U.S. Politics 2018

[Colin Parkinson]

Do you watch CNN, BBC News, or read the New York Times, Huffington Post or Toronto Star?

I have Huff and Puff on my FB, every 3rd article is how Brexit is going to cause a crack in the space-time continuum and every 2nd one appears to be how Trump is the worst world leader ever.

If I want intelligent left leaning thought, I read Chantel Hebert, hell even the Guardian can occasionally sound rational as well and can sometimes produce excellent articles on non-political stuff. 

 

[jollyjacktar]

As far as him and Fox and Friends is concerned,
https://www.google.ca/search?dcr=0&source=hp&ei=2u9YWqS1EIWpjwSO6KOADg&q=trump+%22fox+and+friends%22&oq=trump+%22fox+and+friends%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l6j0i22i30k1l4.4678.12700.0.13155.24.23.0.0.0.0.241.3801.0j21j2.23.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..1.23.3787.0..46j35i39k1j0i131k1j0i46i67k1j46i67k1j0i131i67k1j0i67k1j0i46k1j0i3k1j0i131i20i263k1j0i20i263k1.0.79Uf1G8nA2U

He's not 100% wrong and l am sure he's voicing what a not insignificant number of Americans might be thinking.  The troubles in Europe from the young fighting age males swarming the continent from Africa and ME are something no country should want.  You would want the best kinds of immigrants that would contribute to the country not drag it under.  However much of his statement has veracity, as POTUS, he shouldn't be using his inside voice outside of the bathroom.

 

[mariomike]

jollyjacktar:

I made no comment.

I asked one question only.

In reply to this,

CNN spends 93% of it's airtime slamming the President so they look for every error.

I asked,

Is Fox and Friends his safe space?

My question was based on what I have read,
https://www.google.ca/search?dcr=0&ei=ISVZWqHHEYywjwSlxZWICA&q=trump+%22fox+and+friends%22&oq=trump+%22fox+and+friends%22&gs_l=psy-ab.12...0.0.0.83805.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c..64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.HeMstx__zjc

Use a left wing search engine (google) to research a right wing subject. 

Enter: Trump "Fox and Friends" into any search engine(s) you prefer.

 

[jollyjacktar]

I was responding to the story only but it could have been any one of the stories on the subject today.  Your post, Mike, was just a direct link to the controversy.  It came up at work today and my comments were what was the general train of thought was amongst us all.

 

[mariomike]

Your post, Mike, was just a direct link to the controversy. 

My one question, JJT, was without comment.

It was limited to what I read in this undated search:

Trump "Fox and Friends"

( Using whatever search engine(s) one prefers. )

 

[jollyjacktar]

Just using you as a bridge, Mike.  No worries.

 

[Rifleman62]

PPCLI Guy:

Do you watch CNN, BBC News, or read the New York Times, Huffington Post or Toronto Star?

To reply - CNN, a little, BBC News, some, Only read the NYT/HP when it is a source in another news feed. Read CNN/BBC more than I watch. Read/watch CBC, CTV, Global National (as much as I can stand of Dawna Friesen). FOX for interviews from both sides of the aisle (if you watch you would know that every interview/discussion has both sides).  Local news. Wpg Free Press subscriber (I use to live in Wpg), National Post subscriber (lots of NYT and WP feeds which is lazy on their part), some Globe and Mail that is not behind a firewall. I get their AM and PM Political Briefings automatically, a little Toronto Star when my Goggle Alert pings it. There are others, but that's the substance.

And of course ARMY.CA which has postings/link to lots of info.

You see it is nice being retired. Of course, when I am in the US for the Winter, I do miss Dawna Friesen so much. :nod:

 

[AlexanderM]

According to Trump US delivers first F-52 fighter jets.

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/11/politics/trump-f-52-fighter-jet-gaffe/index.html

It should have been 52 F-35's as Norway has ordered 40 with an option on an additional 12.

