April 26, 2018
Trump motormouthing on "Fox and Friends" this morning.
My notes, jotted down in real time, listening to this after posting the video:
He only got a card and flowers for Melania for her birthday, because he's very busy.
He's really changed Macron's thinking about Iran.
Iran's "little boats" are not circling our ships any more.
The subject of Ronny Jackson triggers a long rant about Democrats obstructing all his nominees.
He brings up Diamond and Silk. They're "warriors." Like the nominees Democrats obstruct.
"Doc Ronny... an incredible man... they're trying to destroy a man... I said 'welcome to the swamp'..."
Comey's "a leaker and a liar" and his "friend" is a "so-called professor"... Comey put "a lot of phony stuff" in his memos... Comey is "guilty of crimes" and "if the Justice Department was doing its job" — but it's your Justice Department! — Trump sets himself apart from it.
Trump has accomplished more in his first year than any other President (even with all this obstruction)...
Michael Cohen is just one of his many attorneys, and Cohen only covers "a tiny, tiny little fraction" of his legal work — notably "this crazy Stormy Daniels deal." When it comes to the criminal investigation of Michael CohenTrump is "not involved" and has been told he's not involved.
He gets along with Kanye. Kanye sees how low black unemployment is, and he's smart. He sees what's happening. "It's changing back" to black people going for Republicans. "You know, Lincoln was a Republican."
Shania Twain is terrific, but she shouldn't have apologized for supporting him. He likes the way Kanye is "sticking to his guns."
He'd rather face a popular vote for President than the Electoral College because "it's easier" to win. They said he couldn't win the Electoral College, that it was structured to be a big advantage to the Democrat.
"I'm not like Obama" or Kerry with the Iran deal. With North Korea, he's ready to walk out. He hasn't given up anything, but "Sleepy eyes Chuck Todd" and the "fake news" are criticizing him for giving up so much to North Korea.
The "Fox and Friends" guy sounds like he's getting exasperated.
Anderson Cooper was "surprisingly tough" on Comey.
Invited to give himself a grade on his presidency, he goes on about how he's fighting against a lot of phonies in the swamp and it's a "fix" and a "witch hunt" before giving himself an A+.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
241 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 241 of 241And its not just Christians. Hindus and Buddhists and Jews and atheistic communists all have the same problems with Muslims.
Yeah, so what? Not the point.
The point is anti-semitism is a Christian/Muslim phenomenon because Christians and Muslims have competing claims on universalist/(imperial) theologies that they were inspired by the Jews - the same Jews that they must then resent and "supersede" - to create.
The Christians borrowed more heavily and built upon the ethical aspects and the Muslims on the tribal aspects. But both were much more imperial than just national, like the original.
Indians like Israel because Muslim imperialism is a problem for them, too. But for the others none of that matters because their claims generally don't exist for the purpose of "outdoing" whatever it is the Jews originally did.
Now now Pee Pee don't be silly. You always need your Jews. You need your Pawn Brokers, diamond dealers and usursers to have a functioning society.
In fact I grant you if you really need tap dancers and basketball players you might find some utility in having the odd Negro. Still I think we could do without just fine and have a much more coherent and much safer society.
Sure we will miss the pancakes and converted rice but there is always French Toast and mashed potatoes.
What we don't need is any dipshit who thinks and encourages thinking exclusively in stereotypes. People like that only ever lead to the downfall of societies.
Sure thing buttercup. Thinking in stereotypes is destructive while savages raping and mudering and running down people is just glorious diversity.
If we went back to dealing in stereotypes everyone would be a lot better off.
Because stereotypes are basiclly universal truth.
Inga: "I was asking your buddy Langford Peel, not you, motormouth."
Well, Inga appears to be quite uncomfortable confronting the violence visited upon european jews by her beloved islamist supremacists.
I wonder if the jews murdered by islamist supremacists in Europe wish that there had been a muslim ban on immigration?
Not to worry though, Inga wants lots of these islamist supremacists brought to America....you know....to assimilate....
Just like Rotherham.
Antisemitism is a Christian-Muslim phenomenon in the last millenium because there were, historically, hardly any Jews anywhere but in Christian-Muslim lands. You can point to a vanishingly few Cochin Jews or Chinese Jews.
But there certainly was antisemitism pre-Christianity and pre-Islam. The first "western" pogroms, and perhaps the worst episode of Jewish genocide pre-20th century, was conducted by pagan Rome.
buwaya: "But there certainly was antisemitism pre-Christianity and pre-Islam. The first "western" pogroms, and perhaps the worst episode of Jewish genocide pre-20th century, was conducted by pagan Rome."
Interesting aside: the Romans considered early Christians to be atheists (they literally called them that) because they could not understand or come to grips with the tenets and practices of Christianity.
Elected Democrat says the Jews are controlling the weather.
It is no wonder that Inga and the other democrats find natural allies in Muslims.
Trump is a hero in Israel.
Everyone knows who the anti-semites are.
Now we know he spent a night in Moscow, which he denied before, and he helped open up case against Cohen, bring it on on motormouth.
I finally saw the entire Fox and Friends segment with Trump running his mouth this AM. Fox actually cut him off mid sentence! Oh ha Hahahahahaha!
Antisemitism is a Christian-Muslim phenomenon in the last millenium because there were, historically, hardly any Jews anywhere but in Christian-Muslim lands. You can point to a vanishingly few Cochin Jews or Chinese Jews.
But there certainly was antisemitism pre-Christianity and pre-Islam. The first "western" pogroms, and perhaps the worst episode of Jewish genocide pre-20th century, was conducted by pagan Rome.
Duh. Because they insisted on maintaining a distinct and religiously free national identity in the face of an empire that needed to assimilate any conquered host not enslaved. This eventually devolved into a national cult where the emperor became a literal god.
Nevertheless, Jews comprised a sizable percentage of the empire at certain points and even apparently took enough Roman wives that their mitochondrial DNA is mostly of that descent. For whatever that's worth.
I'm sure it gives langford the willies.
Trump is a hero in Israel.
Translation: "Jews should not exist outside of Israel."
"distinct and religiously free national identity"
So did everyone else. The Egyptians kept their old Gods way into the fifth century.
The Romans were happy to adopt Isis and Mithras and even Cybele.
But the Romans, episodically, had it in for the Jews. Much as the Christians and Muslims did in their times.
Inga said...
I finally saw the entire Fox and Friends segment with Trump running his mouth this AM. Fox actually cut him off mid sentence! Oh ha Hahahahahaha!
roesch/voltaire said...
Now we know he spent a night in Moscow, which he denied before, and he helped open up case against Cohen, bring it on on motormouth.
Think of all the crap these losers have been throwing at Trump.
At look at them now. Gibbering and drooling in the corner muttering inanities.
"This eventually devolved into a national cult where the emperor became a literal god."
This had very deep roots in Rome, with their ancestor worship, and for that matter elsewhere in their world. It was SOP in the Eastern Med.
This came very early to emperors. Augustus himself, the first emperor, was the first imperial God. Most everyone was cool with it.
“Gibbering and drooling in the corner muttering inanities.”
You’re all Stalinists!
Who knew that the early slaveholders, even before the Revolutionary War, were Democrats?
Achilles knew!
LOL.
The Romans were happy to adopt Isis and Mithras and even Cybele.
Not the state, you fucking dummy. Augustus literally seized power by proclaiming Antony in thrall to foreign gods and practices.
You are as dumb as a stump.
But the Romans, episodically, had it in for the Jews. Much as the Christians and Muslims did in their times.
The Egyptians were ruled by Greek descendants of Alexander's companions, the Ptolemaic dynasty. The Western forebears to Rome. This obviously led to a different kind of a relationship.
You're so fucking ignorant it's scary.
But your agenda seems clear: Apparently you think there were more good reasons for hating Jews than just plain old political or religious imperialism.
No wonder you're on the right.
This had very deep roots in Rome, with their ancestor worship, and for that matter elsewhere in their world. It was SOP in the Eastern Med.
Hence, Jews being different in a way that seems to bother you.
"by proclaiming Antony in thrall to foreign gods and practices."
It was a no-no for a noble Roman to be in thrall to foreign gods. But foreigners? Lower caste Romans? Slaves? Freedmen? Nobody cared. The Legions erected shrines to Mithras.
"The Egyptians were ruled by Greek descendants of Alexander's companions, the Ptolemaic dynasty. "
Not after Octavian took the place from Antony and Cleopatra in 30 BC. Thereafter it was a Roman province.
Rome did not, over the entirety of the course of their diverse 300+ year-long relationship, especially "have it in for the Jews." They had it in for anyone opposing Roman rule. The Jews were actually somewhat privileged in being allowed a greater measure of religious freedom and even an odd type of begrudging respect (sort of like the Evangelicals in America feel) despite the differentness of their unusual and more philosophical practices. The Jews initially became allies with the republic by appealing for its assistance in overthrowing a Greek hegemony.
buwaya puti has the knowledge of a gnat and the arrogance of a hyena.
Thanks for nit-picking on irrelevancies that are beside the point, buwaya 8:59 PM.
When you come up with something relevant to say do let us know.
"Hence, Jews being different in a way that seems to bother you."
It matters not to me. There is a family tradition, based on my grandmothers surname, that she was descended from Spanish Jews, conversos. Its been quite a fashionable thing in Spain since the early 19th century. Very romantic. It was in a bunch of zarzuelas.
The bigger point is that the Jews problems with the majority societies they are embedded inside hasn't much to do with the nature of the religion of the majority.
Gypsies were always badly treated likewise, but they had much less power than Jews, and there was no class or caste issue in these cases.
The Jews were usually caught between the crown, or the state, and the people, including the gentry. Jews were very often the intermediaries between them, especially in the matters of taxation and banking, which were inseparable.
And they were ethnically distinct in a Europe that was, locally, homogenous by this time, the differences between Germanic and Latin and Greek and indigenous peoples having been erased, in a far less cosmopolitan world.
If someone needed to suffer for something, the choice was easy. The same thing happened in the Islamic world. When the Moroccans had a beef with the Sultan, they sacked the mellah.
"have it in for the Jews."
Yeah they did. Only two other peoples raised such a pitch of fury of murder in Romans - Gauls and Carthaginians. And the Romans were done with both long before they had a beef with the Jews.
Rome was not nice to the defeated (vae victis), but mass slaughter as a policy was not that common.
So, in short: Ethnocentrism and imperialism. Just as I (the latter) and everyone else (the former) have said all along.
Thanks for playing.
"If someone needed to suffer for something,"
Nice. Great insight into how you rationalize things.
Rome was not nice to the defeated (vae victis), but mass slaughter as a policy was not that common.
Neither is mass resistance within a population. What is your point?
"What is your point?"
To dispute your point that there was something specific to Christianity or Islam vis-a-vis their attitude to the Jews. Pagan Rome was quite as nasty to them, or not, as the fashion took them.
"If someone needed to suffer for something,"
"Nice. Great insight into how you rationalize things.'
Simple observation of human nature. When the masses are unhappy, someone must pay, and the scent of blood, or even some tall tale, very often brings out masses demanding slaughter. Over and over and over, everywhere you care to look. People can be, and often are, real shits.
To dispute your point that there was something specific to Christianity or Islam vis-a-vis their attitude to the Jews. Pagan Rome was quite as nasty to them, or not, as the fashion took them.
Are you fucking out of your gourd? Christianity and Islam needed, theologically, to make them into a permanent religious underclass. Rome simply wanted all conquered hosts to do as the conquerer pleased, which was the norm back then. Compared to how they treated the Gauls, their treatment of the Jews was pretty enlightened for the majority of the that time - i.e. when they were a republic. It changed on becoming an empire. I've told you this a million times but you keep wanting to see Rome as a rationalization for what Christendom and Islam (and I suppose Hitler) did. It was not.
Simple observation of human nature. When the masses are unhappy, someone must pay, and the scent of blood, or even some tall tale, very often brings out masses demanding slaughter. Over and over and over, everywhere you care to look. People can be, and often are, real shits.
Maybe your nature. Not so much human as hyena.
There is a difference between understanding and rationalizing. You specialize in the latter.
Inga said...
Who knew that the early slaveholders, even before the Revolutionary War, were Democrats?
Achilles knew!
LOL.
Wait. Are you seriously trying to pretend it was not he democrat party that fought for slavery and Jim crow?
Interesting.
I know it is hard to deal with the reality you are part of a party that has a disgusting racial history.
Boy the lefties, Ritmo and Inga and R/V are all going crazy.
Nothing to see here, even with buwaya.
Wait. Are you seriously trying to pretend it was not he democrat party that fought for slavery and Jim crow?
Interesting.
The Southern Democrats might have, but the Northern Democrats just wanted to avoid a conflict. (I know, hard to believe that avoiding a half million American deaths might have been a priority for cannon fodder such as you; no matter - you're like most grunts. Willing to kill anyone for whatever reason they give you).
But the Democratic-Republicans such as Jefferson, Madison and others were the ones who kept their slaves, not even in many cases emancipating them upon their deaths, and fought for those same southern slaveholding interests when writing them into the constitution.
The Federalists, did not. Are you saying you're a Federalist, now? Did you read a single word of that entire explanation, posted for your aggressively ignorant benefit?
Parties change. People are free to change with them. Blacks switched en masse to the Democrats when FDR decided to shamelessly employ as many of them as he wanted - unlike aristocratic Republican assholes like Coolidge and whomever else who found such neighborliness shameful. And without the Democrat LBJ the votes to pass civil rights legislation would not have occurred. But Achilles will gladly imply that black Americans are too stupid to know their own interests while castigating others for not agreeing with his hare-brained idea that party platforms are static over 150 years or their principles genetically inherited. If they were then Nixon couldn't have implemented his well-documented Southern Strategy and won over the Wallace voters through similar tactics as Reagan did when trashing the Voting Rights Acts and calling black women "welfare queens" and pitting black voters against easily upset Southern whites.
Nothing to see here, even with buwaya.
Nah, his legerdemain has been more skillful than Scaramouche's tonight. If anyone would be dazzled by such artful obfuscation, it would be you. He has you in the sightline of his kaleidoscope.
And he's just getting started. He's building an entire thesis about the supposedly natural, ingrained and universal tendency to hate Jews. You should really hear him. I think he's just starting to convince himself. Politics has nothing to do with it, he thinks. It's a natural, universal thing.
The Roman state did in fact pay for temples to Isis and Cybele. See Wikipedia for the Temple of Isis and Serapis, voted by the 2nd Triumvirate in 43 BC, destroyed by Augustus (no doubt for its Antonian connections), and rebuilt some time between 37 and 65 AD. The temple for Cybele (the Magna Mater) was built with government funds in 191 BC and lasted until 394 AD, when the Christian Theodosius destroyed it. It did burn down three times in the 1st century BC, but was promptly rebuilt, twice by Augustus, who obviously had no objection to this particular cult. I haven't bothered to search for state-financed temples of Mithras because who cares? This is more than enough to show that buwaya was right on this point.
On the tendency to mistreat and even massacre minorities -
If you want to take an analogous situation elsewhere, consider South East Asia. There are no Jews here, or extremely few Western Jews, who are seen as simply indistinguishable white people. A white man is a white man, and distinctions between them are irrelevant. But the Chinese are something else. They really do occupy the Jewish slot in these regions, with some differences.
And they have been and fairly often still are treated much like Jews have been, by the natives. There have been numerous cases of pogroms, of sackings and massacres and expulsions, violent riots and lynchings, and, more usually, much more private things, robberies and kidnappings and casual murder. All these are likely during wars and unsettled times.
The cases are ubiquitous, and far more recent than anything of the sort perpetrated against European Jews. Amy Chua's book "World on Fire" was a reaction to bloody anti-Chinese riots in Indonesia. Chinese are still legally discriminated against, literally treated as "second class citizens" in several countries.
And, of course, I have seen and heard plenty of this myself. Much of it just last year. If you yourself travel in SE Asia, and pay attention, you will not miss it.
The Chinese are distrusted and envied for their communal preferences, economic power, etc. The only differences vs Jews in Europe is in Asia they say these things far more openly about the Chinese, and that the Chinese are much more numerous.
If SE Asia had ever had a powerful modern ethnic polity (other than China), a SE Asian Germany, who knows what they would have done, or would be tempted to do now in such an atmosphere of fear about China. They are too weak and fearful to do it, but the ideas are there.
These things, the dangers latent in the worse impulses of human nature, are in no way unique to the Jews.
Does it make me a bad person if I wish the first city hit by a nuke [if the Trump & Kim Jong Un talks fail] is Pasadena?
Yes, it does.
1) I live near Pasadena.
2) I voted for Trump.
3) I don't know Vicki.
Not that my vote made any difference in California, but I'd sort of like to stick around and see if Trump can at least break even in the 2018 midterm and go on to win re-election in 2020.
Oh, and see my grandkids graduate from high school.
Most of this thread is just people motorboating each other.
@Achilles:
Not sure if this will be read through all the morass, but it contains such blatant falsehoods, it's worth challenging them whenever encountered.
We gave Iran billions of dollars...
We did not give Iran billions of dollars. The money that went to Iran was money already owed to Iran from the sale of oil on the world market. The money was simply frozen in foreign accounts (e.g. in places like Japan) as part of UN sanctions on Iran. Had talks broken down and no deal reached, the money would have gone to Iran with no deal in place.
...in exchange for them pinky swearing they wouldn't develop nukes.
No, the JCPOA placed significant limitations on Iran's nuclear production capacity, above and beyond even what is permitted under the NPT. You can read the complete list of requirements and actions mandated here
And no inspections. Ever. Because we can totally trust the mullahs.
Huh? IAEA inspectors have daily access to Nantanz and Fordow and have video surveillance equipment installed in these sites. You can read all the verification and monitoring reports here. From the most recent report: "Iran has continued to permit the Agency to use on-line enrichment monitors and electronic seals which communicate their status within nuclear sites to Agency inspectors, and to facilitate the automated collection of Agency measurement recordings registered by installed measurement devices (para. 67.1). Iran has issued long-term visas to Agency inspectors designated for Iran as requested by the Agency, provided proper working space for the Agency at nuclear sites and facilitated the use of working space at locations near nuclear sites in Iran (para. 67.2)."
It is funny how you people totally love the Clinton/Bush/Obama approach that worked so well with North Korea.
Not sure who "you people" are, but I like a good deal, and that's how I judge it. Not by who negotiated it. And I am prepared to argue why this is a good deal. As for North Korea I would recommend 5 Myths on Nuclear Diplomacy with North Korea and Revisiting the Agreed Framework.
You have to be absolutely stupid to think that was a good deal. We have watched this play out once before in almost exactly the same situation. The only thing that makes sense is you people want Iran to get nukes and you want them to trigger a nuclear holocaust in the region.
Yes, of course, that is the "only thing that makes sense." Well, perhaps in your fevered imagination.
R/V
You probably want to check your sources. It turns out the times that were used to establish Trump overnight in Russia did not understand those pesky time zones. You're wrong and days behind.
Post a Comment