Trump Thread 2.0

[phillipj]

Chomsky is a nut job because of every single one of his ideas except for his defense of free speech. I agree, all media that is for profit is potentially and likely poisoned. Clearly the founders never intended the third estate to be incorporated. Which is why citizen journalism is more important than ever.

Huh. You're fully agreeing with his core beliefs -- so, what are these other ideas that are so "nut-job"? ... You're also the guy quoting con man Dinesh D'Souza as some kind of viable source and idea-man a few pages back.

Freedom of the Press is not supposed to be hindered by the government or shareholders.

But seriously dude, you think that the President has that kind of influence over these companies? I don't believe that. Trump is and always will be a blowhard. He pisses everyone off. I am cool with that.

Yes. He has certain connections, the cronies, the revolving door, that kind of influence. The administration works in tandem with them. And, no "it's not new" but don't look the other way.

You do realize that politics and media co-mingling has been happening for the better part of 50 years, right? George Stephanopolous? Karl Rove? James Carville? All of them are political operatives who have been in administrations and then moved to media. Is this really new to you?

No, not new to me, or anyone else. Both of us, we don't want the press colluding and propagandizing for any politician, or specific party agenda, do we? It's not admissible to me because both sides do it. Not acceptable.

What do you think I think when I see highly coordinated knives-out for Bernie Sanders in the MSM?? Here you have someone standing up for under-privileged individual rights and against corporate dominance and what's the MSM reception? You get both "sides" and all their corporate and political backing submarining him as hard as they can. First you'll get a blackout on coverage. But, later, if you're succeeding, you get relentless, overly caricatured negative opinion or out of context coverage. Take your pick, will it be Chris Matthews on MSNBC and his exasperated "this is like the Nazis marching on France" or is it James Carville on CNN with gobs of airtime fear-mongering, or is it a more subtle Anderson Cooper hit job on CBS, or is it Fox News doing all that and worse... I have no love for any of these corporate news entities. They don't really care about us, just their bottom line.

[marshallnoise]

It is up for debate, and saying something opinion based like we have been in a crisis for 34 years should certainly be as the time frame is so great as to generally cast doubt on the assertion. I addressed this either in this thread or another in P&R and the numbers that we know show that legal immigration is clearly insufficient to meet growth needs, and that illegal immigration (as far as we can guess) is within acceptable/manageable limits for this country, and has probably declined in the last decade.

When '86 amnesty was passed, the Democrats in congress lied to the American public and told them they would secure the borders. That NEVER happened. Hence, the 34 years is legitimate. I will hunt around for your information about whether legal immigration is sufficient or not. That we need growth from immigration at all is another topic that can be discussed. I would say that illegal immigration should never be accepted. Thousands of Angel parents would agree. Those are crimes that literally could have been prevented: Crimes that are committed by people who are not even permitted to be here. That can't be argued either. You can say, "Oh well, shit happens" but its of little comfort when literally the laws are there in place to prevent those types of crimes.

Borders are not walls, and have almost never been so historically. The scale of the wall is more the issue of course, unless you can continually patrol the entire distance and respond to an attempted breach in say 10 minutes it's pretty much just a token affair, which means that it is an egregious waste of time and money.

That first statement makes no sense. Walls are borders by definition. Walls kept the Mongols out. Helped the Soviets destroy Berlin. We can argue about what constitutes a waste of time and money regarding border enforcement, but border enforcement NEEDS to happen.

[marshallnoise]

So now we're taking definitions based on interpretations IAW marshallnoise, got it. Now I see how you manage to make these arguments seem rational to yourself.

I have no idea what IAW means. Not hip enough I guess.

If you think I am making up definitions to suit my needs, you are wrong. You literally did that yourself as mentioned above.

All the things you accuse me of sure seem like they apply to you. I wonder why...?

[marshallnoise]

Huh. You're fully agreeing with his core beliefs -- so, what are these other ideas that are so "nut-job"? ... You're also the guy quoting con man Dinesh D'Souza as some kind of viable source and idea-man a few pages back.

"Noam Chomsky, in an essay titled, “What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream,” argued that corporate media organizations attempt to “divert” people’s attention from serious matters. “What are the elite media, the agenda-setting ones? The New York Times and CBS, for example. Well, first of all, they are major, very profitable, corporations. Furthermore, most of them are either linked to, or outright owned by, much bigger corporations, like General Electric, Westinghouse, and so on,” wrote Chomsky. “They are way up at the top of the power structure of the private economy which is a very tyrannical structure. Corporations are basically tyrannies, hierarchic, controlled [sic] from above. If you don’t like what they are doing you get out. The major media are just part of that system.”"

That is a nutty comment. He may agree with me on free speech, but this country is the best that's ever been including all of its flaws. He certainly disagrees with that and I think he is a fucking nut for it.

Yes. He has certain connections, the cronies, the revolving door, that kind of influence. The administration works in tandem with them. And, no "it's not new" but don't look the other way.

Its called politics. I don't think he has had any more influence on media than any other White House in history. I just simply disagree with you on that.

No, not new to me, or anyone else. Both of us, we don't want the press colluding and propagandizing for any politician, or specific party agenda, do we? It's not admissible to me because both sides do it. Not acceptable.

Fine, I agree with you. It isn't acceptable. But it is the current game we are all playing in and we don't have a choice but to roll the dice, meander about and lay our cards down. I am open to talking about what we can do to curb political influence out of media and vice versa. One thing for sure would help is to break up DC completely. Leave the executive there, move congress to Minneapolis, move the senate to Billings and the SCOTUS to Phoenix. That will help. It will make lobbying MUCH more expensive for everyone involved. Another idea I have is we should get back to 1 rep per 30,000 people. That would flood the halls of government with so much gum that the whole works would essentially stop. Again, it would drastically increase the cost of lobbying. Another idea I have is to make public service, in any form, limited by social security number to no more than 15 years. That means being a staffer, being a congressman, being a state senator, being a county clerk, etc. I got ideas bro. Tons and tons of them. You want to fix the system, lets actually discuss ideas.

What do you think I think when I see highly coordinated knives-out for Bernie Sanders in the MSM?? Here you have someone standing up for under-privileged individual rights and against corporate dominance and what's the MSM reception? You get both "sides" and all their corporate and political backing submarining him as hard as they can. First you'll get a blackout on coverage. But, later, if you're succeeding, you get relentless, overly caricatured negative opinion or out of context coverage. Take your pick, will it be Chris Matthews on MSNBC and his exasperated "this is like the Nazis marching on France" or is it James Carville on CNN with gobs of airtime fear-mongering, or is it a more subtle Anderson Cooper hit job on CBS, or is it Fox News doing all that and worse... I have no love for any of these corporate news entities. They don't really care about us, just their bottom line.

First, blame the DNC/MSM complex for that. One more item of proof that the DNC hated Bernie. In 2016, Donna Brazile literally called her media cronies to get the questions ahead of a debate for Hillary Clinton. I can't believe that you think Bernie cares about people in the manner you think. MIND BLOWN.

[roguetoaster]

When '86 amnesty was passed, the Democrats in congress lied to the American public and told them they would secure the borders. That NEVER happened. Hence, the 34 years is legitimate. I will hunt around for your information about whether legal immigration is sufficient or not. That we need growth from immigration at all is another topic that can be discussed. I would say that illegal immigration should never be accepted. Thousands of Angel parents would agree. Those are crimes that literally could have been prevented: Crimes that are committed by people who are not even permitted to be here. That can't be argued either. You can say, "Oh well, shit happens" but its of little comfort when literally the laws are there in place to prevent those types of crimes.



That first statement makes no sense. Walls are borders by definition. Walls kept the Mongols out. Helped the Soviets destroy Berlin. We can argue about what constitutes a waste of time and money regarding border enforcement, but border enforcement NEEDS to happen.

It's fine to say that whoever originated the "problem," but since it hasn't been "fixed" since then it likely wasn't an important enough problem to resolve for either party. Illegal immigration is going to happen, and much of it is simple visa overstays. While neither of us could reasonably prove it, I suspect that crimes perpetrated by illegals occur at a similar rate to citizens or legal immigrants.

Walls didn't keep the Mongols out, they still got it when the walls couldn't be manned or maintained effectively. In Berlin the wall was porous to say the least, but was effective symbolism to divide the people. The fact remains that walls by themselves don't work to stop people any more than a lock on the door of your house, as anyone who is determined will still get in. Clearly we cannot allow everyone is who wants in, but we can allow more people in legally, which takes some of the pressure off of border enforcement. Basically, I think that a we could reduce border violations in ways other than by throwing money at a silly symbol, or even by just adding many more LEOs in the area.

[phillipj]

"Noam Chomsky, in an essay titled, “What Makes Mainstream Media Mainstream,” argued that corporate media organizations attempt to “divert” people’s attention from serious matters. “What are the elite media, the agenda-setting ones? The New York Times and CBS, for example. Well, first of all, they are major, very profitable, corporations. Furthermore, most of them are either linked to, or outright owned by, much bigger corporations, like General Electric, Westinghouse, and so on,” wrote Chomsky. “They are way up at the top of the power structure of the private economy which is a very tyrannical structure. Corporations are basically tyrannies, hierarchic, controlled [sic] from above. If you don’t like what they are doing you get out. The major media are just part of that system.”"

That is a nutty comment. He may agree with me on free speech, but this country is the best that's ever been including all of its flaws. He certainly disagrees with that and I think he is a fucking nut for it.

That is such an accurate comment! Great commentary. And one you seem to agree with! Powerful interests and corporations control the big mainstream news, or they are corporations themselves, and manipulate it for their bottom-line and vested interests. Anyone reading this here is going to agree. But certainly speak out if you don't!

And, No!! The Country is not "the best it's ever been." How do you figure that? The country has never been so unequal. There has never been so many people incarcerated. The country has never been in so much debt, whether we are talking the government, or numbers of individuals. There's never been so many people bankrupted because they couldn't afford their medical bills! The country is probably more divided and polarized than ever before. Lifespan in this country is going down and infant mortality and those living below the poverty line is going up. The homeless population around me has gone up 20% in the past year, when I drive to work I often wonder if that person lying over there is dead on the sidewalk. Job quality is overall worse. Job availability is definitely worse. Pay has more or less flat-lined for decades!

Its called politics. I don't think he has had any more influence on media than any other White House in history. I just simply disagree with you on that.

Trump works closer and in tandem with Fox News specifically and other conservative news outlets -- OAN for example -- more than any other President in this country's history. He also gives these very manipulative, spun sources legitimacy they do not deserve on the largest most powerful platform available. Needs to be acknowledged.

Fine, I agree with you. It isn't acceptable. But it is the current game we are all playing in and we don't have a choice but to roll the dice, meander about and lay our cards down. I am open to talking about what we can do to curb political influence out of media and vice versa. One thing for sure would help is to break up DC completely. Leave the executive there, move congress to Minneapolis, move the senate to Billings and the SCOTUS to Phoenix. That will help. It will make lobbying MUCH more expensive for everyone involved. Another idea I have is we should get back to 1 rep per 30,000 people. That would flood the halls of government with so much gum that the whole works would essentially stop. Again, it would drastically increase the cost of lobbying. Another idea I have is to make public service, in any form, limited by social security number to no more than 15 years. That means being a staffer, being a congressman, being a state senator, being a county clerk, etc. I got ideas bro. Tons and tons of them. You want to fix the system, lets actually discuss ideas.

Term limits, ok! But some way, any way, to curb lobbying and campaign finance should be #1; but let's notice who are the only people talking about that seriously? Can you name someone? Hm. I can.

First, blame the DNC/MSM complex for that. One more item of proof that the DNC hated Bernie. In 2016, Donna Brazile literally called her media cronies to get the questions ahead of a debate for Hillary Clinton. I can't believe that you think Bernie cares about people in the manner you think. MIND BLOWN.

Oh I do, and it wasn't fair. And guess what?! Fox head Roger Ailes tipped off his buddy Trump on questions before his Presidential debate, too. I do not care for any of these people. Roger Ailes. Trump. Donna Brazille. Clinton. They deserve each other.

And, I very much do believe Bernie Sanders cares about real, everyday people. How do I know? I met him myself. He is a good man.

[ZeKahr]

And, I very much do believe Bernie Sanders cares about real, everyday people. How do I know? I met him myself. He is a good man.

Politicians who believe in socialist or communist views, like Bernie Sanders, are very, very, VERY dangerous. The only reason you think Bernie is "a good man" who "cares about real, everyday people" is because he has the "He looks like a guy I can have a beer with" effect on you. Just like Barack Obama did on people who voted for him back in 2008. Just like George Bush did on people who voted for him back in 2000. What did Obama do after he got elected in 08? Pass oppressive healthcare legislation and bomb other countries in the middle east, both of which drove up Federal debt. Same with idiot Bush and his invasion of Afghanistan (look at long that raged on) right after 9/11, just drove this country into further bankruptcy. And the fat orange that throws tantrums (Trump) is currently shooting up the debt with stupid legislation like the CARES act. If Bernie, or anyone like him, is ever elected President, this country will be fucked financially in short order.

Every single country where communism or hardcore socialism have been implemented have eventually gone bankrupt with the majority of the population ending up in poverty and/or living under oppressive government regimes.

Sanders has a history of praising oppressive dictators (link: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...-hes-dangerous). I would NOT want someone like that running the United States of America. But unfortunately, this country will probably end up with a socialist president within one/two cycles (and that could even end up being Trump himself) because Americans have socialist fever now...

[phillipj]

Politicians who believe in socialist or communist views, like Bernie Sanders, are very, very, VERY dangerous. The only reason you think Bernie is "a good man" who "cares about real, everyday people" is because he has the "He looks like a guy I can have a beer with" effect on you. Just like Barack Obama did on people who voted for him back in 2008. Just like George Bush did on people who voted for him back in 2000. What did Obama do after he got elected in 08? Pass oppressive healthcare legislation and bomb other countries in the middle east, both of which drove up Federal debt. Same with idiot Bush and his invasion of Afghanistan (look at long that raged on) right after 9/11, just drove this country into further bankruptcy. And the fat orange that throws tantrums (Trump) is currently shooting up the debt with stupid legislation like the CARES act. If Bernie, or anyone like him, is ever elected President, this country will be fucked financially in short order.

Every single country where communism or hardcore socialism have been implemented have eventually gone bankrupt with the majority of the population ending up in poverty and/or living under oppressive government regimes.

Sanders has a history of praising oppressive dictators (link: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/o...-hes-dangerous). I would NOT want someone like that running the United States of America. But unfortunately, this country will probably end up with a socialist president within one/two cycles (and that could even end up being Trump himself) because Americans have socialist fever now...

Thank you for your concern, but I am secure in this belief. You read that Washington Examiner and say "He has a history of praising oppressive dictators" ... Here is exactly what Sanders said in Anderson Cooper's faux "gotcha" moment your article is referring to: "We're very opposed to the authoritarian nature of Cuba. But, you know, it's unfair to simply say everything is bad. When Fidel Castro came into office, you know what he did? He had a massive literacy program."

He gave credit where credit is due: Cuba had a massive literacy program, which made a difference. And they actually have relatively excellent healthcare. For Sanders to acknowledge both positives and negatives in other countries no matter our histories with them is a strength. Most importantly, this can be said of his frank and honest assessments of Israel, Saudi Arabia, and China -- something establishment politicians and Trump can not say for themselves.

Bernie Sanders is not a communist or a socialist in the ways you want to fear monger about. Yeah, he advocates that Americans should have the right to good jobs and a living wage; Americans should have healthcare as a right and not let it be greatly profited upon, just like it is in every other developed country. Big deal.

We already have Socialism in this country: It's socialism for the rich and most powerful, they get the enormous bulk of handouts, loopholes and tax-breaks. Trump is in many ways the figurehead of 'Socialism for the rich': let's create even more tax loopholes, let's bailout Boeing, let's give billions in handouts to Big Farms that his own trade war screwed over; there's just too many instances to even count.

[MrBurgundy]

Bernie Sanders is not a communist or a socialist in the ways you want to fear monger about. Yeah, he advocates that Americans should have the right to good jobs and a living wage; Americans should have healthcare as a right and not let it be greatly profited upon, just like it is in every other developed country. Big deal.

We already have Socialism in this country: It's socialism for the rich and most powerful, they get the enormous bulk of handouts, loopholes and tax-breaks. Trump is your king of Socialism for the rich: let's create more tax loopholes, let's bailout Boeing, let's give billions upon billions in handouts to Big Farms that my shitty trade war screwed over; there's just too many instances to even count.

Bernie sanders is exactly that. Bernie belongs to the group democratic socialists of america and they explicitly say that they want to get rid of private wealth and capitalism as a whole

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Socialists_of_America

The DSA regards the abolition of capitalism and the realization of socialism as a gradual long-term goal, therefore the organization focuses its immediate political energies on reforms within capitalism that empower working people while decreasing the power of corporations

The DSA characterizes its vision of socialism as an economic system based on maximum decentralization that can be supportive of a range of models for social ownership, including publicly owned enterprises and worker-owned cooperatives. The DSA rejects centralized economic planning in favor of a combination of democratic planning and market mechanisms:^[119] Because the DSA does not believe capitalism and private corporations can be immediately replaced with socialism, it is favorable to using government regulations and organized labor to make private businesses more accountable to the public interest:

and "we already have socialism for the rich"

You have no idea what that socialism means lol.

[phillipj]

Bernie sanders is exactly that. Bernie belongs to the group democratic socialists of america and they explicitly say that they want to get rid of private wealth and capitalism as a whole

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democr...sts_of_America

and "we already have socialism for the rich"

You have no idea what that socialism means lol.

You are wrong / lying as usual: Sanders does not actually "belong to the group Democratic Socialists of America". He's an Independent. And he ran for President twice on the Democratic ticket. And he certainly does not advocate "to get rid of private wealth or capitalism as a whole". He does not advocate for public ownership of production nor seek to abolish the profit system, which are the two core defining characteristics of Socialism. Regulated Capitalism is not Socialism.

But, mischaracterize Sanders and the word "socialism" however you like, it's a free country.

A little about Socialism for the Rich:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social...m_for_the_poor

[LowR3V'in]

pretty sure bernie sanders declared himself a "democratic socialist".
his words. Preetttyy sure.

[MrBurgundy]

You are wrong / lying as usual: Sanders does not actually "belong to the group Democratic Socialists of America". He's an Independent. And he ran for President twice on the Democratic ticket. And he certainly does not advocate "to get rid of private wealth or capitalism as a whole". He does not advocate for public ownership of production nor seek to abolish the profit system, which are the two core defining characteristics of Socialism. Regulated Capitalism is not Socialism.

But, mischaracterize Sanders and the word "socialism" however you like, it's a free country.

A little about Socialism for the Rich:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social...m_for_the_poor

Okay,

well, here's this I guess

Sighhhh

Since you're calling me a liar, you're a retard.. Democratic socialism is democratic socialism. He may be an idependent in office, but he IS a democratic socialist. You're wrong, again. He is everything that a democratic socialist is. Who cares if he's an "independent' on his ticket? He has to put that becuase no one in their right mind wants a socialist lol

https://youtu.be/7Vuvuvz0Qks

https://youtu.be/K7jlAZSGXf4

Should I post more?

I wonder how you're going to discredit this

Watch the first 5 seconds of the second video and call me a liar again.

[roguetoaster]

Okay,

well, here's this I guess

Sighhhh

Since you're calling me a liar, you're a retard.. Democratic socialism is democratic socialism. He may be an idependent in office, but he IS a democratic socialist. You're wrong, again. He is everything that a democratic socialist is. Who cares if he's an "independent' on his ticket? He has to put that becuase no one in their right mind wants a socialist lol

https://youtu.be/7Vuvuvz0Qks

https://youtu.be/K7jlAZSGXf4

Should I post more?

I wonder how you're going to discredit this

The label isn't too important in the political sense, but the measure of the man behind it is really what matters.

A pretty good read, with ideas still mostly applicable 100 years later, from a politician who would later be labeled as everything from an imperialist to un-American depending on the objectives of the person applying the label: https://www.mbiconcepts.com/teddy-ro...vidualism.html

[cale]

Should I post more?

Yea, you should post the substantiation for...

Bernie sanders is exactly that. Bernie belongs to the group democratic socialists of america and they explicitly say that they want to get rid of private wealth and capitalism as a whole

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democr...sts_of_America

You made the claim he "belongs" to this group, so far that's proving to not be true, he just shares similar views and they chose to endorse him. So far you're either proving to be a liar or ignorant, which is it?

[nando]

Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...-brad-parscale

I posted a link to Faux News, because, you know some people are too good for "MSM" and are more interesting in hearing what they want to hear.