Here is something on the order from Norway.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-norway-lockheed-f35/norway-receives-first-f-35-fighter-jet-idUSKBN1DA26A

And from that:
The estimated cost of acquiring 52 new combat aircraft would be NOK 67.9 billion ($8.36 billion) in 2015 values, including support equipment, simulators, weapons and training, according to the Norwegian Ministry of Defence.
___________________________________________________________

So, 52 fighters for $8.36 billion USD with all of the above included, which would be about $17 billion CDN for 88 including the support equipment, simulators, weapons and training, leaving us about $2 billion for work required on Canadian airfields etc. Compare that with the quote for $6.4 billion CDN for 18 Super Hornets and the F-35 quote looks much better. If those numbers are even close to being accurate, and the costs are supposed to be coming down, then let's get the politics sorted out and order 88 F-35's.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Alexander]  then let's get the politics sorted out and order 88 F-35's.
[/quote]
We should fix recruiting first. Then our bloated hq system followed by procurement, then general equipment and finally squeeze some F35s in there.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=PPCLI Guy]

Moreover, they are all also businesses, and not public utilities, nor are they bound in any way by things like journalistic principals.  They can do whatever they would like, within the bounds of fiduciary responsibilities to their shareholders.

They have complete control over the content that is displayed on their platforms, and those platforms are moderated, much like this one is.


[/quote]

Great points that people forget (guilty! ). I guess the error is expecting some form of impartiality.

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

He's not 100% wrong and l am sure he's voicing what a not insignificant number of Americans might be thinking.  The troubles in Europe from the young fighting age males swarming the continent from Africa and ME are something no country should want.  You would want the best kinds of immigrants that would contribute to the country not drag it under.  However much of his statement has veracity, as POTUS, he shouldn't be using his inside voice outside of the bathroom.

But where does he think that people immigrate from? This may come as something of a shock to many, but Europeans came from countries that were shitholes too.... Ireland up until the last 50 or so years wasn't exactly amazing. People generally immigrate to places because they want better lives. The rest is just general fear mongering using outliers and not statistics to attempt to prove something that in reality doesn't really exist. Migration has been generally positive for economic growth in Europe.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/eight-myths-about-migration-and-refugees-explained-a-1138053.html

 

[jollyjacktar]

And as l said, "the troubles with the fighting aged males" and there has been problems with "some" of those whom are swarming into Europe and they are not what any country would like as a new immigrant.  In that respect, he's not wrong and it would be difficult to argue against.

There have been some fantastic folks whom have come from afar, the Hadad family, from "Peace By Chocolate" come to mind.  That family will be a boon to Antigonish and NS.  Sadly, not everybody will be equally positive to their new country.  And from that POV, Trump is not 100% off base as far as I'm concerned.  Even l agree with Trudeau from time to time.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Sucks to be Trump. His predecessor wins the Nobel peace prize while bombing Afghanistan Iraq Libya Pakistan Somalia Syria and Yemen. Trump allegedly uses shitty language it's horror unspeakable.  The next election is going to be amazing to watch. Hope it's during a full moon to give Americans something to howl at.

Trump just has to wear a pussy hat and drone some villages.



[quote author=Bird_Gunner45] Migration has been generally positive for economic growth in Europe.

[/quote]
What about refugees?

 

[FJAG]

The point though is that this resurgence of Nativism isn't based on the the individual and whether or not that individual is a threat but against a class of people based on racial, religious or point of origin lines based on the assumption that the particular race, religion or country spawns some undesirable individuals.

In the eighteen hundreds, as Bird_Gunner45 said, the US had strong movements against Irish Catholic immigration. Subsequently it was German immigration. Interestingly enough, during those days, the South had no problem in taking in boatloads of Africans (as long as they came in shackles).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nativism_(politics)#1830-1860

The resurgence of the Ku Klux Klan in 1915 ". . . was based on a new anti-immigrant, Anti-Catholic, prohibitionist and anti-Semitic agenda, which reflected contemporary social tensions, particularly recent immigration."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Second_Klan:_1915%E2%80%931944

We've constantly had periods of opposition to immigration of folks who weren't "like us". This is why the second part of Trump's comments to the effect that nice Norwegians would be okay is particularly troubling. It means we're not just targeting people from "sh*thole countries" but we want fair-haired, blue-eyed folks like we are.

The trouble is that the dominant peoples of the Americas have, in large part, legitimized the occupation and expansion of themselves throughout these continents over the original inhabitants with a history of immigration and the whole "Give me your tired, your poor/Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" mythology. It's more than a little disingenuous at this point in time to start putting the brakes on the thing. Reasonable quotas, reasonable security checks, reasonable health and training standards - sure. But not outright bans.

Full disclosure: I was/am a blonde-haired (now brown), blue-eyed immigrant.

:cheers:

 

[PuckChaser]

How many people outraged have ever been to Africa other than watching a Nat Geo special on TV/Youtube? Most of those countries are $***holes. I've been to the poorest regions in the continent (actually listed as poorest region in the world), and it absolutely was a $***hole. Sorry that the truth hurts, but when everything including the environment, water (if you can find it), and people want to kill you, what else do you call it?

Its also fun to see all the confirmation bias, that Trump must have said this. The accusation is from Sen Dick Durbin, who co-sponsored the bill to try to impeach Trump last year. Totally doesn't have an axe to grind or reason to make Trump look bad, and the media is lapping it up as gospel because it fits the narrative. I really hope Trump does start secretly recording all his meetings with the Dem lawmakers, so that it blows up in their face when he produces actual audio evidence instead of he said/she said partisan bickering.

 

[FJAG]

How many people outraged have ever been to Africa other than watching a Nat Geo special on TV/Youtube? Most of those countries are $***holes. I've been to the poorest regions in the continent (actually listed as poorest region in the world), and it absolutely was a $***hole. Sorry that the truth hurts, but when everything including the environment, water (if you can find it), and people want to kill you, what else do you call it?

Its also fun to see all the confirmation bias, that Trump must have said this. The accusation is from Sen Dick Durbin, who co-sponsored the bill to try to impeach Trump last year. Totally doesn't have an axe to grind or reason to make Trump look bad, and the media is lapping it up as gospel because it fits the narrative. I really hope Trump does start secretly recording all his meetings with the Dem lawmakers, so that it blows up in their face when he produces actual audio evidence instead of he said/she said partisan bickering.

There are also Republican comments that support that Trump said something inappropriate:

Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republcain, was also part of the Oval Office sitdown. He suggested in a statement Friday that the President had said something questionable, but Graham did not directly say Trump had used the term "*******" to describe African countries.

"Following comments by the President, I said my piece directly to him yesterday," said Graham, who was part of a bipartisan proposal on immigration that Trump rejected at the meeting. "The President and all those attending the meeting know what I said and how I feel. I've always believed that America is an idea, not defined by its people but by its ideals."

However, Republican Sen. Tim Scott, the junior senator from South Carolina, told the Charleston Post and Courier that Graham told him the reported comments are "basically accurate."

"If that comment is accurate, the comment is incredibly disappointing," Scott told the newspaper.

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politics/senators-trump-comment-tom-cotton/index.html

Not that hard to read between the lines.

:cheers:

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

How many people outraged have ever been to Africa other than watching a Nat Geo special on TV/Youtube? Most of those countries are $***holes. I've been to the poorest regions in the continent (actually listed as poorest region in the world), and it absolutely was a $***hole. Sorry that the truth hurts, but when everything including the environment, water (if you can find it), and people want to kill you, what else do you call it?

Its also fun to see all the confirmation bias, that Trump must have said this. The accusation is from Sen Dick Durbin, who co-sponsored the bill to try to impeach Trump last year. Totally doesn't have an axe to grind or reason to make Trump look bad, and the media is lapping it up as gospel because it fits the narrative. I really hope Trump does start secretly recording all his meetings with the Dem lawmakers, so that it blows up in their face when he produces actual audio evidence instead of he said/she said partisan bickering.

I've also been to Africa, Afghanistan, and the middle east. You're right- they are shit holes (I'd also classify Winnipeg and Detroit as shit holes... I felt much safer in amman, Jordan than in parts of Winnipeg) . Hence why people want to leave.

However, it's not the calling the countries shit holes that has anyone upset.  It's more his confusion as to why the US allows people from there to immigrate. It's simple nativism and catering to the basest element of his society. The same element that said Irish and Italians werent good enough less than 100 years ago.

As for the rest- it's not confirmation bias. It just sounds like something he would say do it adds credibility. If they said that Trump was talking about the philosophy of Rene Descartes while listening to a concerto I would be more suspicious.

 

[dimsum]

I don't think the worst word was "shithole".  I think the worst was "why". 

Actually, a Redditor said it better than me:

The most offensive part about Trump's comments today wasn't the word "shithole". It was the word "Why".

“Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?”

Do people even really understand what our president is saying?

Look, I'm not angry because he calls places "shitholes". I'm a first generation immigrant. I come from a shithole. I lived 10 years in a shithole. I'll freely call it a shithole. I won't get offended if you call it a shithole! It's a shithole! Happy?

But how DARE he use my origin as an excuse to demand an additional reason to explain my presence here? Why is it up to me (but not say, a white Norwegian) to provide some extra level of justification for why I deserve the chance to be an American?

If these places really are shitholes, shouldn't there be an even greater obligation to help people who come from there, specifically because they're in the most danger?

Apparently not. Because Trump sincerely believes that some people do, and some people do not deserve the chance to be Americans, and your birthplace (and by extension, your race) is a key deciding factor in whether you deserve the chance to be an American. And it just so happens that the "right" places happen to be white.

Notice that he did not ask "Why are we letting in poor people?" or "Why are we letting in people without degrees?" or "Why are we letting in people with criminal histories" or "Why are we letting in people who refuse to learn English?".

No, let's cut the crap, already, because deep down, we know damn well that he's not talking about merit, or even about your place of origin. After everything you've seen, who do you think Trump is more likely to feel is more deserving citizenship? One of those scary Muslims that are "taking over" Norway, or a white South African? Cuz I got a feeling that when he gets a look at those people, the calculus for determining whether their home countries count as "shitholes" suddenly changes.

Trump is practically saying "America is for white people. The rest are interlopers until proven otherwise. Until someone explains to me WHY they're even allowed here." Let's not forget either, that in this particular situation, he's not even talking about illegal immigrants. He doesn't get to even use that old fig-leaf.

He's talking about a reconfiguration of who we even allow the chance to become legal, through all the proper channels, not based on merit, not based on national security, not based on employability, but specifically targeted against the people he happens to hate.

And yet, the media is taking the bait. Already they rush to obfuscate the issue, to absolve him of the real evil of his comment by focusing on the "inappropriate word" he used.

Already, we're having these dumb conversations like "Well, he denied that he said that exact word, but he said she said that he did!" or "Well, to be fair, Haiti isn't exactly a nice place to live, he's just saying what everyone thinks privately, and he just chose a colorful word to describe it...", and instead of focusing on the racism, we just go "Oh, but look at the pretty beaches of Haiti! It's not a shithole! Look at the natural beauty and rich culture of-" SHUT THE FUCK UP!

What bearing does that debate have on anything?!? As if Trump's greatest sin is his vocabulary and not watching the Travel Channel?

What our president said today isn't just boorish, it isn't just cruel. It betrays a deep and insidious level of racism that can only be described as white supremacy. Again. This is a pattern, don't forget. But in this instance, he is literally throwing a tantrum because the "wrong people" are enjoying the benefit of immigration.

And it is so depressing and so terrifying, that even Trump's opponents - the people who represent the best hope we got to survive this regime - are just gonna waltz past that and chide him for his language.

If I'm the one from the shithole, how come Americans are so stupid that they keep falling for this crap over and over?

 

[Jarnhamar]

All things considered a tape of Trump 13 years ago on a bus trip surfaced so surely someone recorded this conversation and it will shortly emerge.

 

[FJAG]

Trump's White House: How a bipartisan policy meeting devolved into vulgarity

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/12/politics/immigration-meeting-donald-trump/index.html

:cheers: