I guess that's why he maintained his security clearance. Or maybe the Obama administration was simply incompetent. Oops, those are Trump talking points.
Last edited:
The policy and politics of Trumpism
- Thread starter CharminTide
- Start date
- Status
Obama wasn't going to anything to appear to either influence or retard this administration publicly, frankly I think it will in the end be one of his greatest regrets. It also points to his wimpish politically driven nature, a point the right was honestly spot on about.
If you're looking for substantive change, you are not going to find it in the Democratic or Republican Party. At least a small handful of conservative types may actually be getting served well by the GOP but they're rare enough. If you identify as a leftist, you can't say with any intellectual honesty that the DNC is aligned with any of your ideals besides socially liberal causes that have absolutely nothing to do with making corporations and private billionaire citizens poorer in the process.
Obama talked like he was Mao Zedong but governed like a more palpable Dubya. The modern Dem has no redress for economic inequalities that can't be explained by one's genitalia, skin tone, or sexuality. While I certainly hope for better compassion for those folks, the DNC lost this election because the middle America that would vote for them hears no convincing platform on how they'll help them. Trump and the GOP deceived these people and will make their lives worse quicker but the DNC really had no plan other than to ignore the gradual decline of this country's laborer class.
The GOP takes crap but the DNC of Clinton (which we have lived in since the 1992 election) is just as guilty in the destruction of this country's middle class. Ignoring the decline while making sure the boardrooms look more like college recruitment brochures is not a fix. All the Dems of Clinton have given us is a secular version of the prosperity gospel: "look at this gay/black leading a company, see the American corporatism model is not broken!"
Obama talked like he was Mao Zedong but governed like a more palpable Dubya. The modern Dem has no redress for economic inequalities that can't be explained by one's genitalia, skin tone, or sexuality. While I certainly hope for better compassion for those folks, the DNC lost this election because the middle America that would vote for them hears no convincing platform on how they'll help them. Trump and the GOP deceived these people and will make their lives worse quicker but the DNC really had no plan other than to ignore the gradual decline of this country's laborer class.
The GOP takes crap but the DNC of Clinton (which we have lived in since the 1992 election) is just as guilty in the destruction of this country's middle class. Ignoring the decline while making sure the boardrooms look more like college recruitment brochures is not a fix. All the Dems of Clinton have given us is a secular version of the prosperity gospel: "look at this gay/black leading a company, see the American corporatism model is not broken!"
I mean, the ultimate proof of the failure of the New Democrat/Neoliberal platform is Obama himself. How has Obama being a black man as the leader of this country appreciably helped the black people of this country?
So with that in mind, how can the New Democrats argue that by balancing the boardrooms that they have made the world better for the average ethnic/gender/sexual orientation minority? And as far as I can tell that is really the only thing the Democrats offered that was substantively differing in policy from the GOP for a long time. Clinton himself was responsible for a litany of social welfare reforms that were wrongheaded and arguably racially biased in some context. People make too much of ultimately inconsequential domestic social wedge issues while ignore crass foreign policy and irresponsible regulatory and fiscal policy. This game has been played by the DNC and GOP for a long time. The problem is that the GOP has been co-opting some more socially moderate platform and marketing over the last decade and it basically leaves the DNC platformless other than "fringe" social equality issues. I think LGBT rights are worth fighting for but not as your sole platform point. The GOP can argue just as eloquently as the DNC about how our bastardized form of capitalism is fair and any incongruities you see that appear to be ethnically or class based are just how the market cookie crumbles. It will sound just as disingenuous to many people coming from Trump's mouth as it does coming from Clinton's.
The sad thing about Obama is that he was much better speaker than he was a leader. He had the oratory chops to whip up Americans behind a true progressive movement. It is a surprise to some within this Southern conservative feedback loop, but Obama was a likable person with a talent for making himself seem like an every man. That is ultimately how he outperformed Hillary Clinton consistently in battlegrounds: people just liked him selling the neoliberal lie better than HRC. It is truly sad that he was ultimately beholden to the financial sector that has wrest control of the DNC from labor groups that are falling apart and radical left movements that were eradicated during the Cold War period. It is a bad thing for this country that there is no real expression of leftist ideals - even the radical ones - because it acts like the opposite anchor in a game of tug-o-war. It keeps us in a responsible centrist model that adopts progressive causes as needed. What we have now is a "left wing" party that would be considered one of the more conservative parties in any other Western democracy. It is tearing our nation apart under the yoke of corporate + police-state totalitarianism.
So with that in mind, how can the New Democrats argue that by balancing the boardrooms that they have made the world better for the average ethnic/gender/sexual orientation minority? And as far as I can tell that is really the only thing the Democrats offered that was substantively differing in policy from the GOP for a long time. Clinton himself was responsible for a litany of social welfare reforms that were wrongheaded and arguably racially biased in some context. People make too much of ultimately inconsequential domestic social wedge issues while ignore crass foreign policy and irresponsible regulatory and fiscal policy. This game has been played by the DNC and GOP for a long time. The problem is that the GOP has been co-opting some more socially moderate platform and marketing over the last decade and it basically leaves the DNC platformless other than "fringe" social equality issues. I think LGBT rights are worth fighting for but not as your sole platform point. The GOP can argue just as eloquently as the DNC about how our bastardized form of capitalism is fair and any incongruities you see that appear to be ethnically or class based are just how the market cookie crumbles. It will sound just as disingenuous to many people coming from Trump's mouth as it does coming from Clinton's.
The sad thing about Obama is that he was much better speaker than he was a leader. He had the oratory chops to whip up Americans behind a true progressive movement. It is a surprise to some within this Southern conservative feedback loop, but Obama was a likable person with a talent for making himself seem like an every man. That is ultimately how he outperformed Hillary Clinton consistently in battlegrounds: people just liked him selling the neoliberal lie better than HRC. It is truly sad that he was ultimately beholden to the financial sector that has wrest control of the DNC from labor groups that are falling apart and radical left movements that were eradicated during the Cold War period. It is a bad thing for this country that there is no real expression of leftist ideals - even the radical ones - because it acts like the opposite anchor in a game of tug-o-war. It keeps us in a responsible centrist model that adopts progressive causes as needed. What we have now is a "left wing" party that would be considered one of the more conservative parties in any other Western democracy. It is tearing our nation apart under the yoke of corporate + police-state totalitarianism.
Last edited:
Also for anyone doubting whether we live in a dystopian corporate/police-state totalitarian state:
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/woman_facing_prison_for_laughi.html#incart_river_home
A protester is going to jail for 6mo to 1 yr for laughing at Sessions' confirmation. Don't impugn your ruling class betters. Don't protest systemic policing failure that follows ethnic/class lines. We'll hose you down, stick dogs on you, shoot tear gas at you.
I'm telling you we need to start fighting back through the electoral system because before long the tinderbox will explode and the only fighting left to do will be the bloody kind.
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/woman_facing_prison_for_laughi.html#incart_river_home
A protester is going to jail for 6mo to 1 yr for laughing at Sessions' confirmation. Don't impugn your ruling class betters. Don't protest systemic policing failure that follows ethnic/class lines. We'll hose you down, stick dogs on you, shoot tear gas at you.
I'm telling you we need to start fighting back through the electoral system because before long the tinderbox will explode and the only fighting left to do will be the bloody kind.
I certainly believe in protest but please do it outside the building and don't disrupt proceedings. Unless it's a 1986 oenophile wine tasting, then have at it.
Sally Yates did very well at the hearing BTW.
Re Flynn's security clearance:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/...arance-required-for-National-Security-Advisor
Sally Yates did very well at the hearing BTW.
Re Flynn's security clearance:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2017/...arance-required-for-National-Security-Advisor
Last edited:
Why didn't they throw "YOU LIE" guy in jail for shouting that during the State of the Union proceedings?
Ah, he was a part of the ruling class and the rules are different for him.
Ah, he was a part of the ruling class and the rules are different for him.
Well now you've taken all of the anticipation out of next week's jury duty for me!
1. When an offer tells you to leave, you leave
2. She won't be going to jail...it just sounds good for an article. She'll get probation....
3. Al.com needs an editor -- because they said the woman's surname was "Fox" and then they refer to her as "Fairooz" --
4. She wasn't arrested for laughing at Sessions. She was arrested for not listening to specific instructions from an officer and disrupting Congress.
No where does it say she "is going to jail" -- don't worry, she'll be fine.
Also, with all of the protests nationwide over the past few months -- contradicts the "totalitarian police state" claim -- "dystopian" however? I'm with you on that.
Last edited:
And frankly, the JFK we remember in this country isn't necessarily accurate to a dispassionate historical eye. His presidency was beset with issues of trust in the military, he got through the Cuban Missile Crisis but probably lost all remaining trust in his military advisement, yet he was also responsible for probably tipping the Vietnam situation into a quagmire it became after his assassination. The saddest part is that he seemed to be coming into his own as a leader when he was killed. He was a young president in a trying time...some slip ups happened but he was gaining confidence and earning the respect of world leaders slowly but surely.
Of course, I come at this from a person with no recollection of that time. I just try to balance the histories I've read and on the balance I guess the JFK and Obama presidencies could be seen very similarly in some regards. Obama was definitely one of the better ones we've had since Nixon but that isn't saying much.
Of course, I come at this from a person with no recollection of that time. I just try to balance the histories I've read and on the balance I guess the JFK and Obama presidencies could be seen very similarly in some regards. Obama was definitely one of the better ones we've had since Nixon but that isn't saying much.
Shel Silverstein had a cartoon in Playboy, one frame was Kennedy orating and had the caption "Strongest stances in the crises." The second frame was captioned "In between, melts like ices." The drawing was Kennedy melting...
We get it... you read it for the articles! [emoji2]Shel Silverstein had a cartoon in Playboy, one frame was Kennedy orating and had the caption "Strongest stances in the crises." The second frame was captioned "In between, melts like ices." The drawing was Kennedy melting...
- Status
Latest threads
-
Maybe aTm's Pockets Aren't So Bottomless After All -- Layoffs In The Athletic Department
- Started by 4Q Basket Case
- Replies: 1
-
Time to un-vacate 2005-2007 on field victories and un-forfeit the 1993 season?
- Started by CmdrThor
- Replies: 9
-
-
-
SIAP there was an article that Joe K interviewed for assistant coach
- Started by mlingerfelt31
- Replies: 11
-
Final Home Midweek for Alabama Brings Samford to The Joe- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0