Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 108

Thread: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

  1. #31
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,326

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    And you can shove the 'cowardice' comment sideways up your own orifice of your choice.
    I would replace "cowardice" with unwarranted hopefulness. It's just drawing another line in the sand, and belaying commitment.
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  2. #32

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    Worry when you see a repeal of the two-term limitation pass one of the houses of Congress. All the sturm and drang Trump may care to deliver does not carry with a majority of the electorate, only his rabidly supportive 30%. I have no fears of a civil war or a race war and we are too aware of "wag the dog" conflicts as political tools to be snowed under by that (Note: Monty will likely assert that GWB's administration did just that in 2003 with the poorly reviewed (at best) evidence on Sadam Hussein's efforts at MDW; I would assert that that is one of the reasons WHY that card would be tough to play again right now).
    You don't have to tiptoe around it, it was lies. The Bush administration consciously and deliberately manufactured lies to create a pretext to invade Iraq, which it had wanted to do since before 9/11. This is all well-documented and common knowledge. I mean, it was kind of out there even in 2002/3, but afterwards there were whole Congressional inquiries and everything that brought thousands of pages of evidence to public attention.

    Besides that historical note, I would note that Trump supporters are especially dangerous because they don't need manufactured evidence, they will literally reject the evidence of their eyes and ears on command. Trump can lie about anything he likes and they will literally believe it. See the especially ludicrous spectacle of Trump releasing a smoking gun for modified limited hangout and then shamelessly declaring that it says what it doesn't and doesn't say what it does, before - and after - personally confirming and *repeating* the substance publicly. The more insipid Republicans then go about debasing themselves by perpetually pretending lack of familiarity with the events when pressed for comment. But again they ultimately subordinate themselves to the subset who will support Trump regardless of what he does that they know is wrong. The former are merely evil. It's the larger group slouching through a haze dreaming dreams who are marked most by their troglodytism, represented by bestial converts like Lindsay Graham, who are more frightening for being both evil and stupid, knowing and representing their constituents so very well.

    Though from the perspective of the Republican Party seizing power, being the party of genuinely stupid people hooked on dark soma is a definite inherent weakness. This correlation between malice and stupidity is perhaps our best hope for survival. Force may shit on reason's back, but the weight of the inability to correctly interpret empirical reality must weigh eventually. The trick is to minimize the damage.

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    This is such insane levels of cowardice masked as caution.

    The dude is clearly strong-arming other countries to influence our election in his favor. You say worry when Congress starts dismantling the Constitution? Jesus man, you might as well ask people to take a day off when the illegals are executed in the streets.
    He's been working the hinges since before he got into office. He has and will continue to do a lot of damage. But if he loses re-election we 'only' have to worry about low-level violence and the institutional damage of an (loudly) unwilling transfer of power in succession. If the guy was smarter and more in step with the Republican Party our prospects would be much bleaker. Imagine what a dedicated propagandist and ideologue like Tucker Carlson could accomplish in office. Thankfully, he is quite uncommonly stupid and irrational for a human being, and as noted above so are many Republicans.

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    I just understand the road this leads to, and you know where it goes as well.
    He knows what side he's on.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    I said it that way because it ain't gonna happen. People are reacting to this asshat as though the system will let him roll over and declare a dictatorship by fiat. Our system, culture, and outlook won't permit such absent a civil war. And if he somehow managed to inspire his yahoo 30% to take up arms they would lose. Instead, he probably loses in November and flitters away into the twitterverse in mid-January 2021.
    Again, cause and symptom - it's the Republican Party we have to worry most about. Not because they will likely back this guy this time around if he wants to seize the republic, but because they will the next one from the start.
    Last edited by Montmorency; 10-07-2019 at 07:31.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  3. #33
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,326

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Thankfully, he is quite uncommonly stupid and irrational for a human being, and as noted above so are many Republicans.
    This isn't a viable safeguard.
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  4. #34
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,213
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    I just understand the road this leads to, and you know where it goes as well.
    It goes to 4 more years of good times for every american not driving themselves into conniptions following the media cycle of endlessly trying to build up a scandal and then ditching it when it turns out bunk and looking for the slightest sign of new scandal to hype past reason. All the while hoping people just forget the umpteen times the newest scandal that would bring down the presidency dissapeared into the ether.

    You're being blue balled into insanity.
    Last edited by Greyblades; 10-08-2019 at 16:46.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  5. #35
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Trump himself will not become a dictator or tyrant, the situation in the US - political and cultural - simply won't allow it. However, Trump can do real damage to the Republic by corrupting American civil society (already done) and moving America that bit closer to an actual Despot.

    The fact the Democrats and moderate Republicans are following Trump in a race to the bottom is the real problem here.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."

    Member thankful for this post:



  6. #36
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,326

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    It goes to 4 more years of good times for every american
    I know you are aware this isn't true. Farmers are totally screwed and will continue to be screwed. They can't even distribute aid properly. I guess it helps that they will still vote for him, even if his policies absolutely wreck them.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1VY0ZT

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Trump himself will not become a dictator or tyrant, the situation in the US - political and cultural - simply won't allow it. However, Trump can do real damage to the Republic by corrupting American civil society (already done) and moving America that bit closer to an actual Despot.

    The fact the Democrats and moderate Republicans are following Trump in a race to the bottom is the real problem here.
    This type of complacency is honestly the most alarming thing I have seen. It's not Trump, it's not his drones, it's not Farage or anything else. It's the fact that people living in democracies are willing to trash their own house if it means they feel better about themselves in the short term.
    Last edited by CrossLOPER; 10-08-2019 at 23:05.
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  7. #37
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by CrossLOPER View Post
    This type of complacency is honestly the most alarming thing I have seen. It's not Trump, it's not his drones, it's not Farage or anything else. It's the fact that people living in democracies are willing to trash their own house if it means they feel better about themselves in the short term.
    Quite the opposite - I am unwilling to roll around in the mud with Trump. Rather, I seek to roll back his perverse influence instead - one coffee shop, one pub, one damned Internet Forum at a time.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  8. #38

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by CrossLOPER View Post
    This isn't a viable safeguard.
    It's one of the best we have, alongside sic semper tyrannis, but you're right:

    Profit, not politics: Trump allies sought Ukraine gas deal

    As Rudy Giuliani was pushing Ukrainian officials last spring to investigate one of Donald Trump’s main political rivals, a group of individuals with ties to the president and his personal lawyer were also active in the former Soviet republic.

    Their aims were profit, not politics. This circle of businessmen and Republican donors touted connections to Giuliani and Trump while trying to install new management at the top of Ukraine’s massive state gas company. Their plan was to then steer lucrative contracts to companies controlled by Trump allies, according to two people with knowledge of their plans.
    HOLY FUCKING SHIT every accusation is always a confession. These reports of unlimited malfeasance always make me smile.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Trump himself will not become a dictator or tyrant, the situation in the US - political and cultural - simply won't allow it. However, Trump can do real damage to the Republic by corrupting American civil society (already done) and moving America that bit closer to an actual Despot.

    The fact the Democrats and moderate Republicans are following Trump in a race to the bottom is the real problem here.
    Democrats certainly aren't rofl.

    Quote Originally Posted by CrossLOPER View Post
    I know you are aware this isn't true. Farmers are totally screwed and will continue to be screwed. They can't even distribute aid properly. I guess it helps that they will still vote for him, even if his policies absolutely wreck them.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1VY0ZT
    You're still not getting it. Factual accuracy is not relevant in these circles. What is false may be truer than true in the truest sense, while anyone can use facts to prove what can't be right.

    This type of complacency is honestly the most alarming thing I have seen. It's not Trump, it's not his drones, it's not Farage or anything else. It's the fact that people living in democracies are willing to trash their own house if it means they feel better about themselves in the short term.
    It's like the old-school political nihilism. Refer to the Dostoevsky quote I dredged up a year ago:

    EDIT: Sorry, here it is.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Then--this is all what you say--new economic relations will be established, all ready-made and worked out with mathematical exactitude, so that every possible question will vanish in the twinkling of an eye, simply because every possible answer to it will be provided. Then the "Palace of Crystal" will be built. Then ... In fact, those will be halcyon days. Of course there is no guaranteeing (this is my comment) that it will not be, for instance, frightfully dull then (for what will one have to do when everything will be calculated and tabulated), but on the other hand everything will be extraordinarily rational. Of course boredom may lead you to anything. It is boredom sets one sticking golden pins into people, but all that would not matter. What is bad (this is my comment again) is that I dare say people will be thankful for the gold pins then. Man is stupid, you know, phenomenally stupid; or rather he is not at all stupid, but he is so ungrateful that you could not find another like him in all creation. I, for instance, would not be in the least surprised if all of a sudden, A PROPOS of nothing, in the midst of general prosperity a gentleman with an ignoble, or rather with a reactionary and ironical, countenance were to arise and, putting his arms akimbo, say to us all: "I say, gentleman, hadn't we better kick over the whole show and scatter rationalism to the winds, simply to send these logarithms to the devil, and to enable us to live once more at our own sweet foolish will!" That again would not matter, but what is annoying is that he would be sure to find followers--such is the nature of man. And all that for the most foolish reason, which, one would think, was hardly worth mentioning: that is, that man everywhere and at all times, whoever he may be, has preferred to act as he chose and not in the least as his reason and advantage dictated. And one may choose what is contrary to one's own interests, and sometimes one POSITIVELY OUGHT (that is my idea). One's own free unfettered choice, one's own caprice, however wild it may be, one's own fancy worked up at times to frenzy--is that very "most advantageous advantage" which we have overlooked, which comes under no classification and against which all systems and theories are continually being shattered to atoms. And how do these wiseacres know that man wants a normal, a virtuous choice? What has made them conceive that man must want a rationally advantageous choice? What man wants is simply INDEPENDENT choice, whatever that independence may cost and wherever it may lead. And choice, of course, the devil only knows what choice.
    Last edited by Montmorency; 10-08-2019 at 23:37.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  9. #39
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Democrats certainly aren't rofl.
    You don't think Elizabeth Warren's claims of native American ancestry are shameless, populist pandering?
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  10. #40

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    You don't think Elizabeth Warren's claims of native American ancestry are shameless, populist pandering?
    I hope in the future you will refrain from commenting on a matter without informing yourself first, as your question is ridiculous in every conceivable facet.

    Warren has thought of herself as having Native ancestry since childhood, in a state (Oklahoma) where perhaps a majority of white people would attest to such ancestry.

    Warren didn't affirmatively advance any claim about herself as Native American to the public, Donald Trump did - in a derogatory fashion. She reacted to it (naively clearly) by demonstrating the accuracy of her family stories.

    There are fewer Native Americans in the United States than there are Jews. Elizabeth Warren acknowledges that she is not a Native American, nor do Natives see her as one. I struggle to imagine how even a calculated claim of such ancestry could begin to be "populist pandering" in theory.

    Even in a scenario where Warren had fabricated an identity as having Native ancestry for the purpose of this election, and doing so was thought to be electorally advantageous among Democratic constituencies, it should be obviously inappropriate to frame it in context with, among other things, violent rhetoric and the corrupt subversion of governmental and civil institutions.

    That was a seriously dogshit post Phil.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  11. #41
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    I hope in the future you will refrain from commenting on a matter without informing yourself first, as your question is ridiculous in every conceivable facet.

    Warren has thought of herself as having Native ancestry since childhood, in a state (Oklahoma) where perhaps a majority of white people would attest to such ancestry.

    Warren didn't affirmatively advance any claim about herself as Native American to the public, Donald Trump did - in a derogatory fashion. She reacted to it (naively clearly) by demonstrating the accuracy of her family stories.

    There are fewer Native Americans in the United States than there are Jews. Elizabeth Warren acknowledges that she is not a Native American, nor do Natives see her as one. I struggle to imagine how even a calculated claim of such ancestry could begin to be "populist pandering" in theory.

    Even in a scenario where Warren had fabricated an identity as having Native ancestry for the purpose of this election, and doing so was thought to be electorally advantageous among Democratic constituencies, it should be obviously inappropriate to frame it in context with, among other things, violent rhetoric and the corrupt subversion of governmental and civil institutions.

    That was a seriously dogshit post Phil.
    Really?

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/warren-...gh-cheekbones/

    https://www.boston.com/news/politics...rican-heritage

    Warren self-identified as Native-American whilst working as a legal scholar and after being hired at Harvard. These articles are from 2012-13 when she was running for the Senate, before Donald Trump even entered politics.

    "No, as I said, these are my family stories. I have lived in a family that has talked about Native Americans, talked about tribes since I had been a little girl," she said. "I still have a picture on my mantel and it is a picture my mother had before that - a picture of my grandfather. And my Aunt Bea has walked by that picture at least a 1,000 times remarked that he - her father, my Papaw -- had high cheek bones like all of the Indians do. Because that is how she saw it and your mother got those same great cheek bones and I didn't. She that thought was the bad deal she had gotten in life."


    "Being Native American has been part of my story, I guess, since the day I was born," Warren continued.

    Yes, Trump then mocked her for these claims and when she ultimately took a DNA test there was little physical basis for them. At the end of the day it's rather like me identifying as Welsh based on my grandmother's ancestry, though she actually bore the giveaway name Lloyd.

    I'm sorry, but if it's not deliberate pandering then it feels like naive Liberal wish-fulfilment. This is not something she just idly claimed - she had it on her professional resume and deliberately presented herself as Native American in public life.

    I see no reason why we can be ultra-Cynical about the likes of Trump, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn but not Elizabeth Warren.

    Absolute best-case explanation is a woeful lack of judgement that makes her unfit for high public office.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  12. #42

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Really?

    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/warren-...gh-cheekbones/

    https://www.boston.com/news/politics...rican-heritage

    Warren self-identified as Native-American whilst working as a legal scholar and after being hired at Harvard. These articles are from 2012-13 when she was running for the Senate, before Donald Trump even entered politics.

    "No, as I said, these are my family stories. I have lived in a family that has talked about Native Americans, talked about tribes since I had been a little girl," she said. "I still have a picture on my mantel and it is a picture my mother had before that - a picture of my grandfather. And my Aunt Bea has walked by that picture at least a 1,000 times remarked that he - her father, my Papaw -- had high cheek bones like all of the Indians do. Because that is how she saw it and your mother got those same great cheek bones and I didn't. She that thought was the bad deal she had gotten in life."


    "Being Native American has been part of my story, I guess, since the day I was born," Warren continued.

    Yes, Trump then mocked her for these claims and when she ultimately took a DNA test there was little physical basis for them. At the end of the day it's rather like me identifying as Welsh based on my grandmother's ancestry, though she actually bore the giveaway name Lloyd.

    I'm sorry, but if it's not deliberate pandering then it feels like naive Liberal wish-fulfilment. This is not something she just idly claimed - she had it on her professional resume and deliberately presented herself as Native American in public life.

    I see no reason why we can be ultra-Cynical about the likes of Trump, Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn but not Elizabeth Warren.

    Absolute best-case explanation is a woeful lack of judgement that makes her unfit for high public office.
    This is a caliber of stupidity approaching insolence. She never presented herself as Native American in public life. She talked about her family history. The DNA test corroborated the family history. The lack of judgement was in thinking her right-wing critics were concerned with that substance for its own sake.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  13. #43
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    This is a caliber of stupidity approaching insolence. She never presented herself as Native American in public life. She talked about her family history. The DNA test corroborated the family history. The lack of judgement was in thinking her right-wing critics were concerned with that substance for its own sake.
    She chose to list herself as "Native American", not "white" or "Mixed White and Native American".

    She chose consciously to present herself, within her profession, as unambiguously native American.

    This also has very little to do with Trump, as opposed to the Birther conspiracy which WAS supported early by Trump.

    When she was confronted she initially doubled down.

    If you think I'm wrong why has she now apologised? It's because she committed the cardinal Liberal sin of claiming an ethnic identity she was not, in their view, entitled to.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  14. #44

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    She chose to list herself as "Native American", not "white" or "Mixed White and Native American".

    She chose consciously to present herself, within her profession, as unambiguously native American.

    This also has very little to do with Trump, as opposed to the Birther conspiracy which WAS supported early by Trump.

    When she was confronted she initially doubled down.

    If you think I'm wrong why has she now apologised? It's because she committed the cardinal Liberal sin of claiming an ethnic identity she was not, in their view, entitled to.
    A supportable Oklahoman (a focal point for white-Native admixture) family legend had her self-identifying as a Native American in 1980s and 90s, in a time where this was a very prominent trend in America. Native groups complained over the 2018 events because the dispute was not politically relevant and could contribute to misconceptions about what constitutes Native affiliation. As Warren said this year, "I am not a person of color; I am not a citizen of a tribe. Tribal citizenship is very different from ancestry. Tribes, and only tribes, determine tribal citizenship, and I respect that difference." So what's the story?

    We can talk about how her response to Trump was in bad judgement, but your characterization of it is plain silly and shows rather worse judgement on your part.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  15. #45
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,341

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    She chose to list herself as "Native American", not "white" or "Mixed White and Native American".

    She chose consciously to present herself, within her profession, as unambiguously native American.

    This also has very little to do with Trump, as opposed to the Birther conspiracy which WAS supported early by Trump.

    When she was confronted she initially doubled down.

    If you think I'm wrong why has she now apologised? It's because she committed the cardinal Liberal sin of claiming an ethnic identity she was not, in their view, entitled to.
    In a perfect world, politicians would be perfect and would not say or do such stupid things. Of the imperfect world we live in, she seems to be on balance the best of the bunch on offer.

    This comment is at best foolish - although she is no fool - and isn't really defensible. But if this is the worst thing she has recently done, well, I'll accept that.

    Last edited by rory_20_uk; 10-10-2019 at 17:26.
    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

    Member thankful for this post:



  16. #46

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    In a perfect world, politicians would be perfect and would not say or do such stupid things. Of the imperfect world we live in, she seems to be on balance the best of the bunch on offer.

    This comment is at best foolish - although she is no fool - and isn't really defensible. But if this is the worst thing she has recently done well, I'll accept that.

    What infuriates me about PVC's framing is that it accuses Warren of something she hasn't done while completely ignoring what is in fact bad about what she has done. A real sandwich.

    The problem with Warren's handling of this issue is that her pedantic sense of her heritage (and the claim of heritage from specific tribal groups rather than generically) is that its contestation serves no benefit for the electorate, and for it to enter national discourse as a subject of discussion probably only brings negative attention to Native interests. Most Natives don't get to enjoy the benefits of whiteness while also eating the cake of exotic aesthetic, and Warren becoming a de facto representative for them when the subject comes up doesn't contribute to repairing their sovereignty or addressing the many demands of Native groups. The publicity doesn't help with the long-running scams that white Americans have run while fraudulently touting Native membership to gain its benefits and access. Warren's family stories might have more substance than most, but the whole trend of excitement and pride over a marginal (non-cultural) connection to Amerindians is both very American and very White, the latter in its ability to treat the putative association to an oppressed minority as a cute factoid or empowering story without burden (though to be fair it has also been a trend among African Americans to identify distant Native ancestry, for slightly different reasons). It's basically a racist mindset in how it relates to Amerindians and how it conceives of what makes one. The technical accuracy of one of Warren's narrowest ancestral propositions or the accuracy of Republican criticisms of her is nothing at all to be resolved on her terms because it's of purely personal import. This is the political sphere. As a politician she has an especially prominent platform, which is best and most responsibly used when advancing the interests of constituents and the country rather than in validating her self-image. That's why it's been gratifying to see her demonstrate the ability to adapt and to learn from mistakes throughout her campaign this year, those being exactly some of the most important qualities a leader can have.

    Whereas PVC comes in here with a propagandistic mindset that sees no dissonance in saying that Warren maintaining her self-image discussing Native ancestry only when prompted to do so by Republican attacks is somehow pandering (without explaining what that could possibly mean in context) and in turn that this testifies to a race to the bottom on Democrats' part is just - the stuff of committed bull artistry and I hold it in contempt.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  17. #47
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,220

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Whereas PVC comes in here with a propagandistic mindset that sees no dissonance in saying that Warren maintaining her self-image discussing Native ancestry only when prompted to do so by Republican attacks is somehow pandering (without explaining what that could possibly mean in context) and in turn that this testifies to a race to the bottom on Democrats' part is just - the stuff of committed bull artistry and I hold it in contempt.
    There's a lot of coordination between the Bannonites on both sides of the Atlantic, and their supporters lap up their stories whilst imagining that their Bannonite position has nothing to do with the Bannonite position on the other side of the water. Thus you will have Brexiteers affecting some kind of contempt for Trump, whilst parroting the narratives devised by Trumpites. Functionally there is no dividing Trump and Brexit; both are branches of the Anglo-American far right, directed by the same group. There is a fair bit of suspicion that Russia and Putin do the strategy, that Russia is the state benefits most, with the leaders of the US and UK also benefiting financially.

    Over here, the main director is Dominic Cummings, currently chief of staff of the PM Boris Johnson. Who are the personnel on the American side?

  18. #48
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    What infuriates me about PVC's framing is that it accuses Warren of something she hasn't done while completely ignoring what is in fact bad about what she has done. A real sandwich.

    The problem with Warren's handling of this issue is that her pedantic sense of her heritage (and the claim of heritage from specific tribal groups rather than generically) is that its contestation serves no benefit for the electorate, and for it to enter national discourse as a subject of discussion probably only brings negative attention to Native interests. Most Natives don't get to enjoy the benefits of whiteness while also eating the cake of exotic aesthetic, and Warren becoming a de facto representative for them when the subject comes up doesn't contribute to repairing their sovereignty or addressing the many demands of Native groups. The publicity doesn't help with the long-running scams that white Americans have run while fraudulently touting Native membership to gain its benefits and access. Warren's family stories might have more substance than most, but the whole trend of excitement and pride over a marginal (non-cultural) connection to Amerindians is both very American and very White, the latter in its ability to treat the putative association to an oppressed minority as a cute factoid or empowering story without burden (though to be fair it has also been a trend among African Americans to identify distant Native ancestry, for slightly different reasons). It's basically a racist mindset in how it relates to Amerindians and how it conceives of what makes one. The technical accuracy of one of Warren's narrowest ancestral propositions or the accuracy of Republican criticisms of her is nothing at all to be resolved on her terms because it's of purely personal import. This is the political sphere. As a politician she has an especially prominent platform, which is best and most responsibly used when advancing the interests of constituents and the country rather than in validating her self-image. That's why it's been gratifying to see her demonstrate the ability to adapt and to learn from mistakes throughout her campaign this year, those being exactly some of the most important qualities a leader can have.

    Whereas PVC comes in here with a propagandistic mindset that sees no dissonance in saying that Warren maintaining her self-image discussing Native ancestry only when prompted to do so by Republican attacks is somehow pandering (without explaining what that could possibly mean in context) and in turn that this testifies to a race to the bottom on Democrats' part is just - the stuff of committed bull artistry and I hold it in contempt.
    You might mind your stress levels go down if you stop assuming other people are more stupid and ignorant than yourself.

    There is a very long history of white people claiming some distant, invisible minority heritage for what is - essentially - a fetish. The most famous of these in the US is the claim to "Native" ancestry for a variety of reasons.

    In the UK it's often claims of Black heritage - not always so simple, either: https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...on-hattenstone

    In the case where people who "present" as only white have stories of mixed-race ancestry they tend to do one of three things; reject it, accept it, or shout it to the world. For obvious reasons people on the Far-Right will usually pick the first. Liberals, especially academics, will sometimes (but rarely) pick the third. This is what Warren did - self-identified to the Texas Bar and in an academic directory as "Native American". There are a number of reasons she may have done this, including outright fetishisation, rejection of white american culture or a need to expunge her own sense of guilt as a product of colonialism.

    I don't think Warren did this to get a job, but I do think she did it to assert a Native American identity, to "be" a Native American lawyer and legal academic. The fact she hunkered down and protested this identity for more than half a decade and took a DNA test to prove it shows she's used it as part of her political idenity too.

    WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/elizabe...nk-11566241904

    Now, you may be most concerned with the impact this will have on Native Americans but I would counter that given your entire system is still designed bottom-up to wipe them out and integrate them into wider American society it's small beer. I'm much more concerned with what this whole sorry episode says about Warren's judgement, because you can bet if she'd been able to convince her detractors and won the election as some point she would have said, "As the first Native American President..."

    Now that​ would have been damaging to Native interests.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  19. #49
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, Cub Shoot 2 Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Treasure Diver Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Mahjong Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Slack Man Champion, Japanese Baseball Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Super Mario Mushroom Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Fish Kill Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, KF 9000 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    10,979

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Our treatment of Native Americans/First Peoples/Amerinds was nowhere near as programmatic as you suggest. It was not designed, so much as happenstance, arising from a mix of racism, greed, remorse, and corruption. A truly coordinated policy of subjugation would have crushed those cultures entirely so that they could be fully absorbed or massacred en toto.
    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

  20. #50
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,213
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    She was baited into taking the tests by a tweet and publicized the results entirely on her own volition.

    Warren being nominated, trump could not ask for an easier opponent.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  21. #51
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    Our treatment of Native Americans/First Peoples/Amerinds was nowhere near as programmatic as you suggest. It was not designed, so much as happenstance, arising from a mix of racism, greed, remorse, and corruption. A truly coordinated policy of subjugation would have crushed those cultures entirely so that they could be fully absorbed or massacred en toto.
    The end-goal of all American policy so far as I am aware has always been:

    1. Christianisation.

    2. Assimilation.

    3. Obliteration through interbreeding.

    Alongside this you have had, at certain times, forced removal and outright massacre alongside the blatant violation of treaties without any pretext.

    So, really, the problem has been that greed has hampered point 2 and 3 - if the white had been less greedy the Native Americans would have disappeared as a separate people just as native Caribbean Islanders have.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  22. #52
    Backordered Member CrossLOPER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Brass heart.
    Posts
    2,326

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    You're still not getting it. Factual accuracy is not relevant in these circles. What is false may be truer than true in the truest sense, while anyone can use facts to prove what can't be right.
    I am aware that they are incapable of humility or critical thought.

    Trump has accomplished two things: He unified the left in terms of bare hatred towards Republicans, and created a homogenized group loyal to him. How would a shrewd mind exploit this? What are the strengths of the former and the weaknesses of the latter?
    Requesting suggestions for new sig.

    -><- GOGOGO GOGOGO WINLAND WINLAND ALL HAIL TECHNOVIKING!SCHUMACHER!
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    WHY AM I NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS???

  23. #53
    Ni dieu ni maître! Senior Member a completely inoffensive name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    I live on the org, feeding off of what few thanks are tossed at my posts. It is up to you to make sure I don't starve.
    Posts
    8,410
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    And you can shove the 'cowardice' comment sideways up your own orifice of your choice.
    I apologize, I took it too far.

    I still disagree with your sentiment, for an example of what is to come, look at Oregon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_O...lican_walkouts

    Refusal to comply with the institutions they were elected to, with the full force of armed militia's. Now that it has worked once, they will keep doing it.
    In all these papers we see a love of honest work, an aversion to shams, a caution in the enunciation of conclusions, a distrust of rash generalizations and speculations based on uncertain premises. He was never anxious to add one more guess on doubtful matters in the hope of hitting the truth, or what might pass as such for a time, but was always ready to take infinite pains in the most careful testing of every theory. With these qualities was united a modesty which forbade the pushing of his own claims and desired no reputation except the unsought tribute of competent judges.

    Member thankful for this post:



  24. #54

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    There's a lot of coordination between the Bannonites on both sides of the Atlantic, and their supporters lap up their stories whilst imagining that their Bannonite position has nothing to do with the Bannonite position on the other side of the water. Thus you will have Brexiteers affecting some kind of contempt for Trump, whilst parroting the narratives devised by Trumpites. Functionally there is no dividing Trump and Brexit; both are branches of the Anglo-American far right, directed by the same group. There is a fair bit of suspicion that Russia and Putin do the strategy, that Russia is the state benefits most, with the leaders of the US and UK also benefiting financially.

    Over here, the main director is Dominic Cummings, currently chief of staff of the PM Boris Johnson. Who are the personnel on the American side?
    I wish you would not use the term "Bannonite," because it imputes far too much influence to Stephen Bannon. He is presently a marginal chump with no particular influence remaining (crossing Trump even got him kicked off of Breitbart), despite the "liberal" media often still handing him pundit-circuit welfare checks to appear on TV.

    Speaking of, searching his name earned me the funniest juxtaposition. What a hack:

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Bannon Media Hack.png 
Views:	11 
Size:	92.6 KB 
ID:	22940


    Sadly also typical for what sort of insight and content the cable TV news prioritizes.

    The important thing to note is that his ideas are merely one outgrowth of mainstream Republicanism. This reddit comment is a perfect representation of the psychology that has been cultivated and in turn feeds this movement:

    I think what most liberals are missing is that this isn't about right and wrong, it's about winning and losing. I've attached my entire worldview to this man and I am going down with the ship. Not one of you is going to convince me otherwise.
    It's a death cult, pure and simple, and death cults tend to collapse at the end of an apocalyptic doom spiral.

    Movement conservatism has no prominent central thought leaders that I am currently aware of, if that's what you mean by your question. Seamus could tell you more. I would identify just the usual longtime constellation of Beltway pundits (e.g. Bill O'Reilly, Tucker Carlson), magazine columnists (David French, Rod Dreher), audiovisual freak shows (Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones) and religious leaders/televangelists/christofascists (Falwell & Graham kids, Pat Robertson - who recently said Trump was in danger of losing "the mandate of heaven" for pulling out under the Kurds). Plus the billionaires who fund many of them and other projects and help refine the party line to their own taste.

    The point is, the Republican Party is not a Leninist organization because Bannon engineered it, Bannon is who he is because the Republican Party has been a Leninist organization since the 1960s and Trumpism dissolved the mask.

    As for Russia, I wouldn't be surprised at Republicans welcoming any level of foreign interference (see: NRA), but more importantly their interests align well enough already that Russia probably wouldn't need any specific leverage; Republicans could independently arrive at a similar result, and increasingly so with the direction of recent political alignments around the globe. Unsurprisingly, a party whose reason for being is to serve domestic fascistic plutocrats does not actually have many doctrinal differences with foreign fascistic plutocrats. Sure, ultimately nationalists have to compete with other nationalists - the pie isn't big enough for every foreigner to wet their beak and sharing is for communists - but trampling civil society and the rights of the peasants, suppressing liberal dissent, that's something they can all agree on.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    You might mind your stress levels go down if you stop assuming other people are more stupid and ignorant than yourself.
    You posted something egregious so I had to respond forcefully. Don't post nonsense.

    There is a very long history of white people claiming some distant, invisible minority heritage for what is - essentially - a fetish.
    I'd have you read these on the matter.

    Let's be aware that politicians often have some sort of narrative about their heritage, and may even be wrong, so the presence of the topic is not a problem in itself. Amerindian heritage in American context is a special category however, and it's a claim that millions of Americans, across the political spectrum make. I wouldn't be surprised if most whites who claim Native ancestry identified as Republicans given their geographic distribution. The "white guilt" narrative is largely a figment of perpetually-panicked conservative imaginations.

    This is what Warren did - self-identified to the Texas Bar and in an academic directory as "Native American". There are a number of reasons she may have done this, including outright fetishisation, rejection of white american culture or a need to expunge her own sense of guilt as a product of colonialism.
    Or, she was very close to her mother, who maintained a claim to Native American ancestry, she liked the sound of it because it made her working-class upbringing more unique, and she wanted to meet other people with similar backgrounds.

    I don't think Warren did this to get a job, but I do think she did it to assert a Native American identity, to "be" a Native American lawyer and legal academic. The fact she hunkered down and protested this identity for more than half a decade and took a DNA test to prove it shows she's used it as part of her political idenity too.
    She didn't shout it to the world, Republicans did. Quibble all you like about her response but recognize that basic fact that she never brings it up except in response to Republicans (and now on her various apology tours with Native groups).

    Now then - so what? Gosh, she self-reported herself in a directory for private and professional networking without ever claiming contemporary affiliation! What does this have to do with pandering or a race to the bottom? If you merely don't like how she reacted to the political controversy that's fair enough, now the next step is to update yourself on her recent conduct.

    I'm much more concerned with what this whole sorry episode says about Warren's judgement, because you can bet if she'd been able to convince her detractors and won the election as some point she would have said, "As the first Native American President..."

    Now that​ would have been damaging to Native interests.
    Baseless BS. You would have to ignore all reality to create this hypothetical. It's like saying, if Barack Obama could be appointed Democratic nominee today he would do it. Absurd counterfactual prejudice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    Our treatment of Native Americans/First Peoples/Amerinds was nowhere near as programmatic as you suggest. It was not designed, so much as happenstance, arising from a mix of racism, greed, remorse, and corruption. A truly coordinated policy of subjugation would have crushed those cultures entirely so that they could be fully absorbed or massacred en toto.
    To say that there wasn't a single overarching national plan (until the end) does not mean that it wasn't systematic. I mean, from the beginning of the country's history almost all white people wanted and expected all indigenous people in the way of expansion to be removed and preferably killed. They carried this desire forward over generations and regions. It was one of the most overwhelming, unifying consensuses in American history.




    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    I apologize, I took it too far.

    I still disagree with your sentiment, for an example of what is to come, look at Oregon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_O...lican_walkouts

    Refusal to comply with the institutions they were elected to, with the full force of armed militia's. Now that it has worked once, they will keep doing it.
    At this moment, Trump calls impeachment illegal and treasonous, and announces his total refusal to cooperate with legally mandatory Congressional oversight. Watch for the escalation of calls to violence.
    Last edited by Montmorency; 10-11-2019 at 03:57.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  25. #55
    Member Member Greyblades's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    8,213
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name View Post
    I apologize, I took it too far.

    I still disagree with your sentiment, for an example of what is to come, look at Oregon: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_O...lican_walkouts

    Refusal to comply with the institutions they were elected to, with the full force of armed militia's. Now that it has worked once, they will keep doing it.
    Read your own link, they've done it before in 2001, and the Democrats walked out in 1971, 1995, and 2001. This is not a watershed moment and the act isnt a republican monopoly, at all.

    Only interesting thing is the "come take it" revolutionary rhetoric, and that is hardly a new thing in american politics, even on the century scale.
    Last edited by Greyblades; 10-11-2019 at 09:15.
    Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.


    Quote Originally Posted by Strike For The South View Post
    Don't be scared that you don't freak out. Be scared when you don't care about freaking out
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  26. #56
    Formerly Wigferth Ironwall Senior Member Philippus Flavius Homovallumus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Isca
    Posts
    13,201

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    You posted something egregious so I had to respond forcefully. Don't post nonsense.
    Overheated rhetoric is never justified. You just didn't like what I said and responded emotionally.

    I'd have you read these on the matter.

    Let's be aware that politicians often have some sort of narrative about their heritage, and may even be wrong, so the presence of the topic is not a problem in itself. Amerindian heritage in American context is a special category however, and it's a claim that millions of Americans, across the political spectrum make. I wouldn't be surprised if most whites who claim Native ancestry identified as Republicans given their geographic distribution. The "white guilt" narrative is largely a figment of perpetually-panicked conservative imaginations.
    White Guilt is certainly present in other parts of the world, if there is no white guilt in the US at all then that suggests a complete lack of self-awareness as a nation. There's a difference in claiming ancestry and asking others to identify you with that ancestry.

    Or, she was very close to her mother, who maintained a claim to Native American ancestry, she liked the sound of it because it made her working-class upbringing more unique, and she wanted to meet other people with similar backgrounds.
    She was middle class - and that statement by her was completely wrong-headed. What does "people like her" mean in this context? Other Native Americans, or other middle class white people who claim Native American heritage? Again, what she wrote in that directory was "Native American" and not "white-Native American".

    She didn't shout it to the world, Republicans did. Quibble all you like about her response but recognize that basic fact that she never brings it up except in response to Republicans (and now on her various apology tours with Native groups).

    Now then - so what? Gosh, she self-reported herself in a directory for private and professional networking without ever claiming contemporary affiliation! What does this have to do with pandering or a race to the bottom? If you merely don't like how she reacted to the political controversy that's fair enough, now the next step is to update yourself on her recent conduct.
    I think if I self-reported as Hong-Kong Chinese I'd get a similar reaction - just because one of my ancestors was posted there and I have dark har and slightly slanted eyes does not mean I should consider myself Hong-Kong Chinese. There's probably nothing to it.

    Baseless BS. You would have to ignore all reality to create this hypothetical. It's like saying, if Barack Obama could be appointed Democratic nominee today he would do it. Absurd counterfactual prejudice.
    Sorry, what? A little while back she had a section on her web site about her DNA test. If she's been embraced by the Cherokee Nation it would presumably still be there. The whole sorry mess speaks to her poor judgement.
    "If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."


  27. #57
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, Cub Shoot 2 Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Treasure Diver Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Mahjong Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Slack Man Champion, Japanese Baseball Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Super Mario Mushroom Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Fish Kill Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, KF 9000 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    10,979

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    At Monty RE #54 above.

    As to the conquest of the Native Americans, I agree with you. While it was not programmatic or systemic, the 'we are better then them so we have a right to squelch them' mentality was a nearly ubiquitous attitude that allowed "euro" Americans to treat them with disdain for so long. While never as openly and completely articulated as the eugenics message of Germany's NSDAP, it was functionally they same self-aggrandizing belief that we were superior and had a right (duty?) to treat them little better than livestock.

    Movement Conservatism Thought Leaders:

    The modern American Conservative movement really has three intellectual founders: Buckley, Kristol, & Friedman. This is the troika who estabished the mantra of smaller and less intrusive government, anti-Keynesianism, market deregulatin etc. At the outset their was a bit of a "white man's burden" attitude towards segregation etc. This was, fortunately, set aside by Buckley et al. Goldwater was the first pol to take up this stance on a national scale. Reagan was his heir in this role.

    GOP'ers usually see two 'counter-points' to movement conservatism: Country Club Republicans [typified by Nixon, GHWB, and Ford] who seek power but have little interest in small government or scaling down government's role in the economy. They are often viewed as seeking to keep their privilege intact while maintaining government power to do so. Trump doesn't use the 'country club' label, since Limbaugh has rechristened them as "Never Trumpers" but they Movement conservatives view them as too willing to make a deal and not dedicated to conservatism winning.

    You also have the "Buchhannan" wing. This was a batch of ardent America Firsters. Less taxation, less social welfare, but promote American economic growth and success through tariffs and leveraging American economic power to advantage. TEA party wingers draw some of their motivation from this wing.

    Trump core support (aside from the racist asshats who want their Aryan nation fantasy) draw from this Buchannan wing and have, to a goodly extent, taken over Movement Conservatism from the inside. I am not enamored of the distortions this brings.
    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

  28. #58
    Ja mata, TosaInu Forum Administrator edyzmedieval's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fortress of the Mountains
    Posts
    10,755

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Greyblades View Post
    Warren being nominated, trump could not ask for an easier opponent.
    Yes and no. Easiest to defeat would be Joe because he's not liked by the whole party; Sanders would be an automatic loss for Trump BUT since his health scare this is very unlikely to get to the nomination.

    Warren on the other hand has all the attributes, charm and power to get to the job. However it depends on her ability to withstand politics.
    Ja mata, TosaInu. You will forever be remembered.

    Proud

    Been to: :

    Swords Made of Letters - 1938. The war is looming - and Alexandre Reythier does not have much time left to protect his country.

  29. #59
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,220

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    At Monty RE #54 above.

    As to the conquest of the Native Americans, I agree with you. While it was not programmatic or systemic, the 'we are better then them so we have a right to squelch them' mentality was a nearly ubiquitous attitude that allowed "euro" Americans to treat them with disdain for so long. While never as openly and completely articulated as the eugenics message of Germany's NSDAP, it was functionally they same self-aggrandizing belief that we were superior and had a right (duty?) to treat them little better than livestock.

    Movement Conservatism Thought Leaders:

    The modern American Conservative movement really has three intellectual founders: Buckley, Kristol, & Friedman. This is the troika who estabished the mantra of smaller and less intrusive government, anti-Keynesianism, market deregulatin etc. At the outset their was a bit of a "white man's burden" attitude towards segregation etc. This was, fortunately, set aside by Buckley et al. Goldwater was the first pol to take up this stance on a national scale. Reagan was his heir in this role.

    GOP'ers usually see two 'counter-points' to movement conservatism: Country Club Republicans [typified by Nixon, GHWB, and Ford] who seek power but have little interest in small government or scaling down government's role in the economy. They are often viewed as seeking to keep their privilege intact while maintaining government power to do so. Trump doesn't use the 'country club' label, since Limbaugh has rechristened them as "Never Trumpers" but they Movement conservatives view them as too willing to make a deal and not dedicated to conservatism winning.

    You also have the "Buchhannan" wing. This was a batch of ardent America Firsters. Less taxation, less social welfare, but promote American economic growth and success through tariffs and leveraging American economic power to advantage. TEA party wingers draw some of their motivation from this wing.

    Trump core support (aside from the racist asshats who want their Aryan nation fantasy) draw from this Buchannan wing and have, to a goodly extent, taken over Movement Conservatism from the inside. I am not enamored of the distortions this brings.
    I actually don't have a problem with the philosophical fathers of Conservatism. Even where I strongly disagree, I still respect their right to pursue their politics. The distinguishing features of what I've called Bannonism are little to do with their political philosophy, and more to do with how they pursue them.

    1. Build a core of around 30% who will back them no matter what.
    2. Build an operational strategy around consequences. If there are no repercussions, they are free to break the law and/or constitution.
    3. Refer all disagreements to the holy principle of democracy, based on the core 30% and whoever else they can get.
    4. Silence the opposition.

  30. #60

    Default Re: The XYZelensky Affair and the Whole Impeachment Shebang

    Given the ongoing relevance,here is a delightful opportunity to highlight the stakes in the Oregon walkout earlier this year.

    In 2018, Oregon Democrats won a supermajority (18-12) in the Oregon State Senate, as well as in the House. Republican senators walked out first in May to block a school funding tax. They returned only after Democrats scrapped bills on gun control and vaccines. The legislature advanced a cap & trade bill that would have easily passed under normal circumstances. Then, the Republican senators walked out to deny the Democrats quorum. The governor authorized state police to detain the senators, most of whom then fled beyond state lines. One of them (Brian Boquist) threatened violent resistance against agents of the state, and he was backed up by militia groups. One day during the walkout loggers held a peaceful protest outside the capitol building that the Oregon GOP twitter account captioned with "Heavily armed militia lays siege to Oregon's Capitol as Senate Democrats cower in fear", and indeed the capitol building was closed out of fears that actual armed militia groups would arrive.

    After a few days, a conservative Democrat took the opportunity to withdraw her support from the bill, breaking the supermajority (needed for tax-related legislation in Oregon). The Democratic leadership announced the cap & trade bill was dead and the Republicans soon returned. Brian Boquist, due to his violent rhetoric, has been restricted from entering the capitol building, but I believe he is still technically sitting in office. For their part at least the other Republican Senators disavowed militia support (though only after Democrats withdrew the bill).

    A chilling usurpation of the legitimate government, especially in light of the long history of political violence and even local coups in the name of white supremacy and other far-right shibboleths in the United States.

    For comparison, let's take a look at the other walkouts.

    March 8, 2007: Senate Republicans staged a brief walkout over a tax deal. Gov. Ted Kulongoski asked the Oregon State Police to fetch two Republican senators from Corvallis for a vote. The senators returned voluntarily without being arrested.

    June 25, 2001: House Democrats staged a five-day walkout to prevent a Republican maneuver to redraw state legislative districts without the governor’s signature. The walkout strategy was supported by then-Senate Minority Leader Kate Brown, who now is Governor.

    April 14, 1995: Ten Senate Democrats walked out, holing up in a Salem restaurant and denying Republicans a quorum, after Republicans decided to kill an award named after the late Sen. Frank Roberts, a Democrat.

    1971: Both House and Senate Democrats staged walkouts during the session, but neither lasted more than a day. Senate Democrats walked out to protest Republican leadership’s refusal to consider ratification of a federal constitutional amendment lowering the voting age from 21 to 18. State Police rounded up missing lawmakers, who were at a Salem legislator’s house. House Democrats also walked out, although the reason is unclear. Oregon State Police were unable to locate the missing legislators, who were hiding in the Senate Majority Leader’s office.


    Obviously this 2019 walkout was a watershed moment.


    Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
    Overheated rhetoric is never justified. You just didn't like what I said and responded emotionally.
    You should consider that I had very good reason for not liking what you said, and that you should internalize it.

    If you had merely offered that you thought she had showed poor judgement in handling the controversy, and your opinion of her political abilities was diminished, it would have been a valid opinion. I would have disagreed on the grounds of her demonstrated campaigning skill and adaptiveness in 2019, but the disagreement would have been so banal as to not warrant arguing over.

    Instead, you said that Warren even maintaining this identity was shameless pandering and part of a race to the bottom, which is the rhetorical and logical equivalent of throwing a flaming sack of excrement. Of course that's shameful, what's wrong with you?

    You thankfully seem to have withdrawn this line, but it's one of the worst I've seen you post.

    White Guilt is certainly present in other parts of the world, if there is no white guilt in the US at all then that suggests a complete lack of self-awareness as a nation. There's a difference in claiming ancestry and asking others to identify you with that ancestry.
    Well, yes?

    She was middle class - and that statement by her was completely wrong-headed. What does "people like her" mean in this context? Other Native Americans, or other middle class white people who claim Native American heritage? Again, what she wrote in that directory was "Native American" and not "white-Native American".
    So?

    I think if I self-reported as Hong-Kong Chinese I'd get a similar reaction - just because one of my ancestors was posted there and I have dark har and slightly slanted eyes does not mean I should consider myself Hong-Kong Chinese. There's probably nothing to it.
    Yes, if you excise events from all context and substitute a different arrangement anything is possible.

    Sorry, what? A little while back she had a section on her web site about her DNA test. If she's been embraced by the Cherokee Nation it would presumably still be there.
    So if she hadn't been criticized for something she wouldn't have adjusted her behavior? That's not shocking.

    The whole sorry mess speaks to her poor judgement.
    I fear your overall perspective on Warren is an unreasonable and prejudicial one, leading to your fixation to the exclusion of facts.

    Referring to the above, this doesn't even bear debating because the facts will develop in the short-term, over the next year. Either she doesn't win nomination and it's irrelevant, or she does and her judgement will be on full exercise for review.



    Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
    Movement Conservatism Thought Leaders:
    I think he was asking more after present-day figures though.
    Vitiate Man.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO