Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
Having no political philosophy or background in history (nor interest), Trump does not understand what he is dealing with.
A very true, and powerful, statement.
He claims he's a very smart person. Time will certainly tell.
PBS Frontline did an interesting historical perspective on President Trump, Joe Bob sez check it out.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
Yury, Liberalism is ideally about letting people be while keeping in mind acting respectfully of other people - their person, their stuff, and our commonwealth such as infrastructure, public lands, etc.
"Liberals" betray liberal ideals all the time by trying to assert intellectual/moral control over what is "right" speech and action, regulating every little thing beyond the principle of transparent transaction and by believing that people are entitled to things beyond "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
"Conservatives" betray conservative ideals all the time by gettin' in peoples' bizness about what they do with their personal lives, playing games with taxes, privatization of public infrastructure, giving corporations welfare, and pillaging commonwealth resources that need to be used more sustainably for future generations' welfare.
My leaning is libertarian, but that group is full of Tea Partiers ("keep the government out of my medicare!"), I got mine and eff anyone else Ayn Randers, tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists ("did you see all those chemtrails this morning?"), and fringe militia groups ("We are the State of Jefferson!").
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
"Liberals" betray liberal ideals all the time by trying to assert intellectual/moral control over what is "right" speech and action...
Not in my experience. All liberals typically object to are political positions that result from the denial of science and/or other readily observable facts.
Curt
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
Curt, Being science-based and fact driven is a liberal ideal that many "liberals" betray, but if you're a liberal - without quotes - that is the modus operandi.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
"Liberals" betray liberal ideals all the time by trying to assert intellectual/moral control over what is "right" speech and action, regulating every little thing beyond the principle of transparent transaction and by believing that people are entitled to things beyond "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Amen!
If most liberals, and if the "left," were as you say, I would be a liberal!
In fact, what you describe is a quick summary of "classical liberalism," but that's a far cry from today's "liberals," who, like their mirror-image on the right, are ALL about CONTROL.
|
|
Curt
climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
|
|
Curt, Being science-based and fact driven is a liberal ideal that many "liberals" betray, but if you're a liberal - without quotes - that is the modus operandi.
Really? Let's hear some examples. There are certainly a few anti-GMO foods and anti-vaxers among liberals, but they are pretty rare. Conservatives who deny climate change, who think the Earth is 6,000 years old, and who think Obama is a Muslim are practically mainstream.
Curt
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
"Curt, Being science-based and fact driven is a liberal ideal that many "liberals" betray, but if you're a liberal - without quotes - that is the modus operandi."
Really...please explain.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
Examples of "liberal" squishy objectivism...
The Prius.
Considering nuclear power inherently evil.
Veganism and PETA.
Straining at recycling and then flying all over the place on vacation.
Alkaline water filters.
Having government supported healthcare that focuses on paying for the exisiting model rather than rethinking the model for legitimate disease prevention and incentivizing selfcare. Having a constitutionally debatable mechanism used to push people into enrolling.
Sorta tongue in cheek....
The overall theme is there is a lot of fluffy, feel good, and/or myopic science going around that doesn't include systems thinking.
That isn't the sole preserve of "liberal".
On the "conservative" side? "Facts" are often whatever makes you feel good, makes you money or gives you leverage over someone else.
"There's no consensus on climate change." Really? There is debate concerning the roles of various vectors that include carbon emissions and detals concerning the various mechanics and projections regarding the observable and verifiable climate change. And, there is no serious question of the smoking gun regardless of whether the shift is being influenced by natural climate shift outside of human influences. Oy.
And, I ain't buying GMO agriculture as a viable sustainable agriculture model. Soil and groundwater degradation among other things appear to be troubling issues. There is questionable science on both sides of that issue, but I'll go with GMO isn't as good an idea as your being sold it is.
|
|
Happiegrrrl2
Trad climber
|
|
I found that video by Oberman to be upsetting and frightening. Since I agree with his opinion, I felt a little bit like I was watching an Emergency Preparedness film.
I'd be interested to hear the opinions of those who support Trump, on the video.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
opinions of those who support Trump
Few and far between, because the majority of people who voted for Trump were really voting against Clinton rather than "supporting Trump." You can't fairly conflate the two.
Had the Dems not rigged the election to foist Clinton off on us, instead choosing virtually any other non-baggage-laden candidate (even the socialist, Bernie), the Dems would almost certainly have won.'
Given Trump on the other side, even Biden could have won.
So, you'll look far and wide to find "Trump supporters." Not a single person in my extended circle was a "Trump supporter."
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Pure and simple - anyone who didn't vote or voted against Clinton is either a moron or a rube.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
"Had the Dems not rigged the election to foist Clinton off on us, instead choosing virtually any other non-baggage-laden candidate (even the socialist, Bernie), the Dems would almost certainly have won.'"
Bullshit and prove it. What fly right over your self righteous head is the fact that a foreign country tried to alter the election with the emails and a lot of low information voters bought the bullsh#t.
https://newrepublic.com/article/135472/no-dnc-didnt-rig-primary-favor-hillary
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
Bob bought the bullsh!t and doesn't have a clue .....
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
Thankfully, we don't have to deal with politically correct BS anymore:
While dozens of celebrities have made it clear they will not perform at President-elect Donald Trump’s upcoming inauguration, even if invited, there’s one man who desperately wants to be part of the festivities, but won’t.
For decades, Charlie Brotman has been the announcer for the inaugural parade, informing new presidents exactly which acts, bands or people are parading past him at any given moment. He first got the job in 1957 for Dwight Eisenhower’s second inauguration. Since then, he has announced 15 parades for 10 different presidents.
“I have never been asked my affiliation, whether I am a Republican, a Democrat or an independent,” Brotman said in an interview with McClatchy. “They don’t care who I am, they don’t care what I am. They just know I’ve been doing a professional job.”
But now Brotman, who is 89, is out as announcer, he has told media outlets. He received an email from Trump’s Inaugural Committee informing him his services will not be required come Jan. 20, he told the Washington Post.
“First and foremost, on behalf of the PIC Staff we want to thank you for your service to this country as the Lead Announcer for the Inaugural Parade,” the email to Brotman read. “There is no question that you are a Washington Institution and a National Treasure.”
But the committee has decided it will instead give the job to Steve Ray, a Washington D.C.-based announcer who has done work for Major League Baseball’s Washington Nationals and other local radio stations. Ray was also a volunteer for the Trump campaign, per the Washington Post.
And while Brotman told WJLA that he hopes Ray does well, he described himself as “heartbroken” and “destroyed” that he would not be announcing Trump’s parade. It would have marked his 60th year on the job.
Brotman told WJLA that he thinks Ray received the job because of his prior support for Trump and Trump’s reputation for valuing and rewarding loyalty.
skill and loyalty in a job mean nothing to payoffs.
But the good and loyal people of Colorado don't care what happens to an old man, so long as they don't have to look.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Bullshit and prove it. What fly right over your self righteous head is the fact that a foreign country tried to alter the election with the emails.
The "prove it" line is flatly ridiculous. You can no more PROVE that a "foreign country tried to alter the election."
On BOTH sides, piles of facts are interpreted. For every INTERPRETED article you produce, I'll show you three that "prove" the opposite.
http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-proves-primary-was-rigged-dnc-undermined-democracy/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wikileaks-emails-show-dnc-favored-hillary-clinton-over_us_57930be0e4b0e002a3134b05
And, BTW, HuffPost is about as "left" as any of the rags! Yet, even THEY can't sing your tune!
As summarized on one reddit thread:
The leaks showed a number of things:
1) The DNC colluded with the hillary campaign to ensure that the primary dates themselves were favourable to her; by front-loading red states who were traditionally more likely to favour hillary over other more progressive candidates, it gave the impression of early momentum. No one really talks about this but the impact this has on an election is massive; had it been the other way around, and Bernie-freindly states had been first, the news cycle would be dominated by the potential upset.
2) The DNC actively pressured friendly news outlets to suppress Bernie coverage in favour of Hillary...
3) ...and put out hit pieces too. one senior Dnc staffer suggested putting out pieces on his religion. Classy stuff. WaPo published over 18 anti Sanders pieces in an afternoon. Collusion.
4) Woe betide you if you wanted to back Sanders as democrat employee or sitting rep/senator. Tulsi Gabbard, for instance, was treated appallingly by the DNC for backing sanders.
5) There was a culture at the DNC that ridiculed Bernie, his team and his supporters. Us included. The emails showed a level of disdain that was pervasive.
And let's not forget the fact that CNN fed Clinton the questions in advance of the debate, while those questions were not shared with the others. The emails went through Podesta at the DNC. CNN later fired (acting DNC head) Brazile for her (the DNC's) collusion with Clinton.
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/new-email-shows-donna-brazile-also-gave-clinton-questions-before-cnn-presidential-debate/
But no amount of evidence on such interpreted subjects can count as "proof."
The fact remains, however, that Clinton is a solid mass of baggage, while such is not the case with other prominent Dems, such as Sanders and Biden, as just two immediate examples.
The DNC idea that Clinton was the best candidate is now seen as the insular stupidity that it was. EVEN TRUMP beat Clinton, and NOBODY wanted Trump!
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
Pure and simple - anyone who didn't vote or voted against Clinton is either a moron or a rube.
And it's just that sort of monolithic thinking that will more and more deeply divide this nation and even perhaps precipitate a civil war.
Congrats!
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
Congrats!
Yea congrats you idiots for proving my own hypothetical beliefs that "the country will become more and more divided and perhaps have a civil war" true in my own head. And I already blame you for my hypothetical beliefs coming true sometime in the future. So congrats on that.
Me though, I'm cool.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
We are, always have been and always will be a divided nation.
We are more divided, and on the basis of far more inflammatory rhetoric, now than ever before in my life. The trend is toward deeper and more vehement divides.
On this very thread we have multiple people saying that they have abandoned friends and family members over debates regarding this election cycle. And the antipathy expressed on this very thread is beyond what I've seen even in the past few years, even on the politard threads here.
If you can't see the direction, then nothing I say is going to convince you. But I sure see a huge difference in the force and content of the disagreements!
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
From your link MB1..."20,000 freshly leaked emails reveal resentful disdain toward Sanders, as party favored Clinton long before any votes were cast"
Of course they had disdain for him, he wasn't a democrat and did very little to raise money for down ballots candidate.
You said they rigged it, prove it.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!