• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Trump's Second Term

dudalb said:
Not from a lot of the rhetoric I hear from some prominent progressives; They seem to have basic dislike for private business.]
We have a real problem with definations here.
Click to expand...

Sure, there's a real problem with definitions... especially when people refuse to accept more authoritative sources in favor of caricatures and demands that all people who identify as something be perfect cookie cutter cuts of each other.

dudalb said:
Like what is the difference between a Liberal and Progressive; there obviously is a differentc.
Click to expand...

Sure. There certainly are differences, as well as overlaps. And why are you asking, specifically? To try to find some reason why your stated position aren't really progressive positions, despite the evidence to the contrary?

dudalb said:
I just don;t trust the boundless fiath many progressives have in government, just as I don;t trust the boundless faith many on the right have in big business and religion.
Click to expand...

Ahh, another really obvious caricature. What a surprise. "Boundless faith" is an extremely inaccurate description.

dudalb said:
Gross exagerration.
Click to expand...

Hmm? Name any others that you're thinking of? The more right wing Democrats generally don't qualify, given their actions, and the Republican Party as a whole paves the way for more and more corruption or aids and abets their comrades who do. As with much else that the Republican Party does, they complain loudly about it, take flashy and often counterproductive action, and take action to erode the foundations over and over. You could argue that some in the Justice system and relevant job positions are truly opposed to corruption, regardless of party, and you would indeed have a point, just not one with political relevance because they aren't a political faction.
 
Last edited:
Dr.Sid said:
Idiocracy achieved.
Click to expand...

it's been said many times before, but it bears repeating.
We would be lucky to have President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho right now. When faced with a crisis he found the smartest person available, asked him to come up with a solution, and followed his advice.
 
Last edited:
As a side note to the Epstein stuff, but looking more at the big picture, Trump and his Administration have been doing a lot to help child predators -
Criminals who prey on children are receiving a boost from President Donald Trump who, as part of his drive to increase immigration busts and deportations, has diverted law enforcement agents once tasked with investigating vile online predator groups.

The right-leaning CATO Institute released a report based on leaked internal Immigration and Customs Enforcement records that shows thousands of agents have been directed to focus on the Trump administration’s cruel immigration agenda instead.
According to the data that CATO received, nearly 20% of agents from the U.S. Marshals Service and the FBI have been diverted, along with over 40% of agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and Homeland Security Investigations.
Click to expand...
For instance, members of the domestic terrorism squad based in Baltimore were involved in investigating the so-called 764 group, which the FBI previously described as a “nihilistic violent extremist group.” But according to law enforcement sources that spoke to MSNBC, members of the squad were deployed in March to round up undocumented immigrants and fewer agents are available to investigate 764 group cases.

The 764 group seeks out teenagers via social media and coerces them into committing depraved acts. These have included creating graphic pornography, harming family pets, making bomb threats, and others. The group extorts its victims and deepens their control of them by threatening to release recordings of these acts.
Click to expand...
Hardly the first or only thing like this that the Trump Administration has done, of course.
 
Andy_Ross said:
I'm going to tell on you!

President Trump warns an Australian reporter that he’s hurting Australia because he asked him about his business activity: You are hurting Australia very much right now. They want to get along with me. Your leader is coming to see me soon, I'm going to tell him about you.
Click to expand...
As an Australian I will respond to that with a classic piece of Australian rhetoric:

Yeah nah ◊◊◊◊ off ya ◊◊◊◊.
 
stanfr said:
I would substitute 'liberal' for progressive in this sentence. Progressive to me (call it a 'private' definition if you like) means what it says on its face--moving forward. Probably why movements like Andrew Yang's 'forward' party are fine calling themselves progressive. It's a simple acknowledgement that the end-stage capitalism we are in has been an abject failure.
Click to expand...
My "private" definition is that progressive is the opposite of conservative. Conservatives want to conserve the status quo (because it benefits them). Progressives want society to progress into better outcomes for everyone.

