osan
Member

Sounds like the Ds are in full-desperation mode. Trump has been actively investigated by Mueller for what, nearly a year - still nothing. This all strikes me as an attempt to skew public perception by setting the tacit "out there" subtext. Trump may not be optimal, but the fact that he has progressives on the verge of arterial failure pleases my inner demon.

I wonder how much the taxpayers paid for that banner.

I think you're a few digits short.

Wow... another correct decision... both in one lifetime? This one must be giving ACLU fits, considering the rock and hard place between which they must be finding themselves.

And what line would they be crossing, exactly?

94? That's IT? Not much bang for that big buck.

We're STILL not sending them home in body bags by the hundreds, so... Just look at the FL situation. Two deputies get the snuff and it is as if Mother Teresa had been gang raped, forced to eat a small black child, dismembered, and killed, not necessarily in that order. And what do the masses do? Doff their hats, bow their heads, and get on their knees, all while donning their "So Sorry" t-shirts. But not to worry; good will always triumph over evil. Right? I said, RIGHT? That's more like it, prole.

RAYcis. Wondering that myself.

Firstly, it's 4:13 AM, wife's snoozing, so I've not watched the video. Regardless, my question stands as a general query: whom do we trust to speak on such matters and how do we judge such worthiness? The Brits are devils of the lowest sort; penultimate global muck rakers for centuries. I don't trust them to the end of my nose, given their long and checkered history of deceit and other chicanery. This ex-ambassador may be speaking truthfully, but how do we decide to trust him or anyone else for that matter where such topics are concerned? Given how many false actors are out there - those who have been put up to the task of bending or breaking truth for whatever the reasons, I have difficulty in trusting anyone making statements about political reality. We live in a world of smoke and mirrors mixed with truth. It is a morass the sorting out of which I must admit my abridged capacities.

1991, George HW Bush marches into Eye-rack. Clinton maintains US presence. GW Bush invades a second time, ostensibly to finish the job. Obama pledges how he would have us out by June of his first year, but never gets us out, though he lied and said we were. Trump seems to be ready to maintain our presence in this string of seemingly ridiculous entanglements. Democrat or Republican - it has made no difference. So why then have we remained in these ruinous endeavors for 27 years to date with such perfect consistency, despite the purported deep philosophical rift between Rs and Ds? I don't think any of this is in the hands of either side. There is something far deeper at work here. If Theye could make a creep like Obama so brazenly break his biggest campaign promise, perhaps they have something on Trump as well. The presidents in question were marketed as widely variant in terms of their personalities and world views. If this is actually true, how is it that we have had twenty seven years of such perfectly consistent circumstance where our engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan are concerned?

True. However, letting your rights take a back seat to what is more convenient is precisely what Theye are depending upon to allow them to screw those rights into the dirt.

I'm a Kate AND a Meghan! I can do that if I want, right? Where do I get one of those hats... and the parasol... and the dress... bet her shoes are knockouts.

I typed too soon. I must agree with you - he decidedly did not err in this case, but Putin did. I discussed this with little bro. Apparently all of the ordnance detonated at once. This was a message to China: "Behold what we can do. Tread ye with utmost care." In law there are the notions of general and specific deterrents. This action served both roles. Specifically, the destruction of Syria's ability to produce, test, and field chemical and other weapons of similar class. Also, this action was Obama's doing, something of which I was unaware. Trump was bound by an agreement Obama made with the UN, pledging that the USA would respond it this or that manner where chemical weapons have been used. This was a situation where the world looks to see whether America has the oats to do as it pledged, or is just a paper tiger. I jumped to a premature conclusion. My error.

Well, that was something of a waste of time. I doubt 100 showed. That is why Theye are going to win.

Well, it's difficult to know he truth in all these matters, but so far as my old eyes can tell, Trump has fucked up this time and in a big way. Question now is how will he proceed. If he is genuine, he will repair. Otherwise, he will maintain as he has chosen and will prove himself as I feared he likely would. If he proves just another one of Themme, then we the people are lost and will find no salvation without arms. Anyone thinking this will be fixed with politics is fooling themselves. America is gone. Time is here. I'm going to the Capitol, armed, to be counted. What will the rest of you do?

Putin has been quoted as saying he will fire upon ANYONE doing to on Syria. Britain and France would be the least of my worries. Russia would likely sink them without breaking a sweat. The US Navy... another story.

Actually, it does. That aside, we were not speaking of industries, but entire economies. BIG difference. It's one thing when your 30' cabin cruiser sinks with 3 people aboard. There is a big difference in degree when a cruise ship with seven thousand people goes under. That sucks dead bunnies, but it is not the same as having no food. The pretending was the opposite - that the world had somehow come to an end, or was about to.

OK, so any upshot at this point? Putin said he'd fire on anyone firing on Assad. Has he killed his own credibility?

My friend Mike just sent me a message: Hang on to your hats, guys. I don't think anyone will lose their cools, but given the infantile stupidity that passes for statesmanship today, I can no longer rule anything out beyond the edges of my comfort. Stay tuned.

I will be at the Capitol in Charleston at 2PM.

Ah, methinks I see the disconnect - our respective notions of the economy tanking. What I mean is ruin, not recession. Industries tank in their near-entirety. Anything less than that is an inconvenience. When I say "tanks", I mean "tanks all the way". Many Americans believe the US economy tanked in 2008 with the election of slime to the Oval Office. Such people are sorely ignorant of what a busted economy looks like. In the wake of burst bubbles and all that, the worst we can say about the American economy was that is experiences a slight bump, which is not to say some people did not lose their shirts, for surely they did. But food, shelter, heat, etc. all remained plentifully available. Compare with post-war Germany where women sold themselves just to have a couple of cigarettes such that they would have some marginal relief from the misery of their daily existences. That is the truer meaning of a downed economy, not mere inconveniences of which soft, weak, ignorant, and characterless people shriek and holler about as if the world were coming to an end. So now that we perhaps understand one another better, what say you?

This is how I see it at present. We are grossly over-dependent on China for a vast array of both consumer products and commodities such as steel, rare-earth elements, and so forth. If their economy goes <poof>, pray tell where will we procure the products and commodities in question in the shorter term if our own manufacturing base is not in place to take over? I may have chosen my words less than optimally when I wrote that if China's economy goes, so does ours, but we would be negatively affected for a time. Add to that the dire state of weakness of a great multiplicity of Americans. About 10 years ago, for example, the state was late with welfare disbursements in my neck of WV. They were, as I recall, two days late - may have been three - and there were people ready to burn the county to the ground. This is not an isolated condition. What does anyone think that places like Los Angele, NYC, etc., will be like if the inept and dependent people cannot be kept passivated with the "free" stuff to which they have become accustomed? It's not just welfare recipients, either. Consider how many mentally and emotionally weak people there are out there - like college students such as those so commonly encountered in places like Yale, Harvard, Brown, and Evergreen. They have nervous breakdowns when people say things that leave them feeling "marginalized", such as when someone asks "where are you from?" This is deep psychopathology, clinically speaking. Do we believe they will suddenly buck up and become adult just because reality steadfastly refuses to kowtow to the whinging and tantrum pitching as do the administrators at their respective institutions of higher babysitting? I don't see it. There would be rioting on a mass scale in some locales, methinks. Don't misunderstand, I think this would be a good thing. Killing a few tens of thousands of stragglers in response to their as-yet unchallenged bad behavior could do nothing wrong in terms of delivering a lesson in hard reality to the rest. But that reality would still likely be as I suspect - unless you have a convincing basis for believing otherwise, to which my mind is wide open. Europe is in even worse shape. They are at least as badly dependent on Chinese products, but suffer the additional problems of out of control immigration - particularly of people innately hostile to the fundamental fabric of that which constitutes all European culture, no to mention the widespread adoption of net-loss carrying "socialism". While our debt situation is bad, Europe's is even worse, so far as I can tell. The Euro is teetering, as are nations such as Sweden which, in direct spite of the lies told about how successful they are, is balancing on a knife's edge. I do not for a moment believe that Sweden would well survive a large disruption, whether by force majeure or political upheaval such as from a Tet-style attack by jihadist moles.

I'm not following you here. How does your response relate to my statement?

Sometimes I just get in a mood.

Wonderful, innit?

From my back yard on 98th st. in Vancouver, I could see the remains of St. Helens. Just before I left WA, she started smoking. I used to just sit and watch, wondering whether we were in for another impressive bang. I miss the PNW.

If only Sandy had done the job right... Just can't get good help anymore. Sheesh.

Bet he claims it's his penis.