "The budget deficit and debt don't actually matter that much and focusing on it is just a way to get us to starve and humiliate the poor."

    Bernie too often does the Dem thing of, "Well actually, Mr. Republican Sir, YOU are the irresponsible one!" which is always lame and never convinces anyone.

    Sanders has a fine economic advisor. Prof. Stephanie Kelton is worth reading for anyone inclined to look at economic issues surrounding spending. Pete is just using Republican deficit scaremongering to aid his patrons.

    • Like 1
  2. Buttiegieg is supposed to slow the MMT transformation. Bloomberg doesn't think he can do it if Biden fails to do it.  

    Who has the most billionaires and consultant (McKinsey) donors?  Yep - Buttigieg. He is preaching austerity to protect his patrons. Bloomberg is protecting his billions. They would be great Reagan era Republicans. Or Third Way Democrats. Anyone making under $100m a year who votes for either is ignorant or sees some need to kiss up to billionaires. Pete does it because that is where his main support is.

    Choose wisely.

    • Like 3
  3. Frankly, no one believes the Pete Peterson lie about the deficit anymore. Billionaires focused on growing their wealth preach austerity for the masses and subsidies for the billionaires. That's ending.

    The Fed does not know how to inflate anymore. Goldman Sachs uses MMT theories to grow wealth. MMT is coming for the United States when people finally understand if we can bail out the bankers with $17T, we can do bigr things, like genuine full employment and a green new deal. Inflation is not a problem (we have a lot of room there) and printing money is merely putting more money into the economy where it is needed most (i.e., Main Street, not Wall Street). 

    Federal government spending is not financed with taxes. It is a siphon that draws dollars out of the economy to keep inflation at bay (something that is not a risk in the foreseeable future). Those facts have the billionaires fearful of losing control of their power. They like the gap between their outrageous fortunes and the rest of the 99.1% and austerity has widened the gap. It is not about punishing the wealthy, it is about lifting all boats (as promised but not delivered  in 2008). 

    MMT explains how money works in the United States far greater than neoclassical economics. 

    • Like 3
  4. I wonder if Obama's indictment of "woke" culture will move the needles on impeachment. 

    Quote

     

    Barack Obama challenges 'woke' culture

    Mr Obama said that calling people out on social media did not bring about change, and that change was complex. . . . 

    Mr Obama told the audience: "I get a sense among certain young people on social media that the way of making change is to be as judgemental as possible about other people. . . .

    "That's enough," he said. "If all you're doing is casting stones, you are probably not going to get that far."

    Mr Obama added that "people who do really good stuff have flaws".

     

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-50239261 (concise/fair/status quo tilt)

    That did not make conviction any easier for him to say that - at this time. But it is forward looking. And it is a path that needed to open for national reconciliation.

    Trump has a window to accept the overture. Not sure what the terms would be, but most likely would involve a decision by Trump to not run for reelection (akin to LBJ's decision to not seek reelection because of Vietnam).

    I do not know whether Trump would accept that, but then Pence would be the prohibitive favorite. He has been solid on the ground for the Republicans. The election would focus on his faith and how that would influence his decisions as President. Whether Pence wins is up in the air, but it would reestablish old political connections, i.e., the status quo of the stable Bush/Obama division.

    Perhaps Obama is the perfect person to say "knock it off" and give Trump a chance to match his tone. Trump's atonality with established thought draws most of the barbs from the Beltway. Whatever happens in Washington leads these days. It is a good measure of President Obama's impact to see if leaders seek a way around a likely acquittal in a Senate impeachment trial in the Senate. 

    • Fuck You 3
  5. So there is some meat on the bone, as this new phase has been entered. Much more powerful now. Procedurally, we are entering into a more formal stage. There will be a record. The investigators decide what is on the record. If it is not on the record, it cannot be used, so we have a more transparent process. It will become more and more transparent as it proceeds. 

    The real strategy moves to the Senate now. First up - what are the rules. Indications are they will follow the Watergate format. This is a two-sided sword. The dirty details can be aired out, but then Trump will tweet away every allegation. The twitter issue comes into play here. 

    One of the rules being floated is to not conduct the trial in front of the entire Senate. Nothing in the Constitution requires 100 Senators to attend and reach a verdict in the trial. And the Senate Leaders can pick their own slate equal in number. When you shrink the jury from 100 to 10, the numbers can work for conviction quickly if the evidence is strong enough. Democrats have some smart innovative lawyers on the impeachment team. 

    • Fuck You 3
  6. 6 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    Believe them that the sanctioned avenues for diplomacy were being subverted to enable trump and rudy to pursue personally important goals instead of nationally important goals. The officer appointed by trump to be the foreign policy expert on Ukraine, Lt Col Vindman, was cut out of the decision making process in favor of a man who had no credentials, experience, or security clearance, and is outside of the reach of public oversight. 

    THAT is the key issue with this, and the issue I have with your position. You continue to claim that what happened was normal and typical foreign policy via normal channels - a claim wholly unsupported by evidence, and directly refuted by the sworn testimony and paper trail of multiple career officials appointed by trump himself. 

    And yet, you continue to use the both sides fallacy to justify this unacceptable behavior by handwaving away facts and claiming that we've done worse (again unsupported by evidence in your posts). That's intellectually dishonest, and not the Socratic method. You're not engaging with any of the (supported with evidence and citations) points we're raising and just pushing your position - even after your position has been challenged by the material facts of the situation. 

    I want to spend some time with your quote before responding, since you have more than passing knowledge and that should not be buried in the cheerleading.  To be continued. 

    I hate to say it but politicians are political and always looking for an advantage. That is the game they play at the expense of the citizens. So, no - personal gain in the form of a political advantage is not compelling unless it was somehow unique. 

    Our foreign policy establishment and the IC does not like Trump interfering with the networks they have developed and mined through the years. The first question is what axe, if any, is the official grinding. If there is no axe, how does that official see Obama's threats to Ukraine? Should they both be punished or did Trump enter a different realm with his threat? Foreign policy is filled with intrigue we used to call diplomacy. Look there and you will see where the bodies are buried. Essentially, if the action by the Obama Administration was given a pass (and it was widely reported and celebrated as a victory by Biden) for threatening aid to Ukraine, we need to specifically identify how this is different and worthy of impeachment. In building a case, the issue of selective prosecution must be addressed for the American people. Or find another ground to impeach him.

    • Fuck You 2
  7. 2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    No, there’s a fucking difference. One of those parties is inciting people to murder folks like me. Maybe you’d like to go shopping at an El Paso Walmart with me?
    People with names like me are having their families ripped apart and their children imprisoned in a gleeful masturbatory hate-fest by that party.
    The deadliest anti-Semitic attack in our history happened a year ago, spurred on by that rabid anti immigrant and anti other rhetoric.
    So, with zero due respect, go fuck yourself. Maybe your ass isn’t in the crosshairs. Great for you. How about you give a fuck about the rest of us?
    Oh, and I loved your Kavanaugh quote. You don’t even get the irony of him describing EXACTLY why we’re dealing with as being “what impeachment is made for.”
    Remember, I used to generally be Republican. If you dont realize the actual and ongoing criminal threat Trump and the GOP represent, you’re willfully blind.

    Anytime Brisket. My sister, as part of the Red Cross, went to El Paso in the aftermath and her stories are moving. El Paso is developing a sense of community that will no longer tolerate racism. El Paso is moving in the right direction, thanks to the people of El Paso standing up and saying not in my town. I have no tolerance for bullies in my life or in the lives of others. In my mind, bullying is Trump's greatest flaw. It encourages division at a time where we need unity. He is out next year, if we make it happen in the election. If we sleepwalk through life and politics again, this nation may be lost. 

    I used the Kavanaugh quote applauded by Biden to show how similar the cronies are in both parties. 

    My ass is in the crosshairs every single day. Supporting Sanders invites all sorts of comments by both parties. So with all due respect, I celebrate you if you have the ability to fuck yourself. And I am not willfully blind - I lost eyesight in one eye due to an unfortunate accident. But thank you for caring, Mr. Former Republican. You and Liz must have a lot in common. How about you work for the little guy this time rather than a bunch of uniparty neoliberals (which, for the uninitiated, is a product of the University of Chicago libertarian economics department gurus). Neoliberalism has gutted this nation. Time for a change and perhaps some genuine hope this time. 

     

    • Fuck You 3
  8. 10 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    Here's my post that you ignored by posting conspiracy theories, but here's the question I asked you:

    Do you not believe the sworn testimony of multiple military officers, combat veterans, and career diplomats that were appointed to their position BY trump and have been corroborated by paper trails? And you instead believe an unqualified hotel magnate that donated a million bucks to trump's inauguration to get the ambassador position?

    Conspiracy theories? The Socratic Method? I know some of you are very comfortable in never-challenged wisdom. But that is no way to go through life. 

    Believe them about what? That a threat to foreign aid was made to Ukraine? It was. It followed an earlier threat to Ukraine aid by the Obama Administration if they didn't get rid of a pesky, corrupt prosecutor. 

    I think the question is whether the threat rose to the level of a crime warranting impeachment where prior instances did not. No? 

    Selective prosecution is highly discouraged in American jurisprudence. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff. How did this go farther than when the Obama administration made a similar threat. Get there and there are grounds and evidence for impeachment. Ignore it at your peril. And, in the end, there will be no conviction and removal. 

    • Fuck You 2
  9. Just now, jimmyjazz said:

    You'd better start brushing up on the other side, and pronto.  You have no time to lose.

    I understand the allegation. I somewhat understand why it might be shocking to some who haven't paid attention to what this nation does and how we conduct foreign policy. If JFK had to negotiate with the Soviets regarding Cuba today, we would not have withdrawn our missiles from Turkey because of the political ramifications. And the Cuban Missile Crisis may have had a different outcome. 

    I expect every President since Reagan has threatened foreign aid withdrawal for political reasons. Was this one beyond the pale? Perhaps. But what does that say about our acquiescence to prior similar acts? Or was this egregious enough to be singled out for scrutiny.

    And moreover, Trump's opponent is at this moment being decided by the powers that be. If we lose sight of that, we again will give control over that choice to insiders, like it was in 2016. And who wants a repeat of that debacle. 

    We can do two things at once. And when the inevitable outcome is acquittal, the most important topic for opponents of Trump is the decision on who will run against him in 2020. I don't think that is a controversial take on the matter. 

    • Fuck You 4
  10. 1 minute ago, NameAlreadyInUse said:

    I've been trying to keep out of this back and forth here, but seriously man, are you in need of some assistance?  Your stream of consciousness typing is jumbled to the point of incoherence in many cases, and I'm worried about your health. 

    If you are healthy, then I'd encourage you to type, take a pause, proofread, make corrections, and only then hit the Submit Reply button. If you are here to have a conversation that will make it easier.

    I appreciate your concern NAIU.

    • Fuck You 2
  11. Just now, atomheartbevo said:

    Plenty of political organizations, and even some other countries, would love to derail conversations about impeachment by sending in astroturfers to bog down the discussions.   

    I understand society has led you to expect instant gratification for your efforts, but that is not the way the world works. Question your assumptions - always. Once you stop, your brain is dead and you become part of the living dead. You deserve better out of life. Expand your perspective. 

    • Fuck You 4
  12. 29 minutes ago, Captainant said:

    Ok, I'm now pretty sure anastasia is trolling with a sock now. 

    But also, I'm call you out. You haven't responded to me directly on any of the points raised on the substance of the whole Ukraine affair, and instead have been spouting conspiracy theories from an intellectually dishonest position. 

    What are your questions. Sorry - missed them. 

    And in reading Anastasia through the years, I seriously doubt he would appreciate you equating his thoughts and writing with my ramblings. Swing/Miss.

    • Fuck You 2
  13. I like PenAmerica's reaction: 

    Quote

     

    As a private platform, it is reasonable for Twitter to take the time to figure out whether and how the manifest ill consequences of micro-targeted ads can be mitigated. While political ads represent an important part of our democratic discourse, online advertising methods pose unique concerns that lawmakers, companies, and civil society are only beginning to understand, much less address. We welcome Twitter’s willingness to put responsibility above revenue in seeking to prevent its platform from misleading voters and polluting the democratic process.

    “Still, we recognize that there are many unanswered questions and that this policy may have some unintended consequences, including, for example, advancing incumbents who rely less on ads. While we reserve judgement on how it may play out, we commend the effort to protect democratic deliberations and emphasize the role of ideas, language, and creativity – rather than money – as tools in the battle of ideas.”

     

    The unintended consequences are a bear to manage. I am not sure anyone wants the field further tilted in favor of incumbents. 

     

    https://pen.org/press-release/pen-america-cautiously-welcomes-twitter-political-ad-policy-says-more-details-needed/

  14. 4 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

    I’m not gonna ignore you. I’m just curious what long cat screed you’re gonna post at 4:00 am this morning like you did last night. Were you up all night doing blow and posting on surly?  Sounds like a party man. 

    Chronic insomnia. My GirlsGW prancing about  lost its luster. 

     

    • Fuck You 2
  15. 4 minutes ago, mdmost said:

    I mean he really had me going until the whole Trump was doing this to stave off Ukrainian influence in our elections...by trying to get Ukraine to interfere in next election. 

    I don't think he was trying to stave off interference by the Ukraine in the next elections. They have been frozen. They are being watched, as is Russia and other forces seen as hostile to this nation. His argument is about getting to the roots of Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 election. The Ukraine is corrupt. Anyone doing business with Ukraine for political misdeeds is in a world of hurt. 

     

    Remember Durham's investigation will leave some marks. One needs to prepare for them and accept the fact that some high profile individuals and institutions will be shown to have acted in bad faith. Some of these people will be those who you may respect. There were a lot of errors in 2016. Losing grip of the Presidency was a blow to the establishment on both sides of the aisle. 

  16. 2 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

    well, this is the impeachment thread, where we discuss, as one does, the impeachment of the president for being a crooked fuckstick.

    we also pay attention to the election as well:

    Thank you. Another longtime poster (back to Hornfans days) pointed me in the direction of the solid policy discussions. 

    And as I said, there is no need to ignore impeachment. Prepare for the inevitable no-conviction (enthusiasm will be tested) and get up to speed with the policy differences. A nominee will be selected as the party's presumptive nominee. When that happens, it will take an Obama type candidate to overcome the presumption (as Obama did in 2008). Neoliberalism is the primary issue - whether to revive it or forge a new path ahead. Do not assume neoliberalism is good for this nation merely because Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama did not choose to change course. We are in a bind because we have pushed the "what happens after neoliberalism falters" issue into the backs of our minds. The powers that be like us in the dark. Time to wake up. 

  17. 1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

    Washpark is not begging the question (the actual logical fallacy, not how it's commonly misused) because he has honest good faith disagreements about anything with us.  

    There are two sides to every story. Wisdom comes with understanding both sides of an argument. 

  18. 1 minute ago, henrygandorf said:

    government inquiries do not remove presidents.

    this is where your jump in logic is horribly flawed.

    Without the inquiry, we have no removal/impeachment. I am missing your argument. Isn't an inquiry a necessary prerequisite for removal? 

  19. 1 minute ago, CowboyFred said:

    you're not even trying to be a clever troll with semi-valid talking points.  troll on ignore.

    Afraid of discussion? Best to ignore me, please and thank you. There is too much going through the motions in political discourse these days. People are locked in news silos, which are rotting people's brains. 

    Best wishes on your journey to enlightenment. Feel free to un-ignore me. 

  20. 1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

    and impeachment. because it's not the democrats that are tearing the country apart. it's donald fucking trump and the 40% of the country that support him, full stop.

    I trust we can do two things at once since impeachment will not result in conviction.

    I think my original point was to request we pay attention to the election as well. We need everyone's input and enthusiasm. If we just let the rulers pick the nominee, we are lost - like we were in 2016. 

  21. 2 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

    As all trials are.

    Unlike investigations. 

     

    The idea that any investigation of Trump wouldn't be severely compromised and almost useless if it were "open" is fantasy of the highest order. 

    If there were the remotest hint of lack of due process in any of this, there might be an issue.  There isn't. 

    I respectfully disagree - especially with Schiff's actions, which should be beyond reproach for a matter with so much significance. But at least we have a vote now and a proper basis for an investigation. Should have been that way from the outset - if we want reconciliation for the nation. 

×
×
  • Create New...