You may ask if progressive is the opposite of conservative, what is liberal the opposite of? Authoritarian.
 
[td]
quote of the day​
[/td]​
[td]

‘Donald Trump comes over as dumber in French than in English. You don’t know what he’s going to say, but you have to be ready.’​

​
[/td]​
[td]
Nathan, an interpreter with a French news station, to The Times about the challenges of translating the president’s words. Due to Trump’s linguistic style, it’s hard to translate his messages “without sounding like a 5-year-old or an idiot.’​
[/td]​
 
stanfr said:
I would substitute 'liberal' for progressive in this sentence. Progressive to me (call it a 'private' definition if you like) means what it says on its face--moving forward. Probably why movements like Andrew Yang's 'forward' party are fine calling themselves progressive. It's a simple acknowledgement that the end-stage capitalism we are in has been an abject failure.
So, if I may ask, who or what do you trust?
Click to expand...
Question is what does moving forward mean?
If it means moivng closer to a command economy count me out.
 
dudalb said:
Question is what does moving forward mean?
If it means moivng closer to a command economy count me out.
Click to expand...
Okay, you're not counted out, then, unless you count sensible regulations and ways to rein in their power without actually controlling them as bringing us closer to a command economy. Which, I suppose can be counted easily enough when the bar is "closer to" and the starting point is far away from reasonable in the opposite direction. So you're probably counted out. Can't do anything at all to restore balance, I suppose, despite your previous claim that you would like the power of corporations curbed.
 
Last edited:
Wow... I mean... wow...

Trump is suing a bunch of companies for the crimnal action of telling people during the elction that he would be a bad president. He's looking for $15,000,000,000.

The lawsuit has been posted and oh my sweet Jeebus it is a doozy. Posted here. Actual lawyers filed this thing... wow...
 
Random said:
Wow... I mean... wow...

Trump is suing a bunch of companies for the crimnal action of telling people during the elction that he would be a bad president. He's looking for $15,000,000,000.

The lawsuit has been posted and oh my sweet Jeebus it is a doozy. Posted here. Actual lawyers filed this thing... wow...
Click to expand...
Actual Trump's lawyers.
 
Random said:
Wow... I mean... wow...

Trump is suing a bunch of companies for the crimnal action of telling people during the elction that he would be a bad president. He's looking for $15,000,000,000.

The lawsuit has been posted and oh my sweet Jeebus it is a doozy. Posted here. Actual lawyers filed this thing... wow...
Click to expand...
Criticizing the king is treason, of course! Doubly so if it's true.
 
Random said:
Wow... I mean... wow...

Trump is suing a bunch of companies for the crimnal action of telling people during the elction that he would be a bad president. He's looking for $15,000,000,000.

The lawsuit has been posted and oh my sweet Jeebus it is a doozy. Posted here. Actual lawyers filed this thing... wow...
Click to expand...
That appears to be a massive tactical blunder. Trump is not suing as POTUS but as an individual meaning that he can't claim presidential immunity if he gets deposed. And there are tons of embarrassing questions (including about the Epstein files) he could face due to the range of claims made in this law suit. And since he will be under oath during a deposition, he has to tell the truth or claim the 5th for each question or face perjury charges.

Of course, the NYT may just as likely seek a summary dismissal of the law suit (and probably get it too).
 
Last edited:
psionl0 said:
That appears to be a massive tactical blunder. Trump is not suing as POTUS but as an individual meaning that he can't claim presidential immunity if he gets deposed. And there are tons of embarrassing questions (including about the Epstein files) he could face due to the range of claims made in this law suit. And since he will be under oath during a deposition, he has to tell the truth or claim the 5th for each question or face perjury charges.

Of course, the NYT may just as likely seeking a summary dismissal of the law suit (and probably get it too).
Click to expand...
Dump? Making a massive blunder? Must be Tuesday
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom