[Newfie]

Oldie but goodie. I wonder how many could name his opponent?

Humans being human.

[Tanada]

Oldie but goodie. I wonder how many could name his opponent?

Humans being human.

Senator from Arizona...

[Cog]

Don't worry Ruth, its a dry heat-------John McCain

[Tanada]

Don't worry Ruth, its a dry heat-------John McCain

LOL no. McCain was his replacement. Hillary Rodham was on his campaign in 1964 I just can not recall his name ATM and looking it up would be cheating.

[Cog]

@Tanada You mean Barry Goldwater of course.

[Cog]

But since I'm thinking about John McCain right now, this quote from Cicero comes to mind:

A nation can survive its fools and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly against the city.

But the traitor moves among those within the gates freely, his sly whispers rustling through all alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself.

For the traitor appears no traitor; he speaks in the accents familiar to his victim, and he wears their face and their garments and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men.

He rots the soul of a nation; he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city; he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. The traitor is the plague. — Marcus Tullius Cicero, from a speech given to the Roman Senate, recorded in approximately 42 B.C. by Sallust.

[Newfie]

It’s not that we have traitors slyly moving amongst, we have preachers ranting from their pulpits. They are not traditional preachers or pulpits but they are still talking to congregations preaching GUILT.

“The problem is those who do not believe as we do. We must be rid of the infidels.”

IMHO the political parties should be banned in the basis of separation of church and state. (Sarc)

If we have a Civil was it will be brutal because it will be a religious war.

[Cog]

Kill Whitie now seems to be the theme among the left as the path forward. Bold move. Lets see how that works out for them.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/12/ms ... e-destroy/

In a feisty segment on Sunday’s “A.M. Joy,” Elie Mystal of Above the Law made an inflammatory comment in which he said white people who voted for Donald Trump should be destroyed. This came after a segment in which he argued there is no moral difference between avowed white supremacists and any white person who votes for Trump.

In the clip, host Joy Reid asked how those who are “drugged” by the president’s rhetoric should be communicated to and convinced they are wrong. That’s when Mystal got even more heated, saying:

“You don’t communicate to them, you beat them. You beat them. They are not a majority of this country — the majority of white people in this country are not a majority of the country. All the people who are not fooled by this need to come together, go to the polls, go to the protests, do whatever you have to do. You do not negotiate with these people, you destroy them.”

[Newfie]

Yes that’s a good example of the kind of rhetoric I’m talking about.

“Lock Her Up” falls into the same category.

Which goes back to Tanada’s post above.

[Tanada]

Yes that’s a good example of the kind of rhetoric I’m talking about.

“Lock Her Up” falls into the same category.

Which goes back to Tanada’s post above.

I guess "Put her on trial" just doesn't have the same emotional appeal to the masses

[Ibon]

Eppstein suicide a potential to bridge the political divide?

Both sides outraged. Forget a moment the conspiracy theories favoring one side or the other.

What about the more poignant fact that this event, so convenient that it smells rotten from any distance, should reveal

the slime and corruption that is simply part of establishment government.

Whether you are Clinton enjoying blowjobs in the oval office or Trump grabbing pussies both sides should well understand a new meaning of the word collusion.

Many rich and famous, many members of the elite, a current and former president, members of both parties, international dignitaries, all colluding with Eppstein in the past, why shouldn't this convenient suicide be added to all the other mounting evidence, the corruption of corporate lobbyist and all the rest, and finally give birth to a movement, maybe even a new political party, that uprises and topples the applecart of established corrupt politics.

I don't think Eppsteins suicide will be the straw that breaks the camel's back but it surely will add a significant weight to the growing awareness.

You want to know something else really convenient to the rich and elite driving this corruption? The political divide. Dividing the electorate fighting each other instead of gathering together in a movement to really and truly drain the fucking swamp.

Any possibilities of this happening?

[Outcast_Searcher]

I have a friend who follows the pollsters and the analysts to try to predict elections.
He was talking about a statistician who unlike the well known meta-pollsters, predicted the 40 house seats the dems gained very closely.

She says the concept the big name meta-pollsters (who aggregate polling data, i.e. metadata) have dead wrong, is that they assume there is still a large middle area where people are likely to change their votes.

She believes this is wrong, and that the nation is so divided politically that the number of people who will change their vote, D or R, is quite tiny.

Unfortunately, he couldn't remember her name, but this friend doesn't just make stuff up, so I presume this is real. And the idea seems to fit hand in glove with this whole "civil war" idea, at least in concept, so I thought I'd post it here, just as a discussion point.

If this idea is correct, then I might be one of the rare birds who is actually an issue voter and who looks at many issues from a left wing standpoint, and many others (mostly in the economic realm) from a right wing standpoint -- who might vote VERY differently depending on things like if the Dems choose a loony-toons candidate like a Bernie Sanders, vs. a very imperfect but at least moderate candidate, like a Biden.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Eppstein suicide a potential to bridge the political divide?

Both sides outraged. Forget a moment the conspiracy theories favoring one side or the other.

What about the more poignant fact that this event, so convenient that it smells rotten from any distance, should reveal

the slime and corruption that is simply part of establishment government.

Um, with respect, if one has been paying any meaningful amount of attention over the last few decades, and only NOW notices slime and corruption in US government, then that person is so far gone as to be hopeless.

In my opinion, of course.

[Outcast_Searcher]

“You don’t communicate to them, you beat them. You beat them. They are not a majority of this country — the majority of white people in this country are not a majority of the country. All the people who are not fooled by this need to come together, go to the polls, go to the protests, do whatever you have to do. You do not negotiate with these people, you destroy them.”[/b]

Somehow, in the modern political environment, if this were a white person saying this about black people, I feel certain that certain camps would be calling this a hate crime, and perhaps even calling for the person's arrest.

If insanity is a lack of reason, we seem to be getting there politically all too quickly.

[asg70]

The moral of "Lock her up" is that it was never about justice, but tribalism. Tribalism breeds double-standards, not justice.

Politics today is about winning office, not governing. Two very different things.

[Ibon]

Eppstein suicide a potential to bridge the political divide?

Both sides outraged. Forget a moment the conspiracy theories favoring one side or the other.

What about the more poignant fact that this event, so convenient that it smells rotten from any distance, should reveal

the slime and corruption that is simply part of establishment government.

Um, with respect, if one has been paying any meaningful amount of attention over the last few decades, and only NOW notices slime and corruption in US government, then that person is so far gone as to be hopeless.

In my opinion, of course.

Of course this is correct. Its like climate change. No one hurricane convinces a climate change denier. But dozens of events then start to chip away.

Similarly, corruption chisels away until the public is fed up. No one event does this, its an accumulating phenomena.

I would say the political division is partially fabricated as it is convenient for the elite wanting to keep the electorate distracted and divided.

There are consequences like the power of corporate lobbyists that effect the entire electorate, not either party. One would think at some point a consensus to unite against this would bridge the divide.

Or am I just a clueless outsider who isn't steeped in the daily information stream that would normally keep me fixed in one tribe or another.

You seem similar Outcast, not allied with any particular tribe.

[Newfie]

Lots of good discussion here. Just a couple of points.

First the last Presidential election was one NY elitist vs. another NY elitist. They are both implicated in the Epstein affair because they belong to the same tribe.

The political divide is both imaginary and real. The is little difference between the parties. Neither party has a decent position on immigration reform, climate change, USA population control, water usage, and a number of other really important issues. Same O, same O.

So they manufacture a fake political divide the same way the rascals in Yugoslavia polarized that country into 3 deadly factions. There was no divide until they manufactured one and our gullible citizens, ever ready for someone to conviently blame, latched onto the meme and are making it grow.

Elsewhere someone linked a documentary about how the Trump campaign used Cambridge Analytica to shape their message around “crooked Hillary.” And the electorate lapped it up. What they desc ibex was that they simply planted the seeds then watched the movement grow.

BOTH sides play this game, some of the same folks worked for Obama as for Trump.

What I’m struggling to come to grips with is exactly who is behind this propaganda and what their longer term goals are.

I think one is pretty clear. Both sides want to keep increasing the USA population so as to increase consumption and feed the entitlement accounts. Both sides want the economy and government to grow. And thenin fighting keeps our eyes on this fakery when we should be watching more important matters.

2¢

[asg70]

The is little difference between the parties.

Wrong. The republicans have a terrible track record on social issues and the environment. Just because the dems haven't done enough doesn't mean there is no difference in policy.

[Newfie]

Your opinion.

[Ibon]

What I’m struggling to come to grips with is exactly who is behind this propaganda and what their longer term goals are.

There does not have to be a specific who or whom here. Enough discord and polarity, enough chaos in general, enough misinformation and this renders the normal system of checks and balances incapacitated.

One scandal after another makes you numb.

Just stream enough scandal and chaos and division and you stop the effectiveness of civil disobedience, you stop the effectiveness of folks organizing an effective alternative.

Lot's of clatter and noise breaks the system, and allows for all those in power to move more freely.

In general reasoned descent is broken, nothing gains traction because there is just this constant level of scandal and discord. And so corporations and politicians and bankers anyone else with influence and power can continue rigging the system. At some point everyone in power figured it out that keeping the level of chaos, scandal and discord at a certain level creates a paralysis.

I don't think this is just an accident, or a coincidence.

Something is rigged here.