Luminous Landscape Forum
The Art of Photography => The Coffee Corner => Topic started by: Slobodan Blagojevic on March 06, 2020, 07:18:15 am
-
Since the DNC successfully closed the previous thread on 2020 Democratic candidates, time to continue the fun, all the way through November.
To start:
These are the people (the Left) who want to run our country, its finances, and our finances. They think they can give one million dollars to every single American by taking it from just one rich guy. To laugh or to cry, that is the question.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbcs-brian-williams-ny-times-editor-marvel-at-tweet-that-got-bloomberg-math-really-wrong?fbclid=IwAR2IwljFxHxS97EhEX5SV9HOfQLQpJ__bTlt8U8haWinyzvJrHpFYmNSpQI
“It’s an incredible way of putting it,” Williams gushed.
“It’s an incredible way of putting it. It’s true,” Gay agreed.
-
It might be possible to give a million to each US citizen instead of that ad campaign, but it would have to be in Iranian rials.
Another way to spend that amount of money would be to buy 327 million of condom packages.
-
It might be possible to give a million to each US citizen instead of that ad campaign, but it would have to be in Iranian rials.
Another way to spend that amount of money would be to buy 327 million of condom packages.
And staple each individual packet. Surprise, surprise!
;-)
-
Since the DNC successfully closed the previous thread on 2020 Democratic candidates, time to continue the fun, all the way through November.
To start:
These are the people (the Left) who want to run our country, its finances, and our finances. They think they can give one million dollars to every single American by taking it from just one rich guy. To laugh or to cry, that is the question.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbcs-brian-williams-ny-times-editor-marvel-at-tweet-that-got-bloomberg-math-really-wrong?fbclid=IwAR2IwljFxHxS97EhEX5SV9HOfQLQpJ__bTlt8U8haWinyzvJrHpFYmNSpQI
Who be the DNC?
-
Who be the DNC?
Democratic National Committee.
-
Since the DNC successfully closed the previous thread on 2020 Democratic candidates, time to continue the fun, all the way through November.
I closed it, under no pressure from the DNC; and I'll do the same to this one if it sinks to the same level.
Jeremy
-
There's the view that US election politics has become nothing more than a search for anything that isn't Trump. That's a pretty clear condemnation of a man even more so than of his policies - such as they may be.
-
Democratic National Committee.
Then how could they have had any input into the locking of that tedious thread? Our Mod is not an American, as far as I am aware.
Why tedious? Because impossible to resolve anything that's nothing more than a constantly dripping tap of political myopia. There was as much open-mindedness as at a friggin' football match. Which is but one reason why I hate such "sports" that should be left behind with childhood.
Rob
-
Then how could they have had any input into the locking of that tedious thread? Our Mod is not an American, as far as I am aware...l
Jesus Christ.
Has everyone lost their sense of humor!? Obviously, it wasn’t the DNC who closed the thread directly. The thread was about 19+ Democratic candidates and it was great fun discussing each one of the clowns. Once the DNC decided there should be only one real candidate and one nuisance, the thread lost its point.
Tedious!? It was great fun. I am not sure why it was closed by the moderator. Those who find political threads tedious will soon realize there is nothing else left to discuss on LuLa.
-
There's the view that US election politics has become nothing more than a search for anything that isn't Trump. That's a pretty clear condemnation of a man even more so than of his policies - such as they may be.
No, Rob, not the “US election politics” but just Democrats’ election politics. The other side is perfectly happy with Trump and there is no search for anything to replace him. Consequently, the only condemnation comes from Democrats, which is to be expected. Can’t wait to see the total nervous breakdown by the left when they realize it is four more years of Trump.
-
Jesus Christ.
Has everyone lost their sense of humor!? Obviously, it wasn’t the DNC who closed the thread directly. The thread was about 19+ Democratic candidates and it was great fun discussing each one of the clowns. Once the DNC decided there should be only one real candidate and one nuisance, the thread lost its point.
Tedious!? It was great fun. I am not sure why it was closed by the moderator. Those who find political threads tedious will soon realize there is nothing else left to discuss on LuLa.
Funny. I thought it was a Russian mole, not the DNC. :)
-
No, Rob, not the “US election politics” but just Democrats’ election politics. The other side is perfectly happy with Trump and there is no search for anything to replace him. Consequently, the only condemnation comes from Democrats, which is to be expected. Can’t wait to see the total nervous breakdown by the left when they realize it is four more years of Trump.
I guess we'll see about this. The polls would suggest that a big bunch of Republican women are unhappy about Trump, which is basically why he'll lose to Biden this fall. (If Bernie somehow got the nomination, Trump might win because Bernie might be even a bigger pain in the ass.)
Here's my prediction: Biden get the nod, chooses Klobuchar as VP candidate. He has two other possibilities, Warren and Kamala Harris -- but neither brings much to the ticket in terms of votes. Warren couldn't win her home state primary, which suggest that she sorely lacks in personal popularity, and Massachusetts will vote Dem anyway. Harris, who identifies as black, wouldn't help much because Biden already is solid with black voters, and most black voters are either in southern states which Biden will lose no matter how big a black vote he gets, or in liberal states which he will win anyway. Besides, he *will* win California, so Harris can't even claim to get him that. Klobuchar is popular in the upper Midwest -- meaning Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and other places with large farm-based economies. Once you sift through all the crap, I say that both sides win the states that they won last time, and the Dems have to flip only Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania to win the White House, and hold on to shaky states like formerly uber-liberal Minnesota. Unless Biden pulls a McCain and chooses a nutcase for VP, I think the Dems will win this fall, both by a large vote margin, as in 2016, but more importantly, by a substantial Electoral College margin.
-
I guess we'll see about this. The polls would suggest that a big bunch of Republican women are unhappy about Trump, which is basically why he'll lose to Biden this fall. (If Bernie somehow got the nomination, Trump might win because Bernie might be even a bigger pain in the ass.)
Here's my prediction: Biden get the nod, chooses Klobuchar as VP candidate. He has two other possibilities, Warren and Kamala Harris -- but neither brings much to the ticket in terms of votes. Warren couldn't win her home state primary, which suggest that she sorely lacks in personal popularity, and Massachusetts will vote Dem anyway. Harris, who identifies as black, wouldn't help much because Biden already is solid with black voters, and most black voters are either in southern states which Biden will lose no matter how big a black vote he gets, or in liberal states which he will win anyway. Besides, he *will* win California, so Harris can't even claim to get him that. Klobuchar is popular in the upper Midwest -- meaning Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and other places with large farm-based economies. Once you sift through all the crap, I say that both sides win the states that they won last time, and the Dems have to flip only Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania to win the White House, and hold on to shaky states like formerly uber-liberal Minnesota. Unless Biden pulls a McCain and chooses a nutcase for VP, I think the Dems will win this fall, both by a large vote margin, as in 2016, but more importantly, by a substantial Electoral College margin.
That could happen. Unless during a debate, Biden forgets his name or where he is.
-
Jesus Christ.
Has everyone lost their sense of humor!? Obviously, it wasn’t the DNC who closed the thread directly. The thread was about 19+ Democratic candidates and it was great fun discussing each one of the clowns. Once the DNC decided there should be only one real candidate and one nuisance, the thread lost its point.
Tedious!? It was great fun. I am not sure why it was closed by the moderator. Those who find political threads tedious will soon realize there is nothing else left to discuss on LuLa.
And this morning, on Sky News, there was nothing being discussed except Coronavirus. I switched.
Rob
-
Jesus Christ.
Has everyone lost their sense of humor!? Obviously, it wasn’t the DNC who closed the thread directly. The thread was about 19+ Democratic candidates and it was great fun discussing each one of the clowns. Once the DNC decided there should be only one real candidate and one nuisance, 1. the thread lost its point.
2. Tedious!? It was great fun. I am not sure why it was closed by the moderator. Those who find political threads tedious will soon realize there is nothing else left to discuss on LuLa.
1. It never enjoyed a point: it was an endless litany of political cant; a soapbox facing a rubber wall in an echo chamber.
2. Great fun?
"Why tedious? Because impossible to resolve anything that's nothing more than a constantly dripping tap of political myopia. There was as much open-mindedness as at a friggin' football match. Which is but one reason why I hate such "sports" that should be left behind with childhood." ... I quote my own post.
;-)
-
Jesus Christ.
Has everyone lost their sense of humor!? Obviously, it wasn’t the DNC who closed the thread directly. The thread was about 19+ Democratic candidates and it was great fun discussing each one of the clowns. Once the DNC decided there should be only one real candidate and one nuisance, the thread lost its point.
Tedious!? It was great fun. I am not sure why it was closed by the moderator. Those who find political threads tedious will soon realize there is nothing else left to discuss on LuLa.
At long last, we agree on something!
;-)
-
At long last, we agree on something!
;-)
I link to Steidl's photo books:
https://steidl.de/Books/Photography-0104064348.html?chunk=1
Looking through this list last night I ended up pulling out my copy of the eponymous Louis Faurer that they printed some time ago. I reread it cover to cover, looked at all the photographs and tried to come to terms with what was going on. Faurer himself had precious little to say, and the editorial writers handling the project waxed eloquent as ever they do. The take away? That as with many photographers, Faurer was confused. In his case, he appears to me to have had a terrible inferiority complex about himself because he earned his living working for fashion magazines such as Harper's Bazaar, and felt that his "real" work - kinda mediocre street stuff - was the real jewel in his life whereas, at least in my opinion, his fashion works was really damned good. Which presumably was also the view of the people who hired him over those decades. He and Frank shared the same low opinion about professional work. Frank got published in book form, Faurer, in his lifetime, did not.
Not only does this seem to me to reflect artistic confusion, but some kind of defensive mechanism perhaps meant to defend published commercial work that may have been felt was lacking in some respects, suggesting that "personal" work - could you but see it - was so much superior. I don't buy that. You are as good as what you can pull off.
Back to the list of books: I saw nothing that I would put my money down to buy. I saw several that I would flip through in a library. Mostly, I just wondered who on Earth took the financial risk of getting the majority through print.
So returning to Slobodan's point about the lack of non-political debate, it's probably due to the fact that photography is about doing it, rather than endlessly disecting the results.
I guess that in the end, GAS and fanboyism is the driving force of public photography interfacings (if I may invent a bastard use of that word).
-
Those who find political threads tedious will soon realize there is nothing else left to discuss on LuLa.
There are numerous articles published and many other discussions going on.
Or are there still people whining about the change in management at the site? It's long past time to let that one go, I'd say.
-
There are numerous articles published and many other discussions going on...
I gave up long time ago on GAS and pixel-peeping debates.
-
There are numerous articles published and many other discussions going on.
The one about whether primes or zooms are better is especially good.
-
The one about whether primes or zooms are better is especially good.
The '80s called... want their topic back.
-
I gave up long time ago on GAS and pixel-peeping debates.
+ 1 with the caveat that I do like to throw in the awkward question now and again regarding the magnificent new images everyone else is making that remind me so much of what has already been done with steam-age cameras and lenses.
It becomes harder and harder to realise that people are all becoming younger and younger and, consequently, so much more impressionable which, of course, makes the wheels of industry go round.
:-)
-
I find solace in portraiture of people I know.
-
I find solace in portraiture of people I know.
I wish I still knew some I wanted to photograph.
Solace indeed, and even rekindled enthusiasm but not, apparently, to be. However, hours spent looking at dear, departed Deborah's oeure still gets me to bed in relative tranquility. I belong in a different time.
Top row, click on first image and pass a grainy hour or so.
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&channel=ipad_bm&source=hp&ei=vh9kXonZBOXBlwTF8rWgDA&q=deborah+turbeville+imagenes&oq=debora&gs_l=mobile-gws-wiz-hp.1.0.41j46i275j46j0l2j46j0i10j46l2.1377.2921..4901...0.0..0.81.450.6......0....1.......8..41i8i13i30j0i131.JwHZRH4izmU
Rob
-
That could happen. Unless during a debate, Biden forgets his name or where he is.
He forgot Obama’s name just the other night during an interview. “... President ummmm, my boss ...”
Your front runner ladies & gentlemen. The clip of him trying to say the pre-amble of the Declaration of Independence was even worse. I have not yet watched a single Dem debate, but the next Biden vs Bernie only debate should be entertaining.
-
He forgot Obama’s name just the other night during an interview. “... President ummmm, my boss ...”
Your front runner ladies & gentlemen. The clip of him trying to say the pre-amble of the Declaration of Independence was even worse. I have not yet watched a single Dem debate, but the next Biden vs Bernie only debate should be entertaining.
He can't easily say Obama because he stutters. He's stuttered since he was young, and still has the problem, and I find it unseemly when people make fun of somebody who has a handicap.
-
He can't easily say Obama because he stutters. He's stuttered since he was young, and still has the problem, and I find it unseemly when people make fun of somebody who has a handicap.
That's an excuse that the media's come up with to protect him. He didn't forget names before. It's age. At 75, I know how it works because I forget names often too.
-
He can't easily say Obama because he stutters. He's stuttered since he was young, and still has the problem, and I find it unseemly when people make fun of somebody who has a handicap.
Lol, sure. Then how do you explain the several previously recorded instances of him saying Obama with ease? ???
AnD there is nothing wrong with pointing out that age has started to severally mentally effect a person who is running for the highest office in the world. It’s legitimate concern.
-
Lol, sure. Then how do you explain the several previously recorded instances of him saying Obama with ease? ???
AnD there is nothing wrong with pointing out that age has started to severally mentally effect a person who is running for the highest office in the world. It’s legitimate concern.
For once, I agree with you 100%. Nobody, but nobody over sixty-five should be allowed to stand. When at least three-quarters of your life are spent, you see the future through different prisms and priorities than do the younger folks. Hell's teeth, most of us are obliged to retire by then, not start to carry the heaviest of loads!
-
That's an excuse that the media's come up with to protect him. He didn't forget names before. It's age. At 75, I know how it works because I forget names often too.
Aren't you guys making too much out of a verbal hiccup?
-
For once, I agree with you 100%. Nobody, but nobody over sixty-five should be allowed to stand. When at least three-quarters of your life are spent, you see the future through different prisms and priorities than do the younger folks. Hell's teeth, most of us are obliged to retire by then, not start to carry the heaviest of loads!
Not sure about that, Rob. They let Trump run, so the bar has been set pretty low. :)
-
Not sure about that, Rob. They let Trump run, so the bar has been set pretty low. :)
Trump may act "nuts". But he hasn't lost his mental faculties. :)
-
Trump may act "nuts". But he hasn't lost his mental faculties. :)
You can only lose what you already have. :)
-
You can only lose what you already have. :)
Did Trump go to Trump Uni?
:-)
-
Did Trump go to Trump Uni?
:-)
No, his IQ was too high for it.
-
Brewing my morning coffee here in Melbourne reading the news and saw this little snippet.
During the brief address [this past Saturday], Biden, 77, bizarrely declared himself an "O'Biden Bama" Democrat, and went on to declare: "We cannot get -- re-elect -- we cannot win this re-election -- excuse me. We can only re-elect Donald Trump -- if, in fact, we get engaged in this circular firing squad here.”
Maybe Bernie will be the nominee now.
-
You can only lose what you already have. :)
He was sharp enough to beat the other 17 entrenched party Republican challengers before the election and the entire Democratic party including the Clintons during it. He beat back four years of attacks including an impeachment. Defeated ISIS, revamp taxes, energized the economy, revitalized the military, upgraded trade pacts, etc. He's taken over the Republican party and is being challenged by a Marxist or a guy who's fading due to old age. He's got more energy that men 30 years younger and stupid he's not. He's got the power of his office. Minimize him at your peril.
-
Aren't you guys making too much out of a verbal hiccup?
Rob, it’s one after the other now, and they are increasing becoming more odd. In the last weeks he has forget Obama, mistook his wife for another campaign official, could not remember the first sentence of the Decloration of Imfependence (perhaps the single most important document in our country), thought Super Tuesday was Thursday and had to be corrected by Mayor Pete, forgot what state he was in again, and the list goes on.
Even left of center news people are suggesting he’s unfit.
This debate is going to be a total disaster for the Dems. The choice between an unapologetic actual commie or an old man who can no longer form coherent sentences and sounds like he is trying to pronounce one really long word. If Biden had never ran, the Dems would be in so much better shape right now.
-
Rob, it’s one after the other now, and they are increasing becoming more odd. In the last weeks he has forget Obama, mistook his wife for another campaign official, could not remember the first sentence of the Decloration of Imfependence (perhaps the single most important document in our country), thought Super Tuesday was Thursday and had to be corrected by Mayor Pete, forgot what state he was in again, and the list goes on.
Even left of center news people are suggesting he’s unfit.
This debate is going to be a total disaster for the Dems. The choice between an unapologetic actual commie or an old man who can no longer form coherent sentences and sounds like he is trying to pronounce one really long word. If Biden had never ran, the Dems would be in so much better shape right now.
But why did all the quitting candidates endorse him?
-
But why did all the quitting candidates endorse him?
If Mayor Pete stayed in, he had no chance of winning but could keep enough delegates from Biden to ensure Bernie would win. This would pretty much end his career. Same thing with Kloubachar. So they did the smart thing and got out before Super Tuesday, and endorsed Biden.
Plus Mayor Pete has no political future in Indiana. It’s a red state only getting redder being mayor is the furtherest he can go. And he can’t remain mayor and run for president again; it just won’t look good. He is probably the best politician out of the bunch and realizes this. So his only way forward is either get a position in a Biden cabinet or carpet bag it to another state. Obviously a position with Biden if he wins is the easiest and most direct, and an endorsement does not cost him anything. Kloubacher probably secures the VP slot (judging by her recent gaffe this weekend), and let’s face it, she could very well end up president in that position if Biden won.
Now if Biden never ran, other more well known moderates would have, putting the Dems in a better place. This also assumes the other moderates would have campaigned better, not allowing Bernie to tack up votes and split the party.
-
But why did all the quitting candidates endorse him?
They either want to be his VP choice and/or they were told to support him if they wanted to continue having a successful career in the Democrat party.
-
They either want to be his VP choice and/or they were told to support him if they wanted to continue having a successful career in the Democrat party.
Based on Joe's observations of aging Biden, why didn't they endorse Bloomberg instead?
-
Based on Joe's observations of aging Biden, why didn't they endorse Bloomberg instead?
I think the Democratic party was hoping for Bloomberg but he did terrible in the debates. When Biden won the South Carolina primary, and Bloomberg lost big time, the Democrats were stuck with Biden too late to change anything. So as they say, they'll put lipstick on a pig and hoped no one will notice their candidate has four legs.
-
Rob, it’s one after the other now, and they are increasing becoming more odd. In the last weeks he has forget Obama, mistook his wife for another campaign official, could not remember the first sentence of the Decloration of Imfependence (perhaps the single most important document in our country), thought Super Tuesday was Thursday and had to be corrected by Mayor Pete, forgot what state he was in again, and the list goes on.
I don't pay attention to the day to day of US electioneering, and I know less about Biden than I do about Iceland. You may very well be correct about him. But if verbal miscues are any guide to anything, Trump doesn't exactly shine in that department. It seems to me that politicians are thrust in front of cameras a bit too often, they (and we) might benefit from more thinking time and less talking time. I don't find that them being "on" camera all the time gives us any more information. What seems to happen is that people who are good on camera get votes, not sure that's the most important criterion. We seem to want them to put on a good show more than we want them to do a good job, although maybe we're not that good at judging what doing a good job even means.
-
I don't pay attention to the day to day of US electioneering, and I know less about Biden than I do about Iceland. You may very well be correct about him. But if verbal miscues are any guide to anything, Trump doesn't exactly shine in that department. It seems to me that politicians are thrust in front of cameras a bit too often, they (and we) might benefit from more thinking time and less talking time. I don't find that them being "on" camera all the time gives us any more information. What seems to happen is that people who are good on camera get votes, not sure that's the most important criterion. We seem to want them to put on a good show more than we want them to do a good job, although maybe we're not that good at judging what doing a good job even means.
Biden's been in politics for 40 years including as a US Senator running senate committees including Judicial. His lapses now are new indicating a slowing down.
-
Biden's been in politics for 40 years including as a US Senator running senate committees including Judicial. His lapses now are new indicating a slowing down.
Slowing down? The man has totally lost it.
-
Shouldn't the Dems ask Bloomberg to come back and save the world?
-
Shouldn't the Dems ask Bloomberg to come back and save the world?
Apparently if you're not quick on your feet in a TV debate, it means you're not qualified. That's how we analyze things now.
-
Apparently if you're not quick on your feet in a TV debate, it means you're not qualified. That's how we analyze things now.
He wasn't prepared. What's interesting is how it shows that all the complaints about different people and groups spending lots of money doesn't necessarily mean anything. First you have to have the goods. Second you have to be able to present it well. Third, there's money on the other side taking the opposite positions.
-
New political term spotted in the New York Times (from Bret Stephens): Sandersnista
-
New political term spotted in the New York Times (from Bret Stephens): Sandersnista
Well the NY Times is left, but not quite Marxist. PLus they're getting on-board the Democrat gravy train and piling up on Sanders to support Biden. The word has gone out. This is the swamp in action Trump talks about.
-
Now that Biden won Michigan, it's all over. I suspect Sanders will cancel his campaign and throw his support to Biden to convince Sanders voters to not stay home. So Biden it is. He could well win in November. I don't think he's capable of running America and will allow a Svengali direct him. Not good for the country if this happens.
-
I think Warren may endorse Biden, I'm less sure about Sanders. I think Sanders gets a deep thrill from screaming at crowds, and he could still do that for a few more months. Biden gave a very gracious speech tonight. If he gets the nomination, it will be a very interesting contrast between the two presidential candidates. I just wish there were a better Republican nominee. In fact, I wish there were a better Democratic nominee, but I'll take Biden.
-
I think Warren may endorse Biden, I'm less sure about Sanders. I think Sanders gets a deep thrill from screaming at crowds, and he could still do that for a few more months. Biden gave a very gracious speech tonight. If he gets the nomination, it will be a very interesting contrast between the two presidential candidates. I just wish there were a better Republican nominee. In fact, I wish there were a better Democratic nominee, but I'll take Biden.
The human dilemma: which is the lesser of two evils?
Instead, in an ideal world, it should be a matter of choosing the best of the good. Why can't politics attract the latter to be players?
;-(
-
I think Warren may endorse Biden, I'm less sure about Sanders. I think Sanders gets a deep thrill from screaming at crowds, and he could still do that for a few more months. Biden gave a very gracious speech tonight. If he gets the nomination, it will be a very interesting contrast between the two presidential candidates. I just wish there were a better Republican nominee. In fact, I wish there were a better Democratic nominee, but I'll take Biden.
Well, some people predict he'll try to influence the Democratic platform at the convention, using his followers as a hook to get the DNC to include his socialist policies in the platform. They'll go along to get his people to vote for Biden and not stay home on election eve. The problem with Biden is I don't think he'll be his own man, more of a puppet. I don;t think he'll protect America like Trump can and does against some of the world's worst people like Xi and even with our friends who often take advantage of America. We need a president who's tough. The VP selection is going to be important as he or she might become president if Biden doesn;t finish his term or run for office the second term, which is most probable. Trump is sharp and would onley be there another four years. Biden would be around 85 or 86 at the end of 8 years. He isn't going to make it.
-
Biden would be around 85 or 86 at the end of 8 years. He isn't going to make it.
If Biden wins this fall, it is extremely unlikely that he would run again in [EDIT] 2024. OTOH, his VP might.
-
Which is why Hillary is sort of throwing her hair scarf into the ring. If she's VP and Biden somehow were to commit suicide she'd be IN!
-
Which is why Hillary is sort of throwing her hair scarf into the ring. If she's VP and Biden somehow were to commit suicide she'd be IN!
She's not a spring chicken either. :)
-
If Biden wins this fall, it is extremely unlikely that he would run again in 2026. His VP might.
Come again? In America we elect a president every 4 years.
-
My mistake, thanks for the correction, I must have confused it with Russia (they have a 6 year term).
Of course, it will be the year 2024.
-
Don't worry about it, Frans. The whole question is academic.
-
Biden and Trump both have mental lapses. It is Trump's moral lapses that bother me. He treats women like objects. He openly uses white supremacist's phrases and gestures. The best thing he has done for this country is to show us how racist we are. The list of his appalling behavior is long, the list of his lies even longer but people will say "yes, but".
Sharon
-
Biden and Trump both have mental lapses. It is Trump's moral lapses that bother me. He treats women like objects. He openly uses white supremacist's phrases and gestures. The best thing he has done for this country is to show us how racist we are. The list of his appalling behavior is long, the list of his lies even longer but people will say "yes, but".
Sharon
Explain to us, if you will, how Trump is racist.
-
My mistake, thanks for the correction, I must have confused it with Russia (they have a 6 year term).
Of course, it will be the year 2024.
That's OK. Putin could run here in 2026.
-
Explain to us, if you will, how Trump is racist.
I somehow doubt it would be possible to discuss anything about Trump with you.
-
Biden and Trump both have mental lapses....
Looking forward to see them together arguing... will be mind blowing.
Defibrillators ready behind the curtain.
-
Looking forward to see them together arguing... will be mind blowing.
Defibrillators ready behind the curtain.
Will Trump deign to debate?
-
That's OK. Putin could run here in 2026.
Won't work. Putin is booked for the next 16 years.
-
Looking forward to see them together arguing... will be mind blowing.
Defibrillators ready behind the curtain.
It will be Chubacca vs. The Swedish Chef in those debates.
Welcome to 2020.
-
I somehow doubt it would be possible to discuss anything about Trump with you.
Try me, you may be pleasantly surprised. For starters, you could answer my question.
-
Yep, just as I thought: crickets...
-
Yep, just as I thought: crickets...
Expressing an opinion doesn’t obligate me to debate with you.
-
Expressing an opinion doesn’t obligate me to debate with you.
No obligation, but it would be nice if you cared to support your opinion with just more than that. Opinions come a dime a dozen.
-
Frans, I don’t appreciate being bullied. If you don’t recognize racism, I’m not going to try and point it out to you. It is a futile exercise.
-
Frans, I don’t appreciate being bullied. If you don’t recognize racism, I’m not going to try and point it out to you. It is a futile exercise.
Wow. An invitation to have a dialogue is now bullying? Wow.
-
No, your refusal to drop it is. I have said repeatedly that I don’t wish to discuss it with you.
-
Based on the content of the last 7 posts, I'd recommend both posters to switch to PM's. Just an idea.
-
No thanks
-
Explain to us, if you will, how Trump is racist.
I mean, he has a white nationalist (https://www.npr.org/2019/12/15/788195178/former-breitbart-editor-katie-mchugh-on-stephen-miller-and-white-supremacy) running his immigration programs.
He complains publicly that a judge of Mexican descent can't adjudicate fairly because of his Mexican heritage. (https://time.com/4356045/donald-trump-judge-gonalo-curiel/)
An earlier run-in with Curiel resulted in what Paul Ryan called the "textbook definition of a racist comment." (https://www.pbs.org/weta/washingtonweek/web-video/paul-ryan-trump-made-textbook-definition-racist-comment)
He continually generalizes foreigners - specifically brown foreigners - with negative stereotypes and assumes that certain brown congresspeople aren't "from here."
He was a driving force of the Obama "birther" nonsense, and despite a $41 million settlement refuses to believe that the "Central Park 5" were actually innocent. (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/what-trump-has-said-central-park-five/1501321001/)
Then there's his 1973 DoJ suit alleging housing discrimination, and so on.
Look, it's a common misconception that "racism" means that someone can't have a "black friend," or if they put a minority in a position of authority (like Ben Carson) that that's proof positive that, hey, they CAN'T be racist. That's not how it works. How's he racist? He makes judgments and assumes negative outcomes based on race.
Do you think that's unclear?
What exactly do you want? Videotape of him running around with a sheet on his head screaming "n****r, n****r, n****r!!!" 'Cause, you know, cynics have known for 40 years now that you can't be that overt. (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Lee_Atwater)
-
What I would like is a meaningful conversation, but that - apparently - isn't going to happen. I'm done here.
-
... How's he racist? He makes judgments and assumes negative outcomes based on race.
Do you think that's unclear?...
Oh, absolutely!
The left has stretched the definition of racism so much that everything they don't like is "racist." It lost its power. Cliche. Worn-out.
But we had this discussions many forum posts ago. For example, that Mexican judge... When a Supreme Court Justice claims that a Latina judge will always make a better decision than a white judge... what's that? I would say her opinion, but if you want equivalence within your stretched definitions, that's racism.
-
Oh, absolutely!
The left has stretched the definition of racism so much that everything they don't like is "racist." It lost its power. Cliche. Worn-out.
But we had this discussions many forum posts ago. For example, that Mexican judge... When a Supreme Court Justice claims that a Latina judge will always make a better decision than a white judge... what's that? I would say her opinion, but if you want equivalence within your stretched definitions, that's racism.
Two things can be true at the same time. "Woke" culture can go too far and become meaningless. And incompetents can be elected to office and precipitate all kinds of bad results.
Aside from policy differences, is anyone else disturbed by the religious-like zeal with which Trump is defended? He's just another politician. It's ok to criticize and even make fun of those guys, there's nothing sacred about them. He's an especially venal example and so invites scorn, he probably seeks it out and welcomes it. His shit stinks, guys.
I don't hear anyone complaining when Obama and Hilary are still criticized years after their alleged transgressions took place. Seems like a case of protesting too much to me. They are (were) politicians in the public eye, they will be criticized and attacked, that's the job.
-
Two things can be true at the same time. "Woke" culture can go too far and become meaningless. And incompetents can be elected to office and precipitate all kinds of bad results.
Aside from policy differences, is anyone else disturbed by the religious-like zeal with which Trump is defended? He's just another politician. It's ok to criticize and even make fun of those guys, there's nothing sacred about them. He's an especially venal example and so invites scorn, he probably seeks it out and welcomes it. His shit stinks, guys.
I don't hear anyone complaining when Obama and Hilary are still criticized years after their alleged transgressions took place. Seems like a case of protesting too much to me. They are (were) politicians in the public eye, they will be criticized and attacked, that's the job.
Although there may be a few Trumpers who feel everything he does is perfect, most Trump supporters are critical of Trump. This is especially true for his twitter feed.
I fall into that category, although it is kind of a Catch 22. If Trump was more toned down like Romney, his opinions would never be covered by the already biased media. The country would just hear the liberal side, and not the conservative. Him being brash demands coverage, although this is rife with opportunities for him to screw up.
One is with the Corona Virus. His twitter feed somewhat contradicts what his experts are saying. Although I feel the administration is doing a good job, Trump is diminishing this by the erratic comments he makes on twitter. I wish he had some self control.
Those with "religious-like zeal" are the Bernie Bros, one of the reasons I am glad to see Bernie fade away. Every Bernie supporter I have ever met are 100% supportive of Sanders and will want to fight you if you have anything critical to say.
-
Although there may be a few Trumpers who feel everything he does is perfect, most Trump supporters are critical of Trump. This is especially true for his twitter feed.
I fall into that category, although it is kind of a Catch 22. If Trump was more toned down like Romney, his opinions would never be covered by the already biased media. The country would just hear the liberal side, and not the conservative. Him being brash demands coverage, although this is rife with opportunities for him to screw up.
One is with the Corona Virus. His twitter feed somewhat contradicts what his experts are saying. Although I feel the administration is doing a good job, Trump is diminishing this by the erratic comments he makes on twitter. I wish he had some self control.
Those with "religious-like zeal" are the Bernie Bros, one of the reasons I am glad to see Bernie fade away. Every Bernie supporter I have ever met are 100% supportive of Sanders and will want to fight you if you have anything critical to say.
Hi,
I don't really want to intrude here, you guys seem to know each other though the forum for a long time but this seems to be the place for political discussions and the opinionated bunch.
I consider myself a Bernie supporter, but in no way submit myself to everything he says with a 100% blind faith as you imply we the "Bernie Bro's" do. In fact I think he has said some really unfortunate stuff that hasn't helped him, not even with a part of his own supporters. I certainly didn't agreed with his wish to outlaw health insurance companies, though I do agree with a socialized health care service that would drive private insurance costs down, as it certainly works in quite a few countries that are not "communists".
His somewhat ambiguous opinions on "left" or communists dictators is not great either. But I get where he's coming from after being a leftists in the U.S politics for so many years. After all, you get Trump saying that Kim Jong-Un is a "great guy" and nobody bats an eye.
Anyway, I felt that he overplayed the radical left card too much but I still supported him, simply because I felt he would need to deal with the government institutions in place and that would balance things out, assuming that a Congress and Senate would actually be willing to reach compromises (isn't that the real fantasy here!).
Regarding what you said about Trump supporters being critic of Trump, I'm afraid that I have the same opinion on that as you have for me, and I wouldn't judge anything trough the eyes of the Twitter micro universe. I can't even find a critic opinion on Trump on this forum from the ones I assume are his supporters, except perhaps you?
For instance I don't really thing that this pandemic is something that was 100% avoidable, but some choices made seem baffling to me, like refusing the virus test from WHO and waisting critical time, and still not being able to keep up with the tests demands, but I can bet i'm going to receive some king of explanation from a Trump supporter here as to why that was the correct thing to do.
But lets's try to find a less global issue that it would be hard to justify (in my mind) and submit it here to the test, just to see if Trump supporters can exhibit some criticism. Case in point, Trump pardoning the war crimes of Navy Seal Operator Eddie Gallagher, even when his own colleagues and army leaders wanted him punished, given that they had plenty of evidence against him.
-
Hi,
I don't really want to intrude here...
Welcome to the Coffee Corner and thanks for your contribution.
-
Welcome to the Coffee Corner and thanks for your contribution.
Thank you!
-
... But lets's try to find a less global issue that it would be hard to justify (in my mind) and submit it here to the test, just to see if Trump supporters can exhibit some criticism. Case in point, Trump pardoning the war crimes of Navy Seal Operator Eddie Gallagher, even when his own colleagues and army leaders wanted him punished, given that they had plenty of evidence against him....
Let's establish some facts here, before we go into criticism.
(Bold mine)
At his court martial, Gallagher was acquitted of murder but demoted in rank for the lesser charge of posing with the body – a decision Trump reversed.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/27/eddie-gallagher-trump-navy-seal-iraq
In other words, he was accused of war crimes, but ultimately acquitted, before Trump intervened.
I am not a legal expert, so don't know if taking a selfie (with a dead terrorist's body) is considered a war crime. If not, than the title of the Guardian article is misleading.
-
Hi,
I don't really want to intrude here, you guys seem to know each other though the forum for a long time but this seems to be the place for political discussions and the opinionated bunch.
I consider myself a Bernie supporter, but in no way submit myself to everything he says with a 100% blind faith as you imply we the "Bernie Bro's" do. In fact I think he has said some really unfortunate stuff that hasn't helped him, not even with a part of his own supporters. I certainly didn't agreed with his wish to outlaw health insurance companies, though I do agree with a socialized health care service that would drive private insurance costs down, as it certainly works in quite a few countries that are not "communists".
His somewhat ambiguous opinions on "left" or communists dictators is not great either. But I get where he's coming from after being a leftists in the U.S politics for so many years. After all, you get Trump saying that Kim Jong-Un is a "great guy" and nobody bats an eye.
Anyway, I felt that he overplayed the radical left card too much but I still supported him, simply because I felt he would need to deal with the government institutions in place and that would balance things out, assuming that a Congress and Senate would actually be willing to reach compromises (isn't that the real fantasy here!).
Regarding what you said about Trump supporters being critic of Trump, I'm afraid that I have the same opinion on that as you have for me, and I wouldn't judge anything trough the eyes of the Twitter micro universe. I can't even find a critic opinion on Trump on this forum from the ones I assume are his supporters, except perhaps you?
For instance I don't really thing that this pandemic is something that was 100% avoidable, but some choices made seem baffling to me, like refusing the virus test from WHO and waisting critical time, and still not being able to keep up with the tests demands, but I can bet i'm going to receive some king of explanation from a Trump supporter here as to why that was the correct thing to do.
But lets's try to find a less global issue that it would be hard to justify (in my mind) and submit it here to the test, just to see if Trump supporters can exhibit some criticism. Case in point, Trump pardoning the war crimes of Navy Seal Operator Eddie Gallagher, even when his own colleagues and army leaders wanted him punished, given that they had plenty of evidence against him.
The shortage of test kits is really due to China's supplies lines being effected by the outbreak. 80% to 90% of the world's pharmaceuticals are, at least in part, made in China. And now, as of today's news, China is threatening to completely cut off those supplies lines unless we thank them and honor them for doing such a great job on controlling the outbreak. Not really sure what they want us to thank them for. Perhaps the fact that they jailed everyone at the beginning who was trying to get the word out (even if only internally), or suppressing all further information, or the fact they have not allowed any help from any outside nations preventing any unbiased news from leaking out, or maybe it would be for the drastic measure of literally welding people into their residences. Who knows, but the shortage of test kits likely can not be blamed on Trump or anyone else outside of China.
Just when I thought my opinion of China could not get any worse. If it were me, I would implement a 200% tariff on all Chinese goods with the exception of pharmaceuticals (putting them between a rock and a hard place), then use emergency powers to allocate necessary drugs to only those 55+ or with preexisting conditions, which are the people this outbreaks seems to be killing. Then work to get a 5 year import tax holiday for all goods produced in Asia outside of China, and totally screw them for this outrage. How dare they ask us to apologize for their massive mishandling of this and then hold us hostage!
I was not aware of the Trump administration specifically refusing test kits from WHO though. However, I did see that the federal government actually shut down testing that had already been put into place for a few stupid reason directly relating to the negatives of an overbearing bureaucracy. For example, right when this broke out, but before it was a big concern, there was a large flu test being done, I believe somewhere in New England. Swabs were taken from test participants and they had to sign a waiver giving permission for the swabs to tested for the flu. The scientists performing this, after the outbreak was picking up traction, decided that it may be good to test the swabs for the COVID19, but were forced not to since the test subjects never sign a wavier for this test. Another, labs that were certified for scientific testing, but not medical, where told not to do any testing for COVID19 even though they have the resources. Just plain stupid.
Furthermore, Trump closing off travel from China was initially criticized as racist (surprise surprise), as is now calling the virus a foreign one. So, like I said, I believe that some criticism of Trump's language on this is warranted, especially when it comes to the inconstancies largely on his twitter feed, but his administration's actions have been on point as far as things are capable from both a logistical and political reality.
But anyway, the Eddie Gallagher example is a head scratcher, especially with his colleagues coming out against it. Of course, Trump is playing to his base here, just like Obama did with the treasonous Chelsea Manning even though the entirety of the US military was against it. The one difference is that Obama waited until his 2nd term to do so, when it did not matter politically. Neither moves were good looking for either president except to his base.
-
Hi,
I don't really want to intrude here, you guys seem to know each other though the forum for a long time but this seems to be the place for political discussions and the opinionated bunch.
I consider myself a Bernie supporter, but in no way submit myself to everything he says with a 100% blind faith as you imply we the "Bernie Bro's" do. In fact I think he has said some really unfortunate stuff that hasn't helped him, not even with a part of his own supporters. I certainly didn't agreed with his wish to outlaw health insurance companies, though I do agree with a socialized health care service that would drive private insurance costs down, as it certainly works in quite a few countries that are not "communists".
His somewhat ambiguous opinions on "left" or communists dictators is not great either. But I get where he's coming from after being a leftists in the U.S politics for so many years. After all, you get Trump saying that Kim Jong-Un is a "great guy" and nobody bats an eye.
Anyway, I felt that he overplayed the radical left card too much but I still supported him, simply because I felt he would need to deal with the government institutions in place and that would balance things out, assuming that a Congress and Senate would actually be willing to reach compromises (isn't that the real fantasy here!).
Regarding what you said about Trump supporters being critic of Trump, I'm afraid that I have the same opinion on that as you have for me, and I wouldn't judge anything trough the eyes of the Twitter micro universe. I can't even find a critic opinion on Trump on this forum from the ones I assume are his supporters, except perhaps you?
For instance I don't really thing that this pandemic is something that was 100% avoidable, but some choices made seem baffling to me, like refusing the virus test from WHO and waisting critical time, and still not being able to keep up with the tests demands, but I can bet i'm going to receive some king of explanation from a Trump supporter here as to why that was the correct thing to do.
But lets's try to find a less global issue that it would be hard to justify (in my mind) and submit it here to the test, just to see if Trump supporters can exhibit some criticism. Case in point, Trump pardoning the war crimes of Navy Seal Operator Eddie Gallagher, even when his own colleagues and army leaders wanted him punished, given that they had plenty of evidence against him.
I think the problem is a deep-seated one perhaps limited, in its extreme, to the States. Why this may be so is difficult to know, but I get the impression that it exists by the very geography of the country: just too big to be able to carry or maintain any real consensus of opinion or judgement across its width. (Hell, much of Europe suffers the same in the north/south directions and, to a lesser degree, east to west too, with tiny Britain having exactly the same problem in microcosm: the language, custom and heritage rift is huge. That's why the Scot Nats exist: they feel ignored by the souther power bulge of London which, ironically, has much the same relationship with the rest of England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well: it lives a distinct life of power and pretty much total control over the rest. Consequently, the rest resents that from the cradle, and that resentment grows as it continues to feel that it is being lied to at every turn.)
So, people have to latch onto some kind of identity that they can recognise from one end of the country to the other. You get a tv entertainer-cum-property speculator with pots of gold, bags of exposure in the celebrity magazines, and that instantly provides a convenient brand name; that's why brands pay a fortune for public exposure wherever the crowds are greatest. Everybody who read Hello magazine or Hola knew about Trump decades before he went political. If Elvis had stood, he'd be on Rushmore today.
So, when you have so many different splinters of interest, folks cluster around any widely identifiable leader or prophet who tells them what they want to hear.
On top of that, there is the amazing reality of absolutely total self-deception, where people without two pennies to rub together stiil believe that, somehow, what's good for the fat cats is also good for them, so they think that paying some private health insurance company (whose sole raison d'être is to maximise profit) is good for them, far better than a genuine, nationally provide, totally inclusive one with an obligation to deliver free at point of requirement. In the blind belief in private medicine, they drive up the cost to what the rich alone can bear, leaving to the poor the scrapings from the bottom of the pot. Yet, they find no paradox in complaining about the high pricing of doctors and dentists. Trickle-down was discredited or at minimum, largely downgraded some time ago: the reality is that the rich get richer and the poor poorer. How can it be otherwise when power resides in the wallets of the rich, another example of the extreme of that being so perfectly at home in America?
So Trump is defended with messianic zeal because he is a nationally (and now internationally) recognised brand, and unlike Coca Cola, has no alternative on the same shelf.
The competition is even worse off: it has pretty much nobody with charisma. All it has are old relics like Sanders, reminiscent of Britain's Michael Foot or - to be honest, I can't come up with a UK equivalent of Biden.
Seldom has such a large and muscular land been so starved of credible giants that would lead it.
Rob
-
... private health insurance company (whose sole raison d'être is to maximise profit)...
It is in the profit interest of the insurance company to put a pressure on providers' pricing.
-
Let's establish some facts here, before we go into criticism.
(Bold mine)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/dec/27/eddie-gallagher-trump-navy-seal-iraq
In other words, he was accused of war crimes, but ultimately acquitted, before Trump intervened.
I am not a legal expert, so don't know if taking a selfie (with a dead terrorist's body) is considered a war crime. If not, than the title of the Guardian article is misleading.
True. No war crimes, at least not legally and if we can ignore all the disturbing stuff that the article says I guess it's just a crime on decorum. Still, why the Trump acquittal? To please the base? Then I can only assume that the base is as fanatic as Joe claims the Bernie base is.
-
True. No war crimes, at least not legally and if we can ignore all the disturbing stuff that the article says I guess it's just a crime on decorum. Still, why the Trump acquittal? To please the base? Then I can only assume that the base is as fanatic as Joe claims the Bernie base is.
Their are supporters, and then there are supporters.
Like I said before, I have yet to meet any Trump people that are on the same level as those who actively go out and rally for Bernie. Those people are nuts. Maybe it is due to the smaller support for Bernie, thus increasing the percentage of zealots of overall Bernie supporters?
I forget which politician said this, but ... if you agree with 7 out of 10 of someone's policies, you should vote for him. If you agree with 10 out of 10, you should be in a mental institution. I have yet to met anyone on the right that fits the latter right now, but the left is filled people who fit this.
-
The shortage of test kits is really due to China's supplies lines being effected by the outbreak. 80% to 90% of the world's pharmaceuticals are, at least in part, made in China. And now, as of today's news, China is threatening to completely cut off those supplies lines unless we thank them and honor them for doing such a great job on controlling the outbreak. Not really sure what they want us to thank them for. Perhaps the fact that they jailed everyone at the beginning who was trying to get the word out (even if only internally), or suppressing all further information, or the fact they have not allowed any help from any outside nations preventing any unbiased news from leaking out, or maybe it would be for the drastic measure of literally welding people into their residences. Who knows, but the shortage of test kits can not be blamed on Trump or anyone else outside of China.
Just when I thought my opinion of China could not get any worse. If it were me, I would implement a 200% tariff on all Chinese goods with the exception of pharmaceuticals (putting them between a rock and a hard place), then use emergency powers to allocate necessary drugs to only those 55+ or with preexisting conditions, which are the people this outbreaks seems to be killing. Then work to get a 5 year import tax holiday for all goods produced in Asia outside of China, and totally screw them for this outrage. How dare they ask us to apologize for their massive mishandling of this and then hold us hostage!
I was not aware of the Trump administration specifically refusing test kits from WHO though.
Furthermore, Trump closing off travel from China was initially criticized as racist (surprise surprise), as is now calling the virus a foreign one. So, like I said, I believe that some criticism of Trump's language on this is warranted, especially when it comes to the inconstancies, but his administration's actions have been on point as far as things are capable from both a logistical and political reality.
But anyway, the Eddie Gallagher example is a head scratcher, especially with his colleagues coming out against it. Of course, Trump is playing to his base here, just like Obama did with the treasonous Chelsea Manning even though the entirety of the US military was against it. The one difference is that Obama waited until his 2nd term to do so, when it did not matter politically. Never moves were good looking for either president.
Your shortage of kits might have something to do with the fact that you never bothered to make any yourselves. Magically, that's somebody else's fault. But of course, you can't blame Trump or yourselves; that would completely shatter your illusion of perpetually being right.
Maybe if the drug companies in the west spent less time manufacturing blue and yellow hard-on pills (or are they imports too?) and more on basic medical solutions for other problems instead, they would have been totally self-sufficient decades ago. After all, they face no need to buy rhino horns. Funny how areas of neglect become somebody else's fault when that neglect comes home to roost.
It surprises me, that dislike for China: when you hit it at every turn at which you think you can without getting a bloodied nose back, what the hell else can you expect from them in return? A bow and a scrape? Disillusion yourself. You see it happen in Europe, too: your Trump encouraged Brexit for the simple reason that he doesn't want a powerful Europe to exist. It's bad enough having to compete with and rely upon China for so many things, but hell, Airbus takes one helluva chunk out of the earlier Boeing monopoly, doesn't it? Having one commercial superpower to compete with is easier than having two or three. On the sidelines, India takes note and discovers how to make Trump feel royal, as Macron did Putin.
Quite why you seem to imagine that the rest of Asia - or the world, for that matter - is still in love with the America of today is quite surprising to an outsider. From being some kind of spiritual guardian of peace, of freedom, you have turned into one of the more bellicose lands of this world, sowing division and discontent like confetti at a wedding. So, did America change recently, or did the scales just fall from foreign eyes? Was the American dream, envied by the rest of the world for so long, just another pile of bullshit?
-
It is in the profit interest of the insurance company to put a pressure on providers' pricing.
The net result being the consumer is fucked twice.
By the way, are you feeling any better today? I tend to solve those cold, chesty symptoms by drinking lots of hot water or hot orange juice diluted in water. Back in the 50s, it was an alternative to Coke in our local café where we would go and have our lunch and illicit cigarettes. I no longer drink tea; it ended up giving me acidic feelings that I did not enjoy.
Rob
P.S.
During Ann's cancer treatment - largely on private insurance - one oncologist told her that he prescribed medications for which the insurance companies did not like to have to pay. On the last treatment, on public health, the new oncologist assured her that she would get whatever drugs she needed, regardless of pricing.
-
Your shortage of kits might have something to do with the fact that you never bothered to make any yourselves. Magically, that's somebody else's fault. But of course, you can't blame Trump or yourselves; that would completely shatter your illusion of perpetually being right.
Maybe if the drug companies in the west spent less time manufacturing blue and yellow hard-on pills (or are they imports too?) and more on basic medical solutions for other problems instead, they would have been totally self-sufficient decades ago. After all, they face no need to buy rhino horns. Funny how areas of neglect become somebody else's fault when that neglect comes home to roost.
It surprises me, that dislike for China: when you hit it at every turn at which you think you can without getting a bloodied nose back, what the hell else can you expect from them in return? A bow and a scrape? Disillusion yourself. You see it happen in Europe, too: your Trump encouraged Brexit for the simple reason that he doesn't want a powerful Europe to exist. It's bad enough having to compete with and rely upon China for so many things, but hell, Airbus takes one helluva chunk out of the earlier Boeing monopoly, doesn't it? Having one commercial superpower to compete with is easier than having two or three. On the sidelines, India takes note and discovers how to make Trump feel royal, as Macron did Putin.
Quite why you seem to imagine that the rest of Asia - or the world, for that matter - is still in love with the America of today is quite surprising to an outsider. From being some kind of spiritual guardian of peace, of freedom, you have turned into one of the more bellicose lands of this world, sowing division and discontent like confetti at a wedding. So, did America change recently, or did the scales just fall from foreign eyes? Was the American dream, envied by the rest of the world for so long, just another pile of bullshit?
America's changing because we're running out of money.
-
I think the problem is a deep-seated one perhaps limited, in its extreme, to the States. Why this may be so is difficult to know, but I get the impression that it exists by the very geography of the country: just too big to be able to carry or maintain any real consensus of opinion or judgement across its width.
If you want to see deep-seated problems read about the arguments that preceded the adoption of our current Constitution. Then read about the arguments that led up to the civil war, and the arguments after that war was over on the subject of Reconstruction. Nothing really has changed. Happily, in the U.S., people can argue -- publicly nowadays on media such as Twitter, Facebook, etc., etc., -- and not have the current version of the Gestapo knocking down their doors. I don't think it's geography, Rob. I think it's an inherited trait -- the one that led to the revolution in the first place. It can be messy, but it's also incredibly productive.
-
The net result being the consumer is fucked twice....
Not really. If your bill seems too large, you call your insurance company and they will, in most cases, negotiate on your behalf to lower the price.
By the way, are you feeling any better today? ...
Not worse, thanks. Dry cough and sore throat still there, and very mild fever (37C or 98.6F). Well, very mild for me, although doctors would not classify that as fever until it is over 100F or 38C.
-
Your shortage of kits might have something to do with the fact that you never bothered to make any yourselves. Magically, that's somebody else's fault. But of course, you can't blame Trump or yourselves; that would completely shatter your illusion of perpetually being right.
Maybe if the drug companies in the west spent less time manufacturing blue and yellow hard-on pills (or are they imports too?) and more on basic medical solutions for other problems instead, they would have been totally self-sufficient decades ago. After all, they face no need to buy rhino horns. Funny how areas of neglect become somebody else's fault when that neglect comes home to roost.
It surprises me, that dislike for China: when you hit it at every turn at which you think you can without getting a bloodied nose back, what the hell else can you expect from them in return? A bow and a scrape? Disillusion yourself. You see it happen in Europe, too: your Trump encouraged Brexit for the simple reason that he doesn't want a powerful Europe to exist. It's bad enough having to compete with and rely upon China for so many things, but hell, Airbus takes one helluva chunk out of the earlier Boeing monopoly, doesn't it? Having one commercial superpower to compete with is easier than having two or three. On the sidelines, India takes note and discovers how to make Trump feel royal, as Macron did Putin.
Quite why you seem to imagine that the rest of Asia - or the world, for that matter - is still in love with the America of today is quite surprising to an outsider. From being some kind of spiritual guardian of peace, of freedom, you have turned into one of the more bellicose lands of this world, sowing division and discontent like confetti at a wedding. So, did America change recently, or did the scales just fall from foreign eyes? Was the American dream, envied by the rest of the world for so long, just another pile of bullshit?
Not sure if you missed this, but 80% to 90% of the world's pharma production comes from China, along with many other things. I know someone in Russia recently who complained about not being able to get a necessary motor part for his car because of the break in China's supply lines. It's everyone's problem, not just the USA's.
Sure, is it partly due to out overall and gradual movement towards being too heavily reliant on China. Sure, but that is not any specific person's fault. However, only Trump decided to question this reliance on a large scale, and we are now finally seeing the consequences.
And what is wrong with helping both men and women who cant get it on to get it on again? ??? Is not sex a healthy and beneficial part of life? But anyway, regardless, I sincerely doubt the research and production that went into blue and yellow pills had any effect on the overall viability of the Pharma industry. As a matter of fact, noting the profits that come from those blue and yellow pills, it only helped them. And last I checked, the Pharma industry is one of the biggest industries in the country and is certainly self-sufficient. The issue here is that they decided to concentrate their supply lines in China.
The bloodied nose you describe from China in this instance is without cause. They started this by being more concerned with the overall opinion of their one party instead of the actual reality of what was going, much like every socialist one-party regime. The fact that they expect us to give into their propaganda is both nefarious and dangerous.
Last, I dont care if the rest of the world is in love with the USA or not. That is not our job to go around pleasing nations, and I would not expect anyone to do so for us. Insofar as Breixt is concerned, the EU does not need Britain to leave to become weak. They are doing that just fine on their own.
-
Their are supporters, and then there are supporters.
Like I said before, I have yet to meet any Trump people that are on the same level as those who actively go out and rally for Bernie. Those people are nuts. Maybe it is due to the smaller support for Bernie, thus increasing the percentage of zealots of overall Bernie supporters?
I forget which politician said this, but ... if you agree with 7 out of 10 of someone's policies, you should vote for him. If you agree with 10 out of 10, you should be in a mental institution. I have yet to met anyone on the right that fits the latter right now, but the left is filled people who fit this.
I think you are generalizing, I definitely believe there are extremists on both sides, but since Trump has way more support than Sanders, then he must have bigger numbers.
-
I think you are generalizing, I definitely believe there are extremists on both sides, but since Trump has way more support than Sanders, then he must have bigger numbers.
But from a percentage wise, it would be lower.
Trump has support from the entirety of Republicans, some of whom are fanatics. Bernie has a much smaller support, mostly from only the left wing of the Democrats, many of whom are the fanatics in that party.
Percentage wise, Bernie will have a higher amount of fanatics, skewing the view of his supporters (and rightly so) as being more fanatical.
-
If you want to see deep-seated problems read about the arguments that preceded the adoption of our current Constitution. Then read about the arguments that led up to the civil war, and the arguments after that war was over on the subject of Reconstruction. Nothing really has changed. Happily, in the U.S., people can argue -- publicly nowadays on media such as Twitter, Facebook, etc., etc., -- and not have the current version of the Gestapo knocking down their doors. I don't think it's geography, Rob. I think it's an inherited trait -- the one that led to the revolution in the first place. It can be messy, but it's also incredibly productive.
We can argue across most of Europe too, without the modern Gestapo dropping in for a free beer.
Considering that the American nation is simply a product of the European ones that conquered the place, the same gene pool pretty much exists elsewhere, too.
Some see America as the greatest melting pot in the world; it's difficult to see that as having also been translated into harmony. To me, that melting pot isn't working in Britain, hasn't worked in Europe. Nothing is going to change the them and us perspective that rules how humans think. Tribal we are, and tribal is different to national, too. Even families sometimes end up killing one another.
It's remarked that no man is an island; I sometimes wonder if he was ever anything but.
Rob
-
We can argue across most of Europe too, without the modern Gestapo dropping in for a free beer.
Considering that the American nation is simply a product of the European ones that conquered the place, the same gene pool pretty much exists elsewhere, too.
Some see America as the greatest melting pot in the world; it's difficult to see that as having also been translated into harmony. To me, that melting pot isn't working in Britain, hasn't worked in Europe. Nothing is going to change the them and us perspective that rules how humans think. Tribal we are, and tribal is different to national, too. Even families sometimes end up killing one another.
It's remarked that no man is an island; I sometimes wonder if he was ever anything but.
Rob
You're missing the fact that nearly every nation on earth is, at least partly, defined by ethnicity. You cant move to Germany and actually be a German without being German. You can't move to Japan and be Japanese without actually being Japanese. Even if this is not completely true politically, it is by the way of our diction.
There is no race that is American by any definition. You can move to America and become, without question, an American.
Additionally, America is not simply a product of Europe. It is the product of people who had the temerity to leave their own country for another unknown one, aka immigrants. Although in Europe, you may have people with that same level of temerity, the concentration of people like this is higher in the USA and other immigrant countries.
-
There is no race that is American by any definition. You can't move to America and become, without question, an American.
Joe, is that what you meant to say? I thought you might want to say that you CAN move to American and become, without question, an American. (At least, it's my opinion that you can.)
I agree the Bernie Bros are nuts. They're the people I knew back in college who could see no wrong in Castro, the Sandinistas, etc., even Russia, although later, Pol Pot somewhat shut them up. But, on the whole, I don't think they're as bad as the Trumpers. Huge crowds of people chanting "Lock her up?" Trump's rallies distinctly resemble the Italian Fascist rallies of the 1930s, and attract the same kind of people. IMHO. No replies necessary.
A question I haven't seen asked: I wonder if the Chinese will restrict the eating of wild animals? This is the third or fourth disease in the past few years to make the jump from "bush meat" to humans. (SARS, MERS, Ebola.) Can you imagine what would have happened if any of those had happened to have the same ability to spread as COVID-19? MERS has something like a 30% mortality rate. We would have been piling bodies in the streets. I wonder if the Chinese have done anything about restricting it?
-
Not sure if you missed this, but 80% to 90% of the world's pharma production comes from China, along with many other things. I know someone in Russia recently who complained about not being able to get a necessary motor part for his car because of the break in China's supply lines. It's everyone's problem, not just the USA's.
Sure, is it partly due to out overall and gradual movement towards being too heavily reliant on China. Sure, but that is not any specific person's fault. However, only Trump decided to question this reliance on a large scale, and we are now finally seeing the consequences.
And what is wrong with helping both men and women who cant get it on to get it on again? ??? Is not sex a healthy and beneficial part of life? But anyway, regardless, I sincerely doubt the research and production that went into blue and yellow pills had any effect on the overall viability of the Pharma industry. As a matter of fact, noting the profits that come from those blue and yellow pills, it only helped them. And last I checked, the Pharma industry is one of the biggest industries in the country and is certainly self-sufficient. The issue here is that they decided to concentrate their supply lines in China.
The bloodied nose you describe from China in this instance is without cause. They started this by being more concerned with the overall opinion of their one party instead of the actual reality of what was going, much like every socialist one-party regime. The fact that they expect us to give into their propaganda is both nefarious and dangerous.
Last, I dont care if the rest of the world is in love with the USA or not. That is not our job to go around pleasing nations, and I would not expect anyone to do so for us. Insofar as Breixt is concerned, the EU does not need Britain to leave to become weak. They are doing that just fine on their own.
That the rest of the world can be as negligent as the USA regarding medical self-sufficiency in no way excuses America; in fact, as the world's richest state, it is even more worthy of blame for such ineptitude.
How on Earth can you simultaneously claim the American pharma industry is self-sufficient, and immediately follow that by declaring they depend on foreign supply lines? This is beginning to read like a post from the rubber man. You either are self-sufficient or you have dependency. You have stated both to be the case... there can be no grey areas to self-sufficiency; like virginity, it's an absolute.
Indeed it's a huge industry; in the past, GSK served this family well over many years.
If you insist in comparing China's political state with your own national political state, please explain the difference between Chinese denials and Trumpian ones, when the rest of your country was only too aware of the inevitability of spread? In one instance it's a blanket, state denial and in the other an individual's denial. Much as with climate change denial and its causes. A massive difference between your countries is that in China it's policy from little red books, whereas in yours, it's policy on the hoof out of twitter, scientific experts silenced or ignored in both cases. But don't think I am being superior here: Britain is running policy, as of a few days ago, on massive debt that it spent several iterations of Conservative rule trying to eliminate, so there you have us: the bluest of our blues now adopting the reddest of socialist solutions: visit the pawn shop.
:-)
-
Joe, is that what you meant to say? I thought you might want to say that you CAN move to American and become, without question, an American. (At least, it's my opinion that you can.)
I agree the Bernie Bros are nuts. They're the people I knew back in college who could see no wrong in Castro, the Sandinistas, etc., even Russia, although later, Pol Pot somewhat shut them up. But, on the whole, I don't think they're as bad as the Trumpers. Huge crowds of people chanting "Lock her up?" Trump's rallies distinctly resemble the Italian Fascist rallies of the 1930s, and attract the same kind of people. IMHO. No replies necessary.
A question I haven't seen asked: I wonder if the Chinese will restrict the eating of wild animals? This is the third or fourth disease in the past few years to make the jump from "bush meat" to humans. (SARS, MERS, Ebola.) Can you imagine what would have happened if any of those had happened to have the same ability to spread as COVID-19? MERS has something like a 30% mortality rate. We would have been piling bodies in the streets. I wonder if the Chinese have done anything about restricting it?
Oops, what you wrote is what I meant, and corrected it.
Insofar as eating wild animals, I have read they are trying to restrict this. But there are a few problems here.
One is cultural; how do you change the culture of an extremely large population especially when eating is necessary. I was watching a documentary on Rhino poaching and someone made the point that there are more people in world who believe in the mythical powers of horn dust then Christians. It's not easy to change the culture of that many people even when it comes to something unnecessary. So with food, it would be incredibly hard.
Second, much of the rural population in China is impoverished. Being so, what other sources of protein do they have access to?
Even in more urban areas, they have incredibly bad farming practices that puts different species in direct contact with each other in crammed conditions. This creates the perfect situation for different virus to mutate and jump species. At any farm I have been to here that has different types of animals, they are all separated by species.
-
That the rest of the world can be as negligent as the USA regarding medical self-sufficiency in no way excuses America; in fact, as the world's richest state, it is even more worthy of blame for such ineptitude.
<snip>
If you insist in comparing China's political state with your own national political state, please explain the difference between Chinese denials and Trumpian ones, when the rest of your country was only too aware of the inevitability of spread? In one instance it's a blanket, state denial and in the other an individual's denial. Much as with climate change denial and its causes. A massive difference between your countries is that in China it's policy from little red books, whereas in yours, it's policy on the hoof out of twitter, scientific experts silenced or ignored in both cases. But don't think I am being superior here: Britain is running policy, as of a few days ago, on massive debt that it spent several iterations of Conservative rule trying to eliminate, so there you have us: the bluest of our blues now adopting the reddest of socialist solutions: visit the pawn shop.
:-)
One big difference between the US and China is that nowhere in the world is the criticism of Trump and his administration as loud, persistent and ugly as it is in the US (as you can see from some folks, like me, on this forum.) And we do it without fear of retribution. And we may take Trump's job away from him, which would be a decision by the people, as opposed to a decision by his party, as it would be in the case of Xi, where the people have little voice.
-
You're missing the fact that nearly every nation on earth is, at least partly, defined by ethnicity. You cant move to Germany and actually be a German without being German. You can't move to Japan and be Japanese without actually being Japanese. Even if this is not completely true politically, it is by the way of our diction.
There is no race that is American by any definition. You can't move to America and become, without question, an American.
Additionally, America is not simply a product of Europe. It is the product of people who had the temerity to leave their own country for another unknown one, aka immigrants. Although in Europe, you may have people with that same level of temerity, the concentration of people like this is higher.
Of course it's a product of the European gene pools! That you have a few native Americans that you spent your best early (?) efforts trying to drive into the swamps, up the mountains or into the seas doesn't indicate any great desire to assimilate or integrate... folks from south of the border, from north of the border, all of them have had a helluva tough time hanging on. Listen to some Cajun or Texan songs.
Actually, the "temerity" to leave Europe was often more a reality of getting chucked out: we invented the concept of modern exile, as we invented Australia, but I leave claims to the biblical one elsewhere.
Funnily enough, many Brits have suddenly become Spanish. Yes, you certainly can become anything you want to become if the country permits it.
-
A question I haven't seen asked: I wonder if the Chinese will restrict the eating of wild animals? This is the third or fourth disease in the past few years to make the jump from "bush meat" to humans. (SARS, MERS, Ebola.) Can you imagine what would have happened if any of those had happened to have the same ability to spread as COVID-19? MERS has something like a 30% mortality rate. We would have been piling bodies in the streets. I wonder if the Chinese have done anything about restricting it?
I saw a special, don't remember where, maybe on YouTube actually, dealing with this issue. I think the government has steeply increased jail time and fines for the illegal trade of endangered species like the pangolin, but that hasn't stopped the black market. It's a big cultural problem linked to showing their newly acquired fortunes (since none of this meat is cheap). They can't seem to stop wanting to eat every creature that roams the earth.
-
Of course it's a product of the European gene pools! That you have a few native Americans that you spent your best early (?) efforts trying to drive into the swamps, up the mountains or into the seas doesn't indicate any great desire to assimilate or integrate... folks from south of the border, from north of the border, all of them have had a helluva tough time hanging on. Listen to some Cajun or Texan songs.
Actually, the "temerity" to leave Europe was often more a reality of getting chucked out: we invented the concept of modern exile, as we invented Australia, but I leave claims to the biblical one elsewhere.
Funnily enough, many Brits have suddenly become Spanish. Yes, you certainly can become anything you want to become if the country permits it.
As a gene pool, maybe we are mostly European. From a cultural perspective, especially when it comes to being risk adverse, we are not European.
And last I checked, not many convicts were forcibly sent to the USA. Nearly all of our emigrants came here voluntarily. I cant speak for Australia, but I would assume the stereotype of it being a convict country is greatly over blown as well.
Last, like I said, politically maybe you can became anything you want. But will you actually be accepted as that? How many pure blood Anglo-Saxons do you know that have become Spanish citizens are actually regarded as being really Spanish by their fully ethnically Spanish countrymen?
I know many non-native Americans that I fully regard as Americans. I think it is reasonable to say this is a big cultural difference between the USA (and perhaps Australia and Canada) then most other countries. The simple fact that by definition there is no ethnic American or Australian or Canadian makes it easier on a language level to accept anyone as being one of those. My point being, the melting pot in Europe may not be working so well, as you claim, but that in the USA, and other countries, we have an advantage of diction not actively working against it.
Now being considered a true Philadelphian without being born and raised in the city, that's another question. ;)
-
That the rest of the world can be as negligent as the USA regarding medical self-sufficiency in no way excuses America; in fact, as the world's richest state, it is even more worthy of blame for such ineptitude.
How on Earth can you simultaneously claim the American pharma industry is self-sufficient, and immediately follow that by declaring they depend on foreign supply lines? This is beginning to read like a post from the rubber man. You either are self-sufficient or you have dependency. You have stated both to be the case... there can be no grey areas to self-sufficiency; like virginity, it's an absolute.
Indeed it's a huge industry; in the past, GSK served this family well over many years.
If you insist in comparing China's political state with your own national political state, please explain the difference between Chinese denials and Trumpian ones, when the rest of your country was only too aware of the inevitability of spread? In one instance it's a blanket, state denial and in the other an individual's denial. Much as with climate change denial and its causes. A massive difference between your countries is that in China it's policy from little red books, whereas in yours, it's policy on the hoof out of twitter, scientific experts silenced or ignored in both cases. But don't think I am being superior here: Britain is running policy, as of a few days ago, on massive debt that it spent several iterations of Conservative rule trying to eliminate, so there you have us: the bluest of our blues now adopting the reddest of socialist solutions: visit the pawn shop.
:-)
Rob, by your definition of self-sufficiency, no company or industry is the world then is. My definition of self-sufficiency is that the company can operate without the need for any outside funds that do not come from sales over the long term, and has nothing to do with getting necessary sources from other countries. Simply put, their revenues are higher then their costs, thus producing profits. By that definition, Pharma is one of the most self-sufficient industries, and they pay damn well for photography.
Insofar as your comparison between China politics vs Trump's, note James' post. I may be a republican, but I agree with his main point of our freedom vs. China's repression.
-
1. Rob, by your definition of self-sufficiency, no company or industry is the world then is. 2. My definition of self-sufficiency is that the company can operate without the need for any outside funds that do not come from sales over the long term, and has nothing to do with getting necessary sources from other countries. 3. Simply put, their revenues are higher then their costs, thus producing profits. By that definition, Pharma is one of the most self-sufficient industries, and they pay damn well for photography.
4. Insofar as your comparison between China politics vs Trump's, note James' post. I may be a republican, but I agree with his main point of our freedom vs. China's repression.
1. Exactly.
2. So why do they need a friendly bank manager or dozen?
3. That simply means they are not running at a loss.
4. That's not the point, whether one system is more "free" than the other; the point is that both of them instinctively lied and went into immediate denial. Both can be painted black.
-
I saw a special, don't remember where, maybe on YouTube actually, dealing with this issue. I think the government has steeply increased jail time and fines for the illegal trade of endangered species like the pangolin, but that hasn't stopped the black market. It's a big cultural problem linked to showing their newly acquired fortunes (since none of this meat is cheap). They can't seem to stop wanting to eat every creature that roams the earth.
I guess this should really be over on the other thread about COVID-19 but I saw this NPR report, https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/01/31/800975655/why-theyre-called-wet-markets-and-what-health-risks-they-might-pose (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/01/31/800975655/why-theyre-called-wet-markets-and-what-health-risks-they-might-pose) about so-called "wet" markets.
And I also saw an online video, may have been this one from CNN https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/05/asia/china-coronavirus-wildlife-consumption-ban-intl-hnk/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/05/asia/china-coronavirus-wildlife-consumption-ban-intl-hnk/index.html), but I'm not sure. I no longer have the original link.
The upshot is that wild meat trade has been stopped then restarted in the past, not clear to me if it is actually stopped now.
-
1. Exactly.
2. So why do they need a friendly bank manager or dozen?
3. That simply means they are not running at a loss.
4. That's not the point, whether one system is more "free" than the other; the point is that both of them instinctively lied and went into immediate denial. Both can be painted black.
They all rely on good highways, a legal system that works, air traffic regulations, police forces that actually go after crooks, etc. To a greater or lesser extent, these "externalities" are paid for by someone other than the companies themselves. Taxpayers end up picking up the cost of environmental clean-up in many localities because no one can track down the commercial entities that were required to clean up after themselves in the first, sometimes because enforcement was reduced because of inadequate public budgets. Corporate lobbying in these administrations is often implicated. None of this is news.
Here in Canada we stopped subsidizing the rail system a while back (or I should say, we were told that they stopped subsidizing them but who knows to what extent), so now our highways are clogged with trucks 24/7, from which we all derive both benefits and huge headaches, and they are not built and maintained by the sales of companies' goods and services, although in part they are because trucking companies pay highway fees. Financial industries benefit from the face that profits derived from capital markets are taxed at a lower rate than income earned in labour markets. In the case of the 2008 crash, some ill thought out deregulation helped.
Society is not a support system for commerce; free market commerce and its governing rules are something the culture created to provide goods and services for us. We often seem to forget who is primal in the arrangement.
-
1. Exactly.
2. So why do they need a friendly bank manager or dozen?
3. That simply means they are not running at a loss.
4. That's not the point, whether one system is more "free" than the other; the point is that both of them instinctively lied and went into immediate denial. Both can be painted black.
1. Differences of opinion I guess.
2. Becuase sometimes you need credit to accomplish things. Do you disagree? Do you think we should do everything with cash then? Did you buy your house with cash, no mortgage?
3. Yep, which pretty much mean profits.
4. That is the point. Aside from full out revolutions, one-party regimes are not accountable. Here in the USA, our politicians are accountable every 4, or 6, years.
-
1. Differences of opinion I guess.
2. Becuase sometimes you need credit to accomplish things. Do you disagree? Do you think we should do everything with cash then? Did you buy your house with cash, no mortgage?
3. Yep, which pretty much mean profits.
4. That is the point. Aside from full out revolutions, one-party regimes are not accountable. Here in the USA, our politicians are accountable every 4, or 6, years.
2. If self-sufficient, of course I would buy by cash; credit always costs you more: it's why banks lend. Yes, I bought my present apartment without a mortgage back in '81.
4. No, that's notthe point: the point was and remains that both systems, yours and China's, to the level of daily practice, both lie and go into denial about anything that doesn't suit their propaganda. It matters not, in this context (which is coronavirus), whether one system is easier or more difficult to replace: their behaviour in this instance is identical.
Rob
P.S.
I really must get off this office chair and retreat to the sofa and the iPad and watch some mind-numbing nonsense for an hour or two; at the moment, that is being taken care of by Justified, which is actually quite funny at times. The pilot show was pretty much an enjoyable action event, but as the first series progresses, more and more is it becoming a spoof.
;-)
-
P.S.
I really must get off this office chair and retreat to the sofa and the iPad and watch some mind-numbing nonsense for an hour or two; at the moment, that is being taken care of by Justified, which is actually quite funny at times. The pilot show was pretty much an enjoyable action event, but as the first series progresses, more and more is it becoming a spoof.
;-)
Try Breaking Bad. I had zero desire to watch but a binge came on recently and my wife wanted to see what it was about. So we watched, and could’nt stop. Weird premise. Superb acting and storyline. Glad I watched in the end.
-
Try Breaking Bad. I had zero desire to watch but a binge came on recently and my wife wanted to see what it was about. So we watched, and could’nt stop. Weird premise. Superb acting and storyline. Glad I watched in the end.
I have that series, Craig, but after a few episodes I found that I could not gel with the characters at all. The rest of the family thought it wonderful, but I couldn't get into their mindset with it.
I enjoy the Italian Montalbano and Gomorrah quite alot, as well as the French duo Engrenages and Braquo; House, of course. The Shield was quite a fast-paced watch too. Of the Americans, I think I liked Sopranos the most.
Rob
-
This thread, TV, DVD, Steaming, Boxed Sets... (https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=126348.0) could help those in self isolation.
-
I have that series, Craig, but after a few episodes I found that I could not gel with the characters at all...
That isn't too surprising for those with a strong anti-American sentiment. The series relies heavily on American cultural symbols, for which you need to either live there, or, as a minimum, have some knowledge and affinity toward American way of life.
-
That isn't too surprising for those with a strong anti-American sentiment. The series relies heavily on American cultural symbols, for which you need to either live there, or, as a minimum, have some knowledge and affinity toward American way of life.
Then why on Earth would I not be able to get into it?
Perhaps you don't quite get the difference between being anti-something, and liking something - but not being blind to its many flaws? You are presenting life as binary, as either black or white; it clearly is not.
For myself, living part of my early life in India, I was exposed to far more Americana than Raj; we drove in V8 Fords, not toy Brit cars of the period; I saw more Studebakers, Hudsons, Buicks, Pontiacs, Chevrolets, Chryslers and DeSotos than Triumphs or Jaguars (can't remember a single one of those) or Rileys, though one poor guy had a Morris. The news and movie magazines were all American ones as was most the music coming over Radio Ceylon, the reincarnation of Radio SEAC. I loved all of that and it influenced me greatly. Hollywood... some of us in boarding school ran the risk of getting our asses caned for sneaking out to go to the movies and watch - that need to sneak out a result of the darker side of US and Australian life: radical Christianity and its missionaries, a travesty of the God they presented as one of love but that they cloaked in fire, brimstone and fear. New generations of those cats are alive and flourishing in America and American politics.
I remember once writing here that I thought Americans had a wonderful country - not to let it disappear. Perhaps it has lost that fight, or at least, this round.
Rob
-
That isn't too surprising for those with a strong anti-American sentiment. The series relies heavily on American cultural symbols, for which you need to either live there, or, as a minimum, have some knowledge and affinity toward American way of life.
I've no great affinity with, love of, or knowledge of the American way of life but thoroughly enjoyed Breaking Bad.
-
That isn't too surprising for those with a strong anti-American sentiment.
Nonsense, that's yet another strawman.... There are very few people here with Anti-American sentiments.
If one challenges actions that defy logic, or morality, or whatever, in the eyes of others, then that's what it is. Nothing to do with Anti-Americanism.
-
I have that series, Craig, but after a few episodes I found that I could not gel with the characters at all. The rest of the family thought it wonderful, but I couldn't get into their mindset with it.
I enjoy the Italian Montalbano and Gomorrah quite alot, as well as the French duo Engrenages and Braquo; House, of course. The Shield was quite a fast-paced watch too. Of the Americans, I think I liked Sopranos the most.
Rob
Too violent and depressing for me. I do think Bryan Cranston is a great actor.
-
Too violent and depressing for me. I do think Bryan Cranston is a great actor.
I'd go one further, Sharon, and say that, in general, even supporting actors in all of these series are incredibly good. It looks like the fate of being a star or a support is nothing more than supreme good fortune and active agents representing you!
I get the same impression listening to many backing singers.
So much talent out there.
Rob
-
I'd go one further, Sharon, and say that, in general, even supporting actors in all of these series are incredibly good. It looks like the fate of being a star or a support is nothing more than supreme good fortune and active agents representing you!
I get the same impression listening to many backing singers.
So much talent out there.
Rob
A bit off-topic maybe but we probably need a break. We watched the first season of Breaking Bad, terrific nihilist theme, enjoyment having little to do with being either pro- or anti-American, assuming that has any real meaning. It was good drama, period. Is Hamlet pro- or anti-Danish? :)
I thought the series was a bit instructive about the drug culture though, as it does not depict it as a supply-side problem, i.e., bad things that "other" people do to us, but rather portrays it as a commodities market, albeit one ruled by the logic criminal gangs. The best dope floats to the top, is that the new American dream? It sure ain't Disney.
Two terrific HBO series were The Wire and Treme, both by the same production team that did NBC's Homicide, Life on the Street. Both were riveting in their own way, though The Wire may have more violence than some people are comfortable with, though never gratuitous.
There is another American drama series, The Sinner, that we enjoyed the first two seasons of so far. There is crime and a tiny amount of on-screen violence but they were really long-form character-driven drama, the best kind of drama for TV. Dense writing, lots happening between the ears, a lot like the best of British drama.
Speaking of which, the 3 British police series Shetland, Vera, and Line of Duty are all very good. The first two are in the tradition of Morse, central detective character and the entourage, police procedural but again with lots happening between the ears. Line of Duty is a fantastic thriller. The interrogation scenes alone are gold.
We're halfway through another British series, Bancroft. Good but not quite first rate, but could get there.
Covid-19 might be good business for Netflix, Acorn, etc.
-
A bit off-topic maybe but we probably need a break. We watched the first season of Breaking Bad, terrific nihilist theme, enjoyment having little to do with being either pro- or anti-American, assuming that has any real meaning. It was good drama, period. Is Hamlet pro- or anti-Danish? :)
I thought the series was a bit instructive about the drug culture though, as it does not depict it as a supply-side problem, i.e., bad things that "other" people do to us, but rather portrays it as a commodities market, albeit one ruled by the logic criminal gangs. The best dope floats to the top, is that the new American dream? It sure ain't Disney.
Two terrific HBO series were The Wire and Treme, both by the same production team that did NBC's Homicide, Life on the Street. Both were riveting in their own way, though The Wire may have more violence than some people are comfortable with, though never gratuitous.
There is another American drama series, The Sinner, that we enjoyed the first two seasons of so far. There is crime and a tiny amount of on-screen violence but they were really long-form character-driven drama, the best kind of drama for TV. Dense writing, lots happening between the ears, a lot like the best of British drama.
Speaking of which, the 3 British police series Shetland, Vera, and Line of Duty are all very good. The first two are in the tradition of Morse, central detective character and the entourage, police procedural but again with lots happening between the ears. Line of Duty is a fantastic thriller. The interrogation scenes alone are gold.
We're halfway through another British series, Bancroft. Good but not quite first rate, but could get there.
Covid-19 might be good business for Netflix, Acorn, etc.
I've got quite a few Brit series available to me courtesy the family, but I can't raise enthusiasm to watch. It might be familiarity breeding contempt, but the accents drive me nuts. As much as I dislike the old, 40s- 70s television news reader voices, the recent vogue for thickish regional offerings - a sop to political correctness and faux equality - makes me switch right off. I dislike the murdering of the English language and the modern affliction of all-inclusivity. Frankly, I have a lot of faith in some forms of elitism, believing that there is more to be gained by good example than bad.
Another series for which I have access but not desire is Game of Thrones. Watched one or two, and thought nope, c'est pas pour moi.
I must have massive receptor failings.
:-(
-
I've got quite a few Brit series available to me courtesy the family, but I can't raise enthusiasm to watch. It might be familiarity breeding contempt, but the accents drive me nuts. As much as I dislike the old, 40s- 70s television news reader voices, the recent vogue for thickish regional offerings - a sop to political correctness and faux equality - makes me switch right off. I dislike the murdering of the English language and the modern affliction of all-inclusivity. Frankly, I have a lot of faith in some forms of elitism, believing that there is more to be gained by good example than bad.
Another series for which I have access but not desire is Game of Thrones. Watched one or two, and thought nope, c'est pas pour moi.
I must have massive receptor failings.
:-(
I’m with you, Rob. Neither Breaking Bad nor GoT really grabbed me. You’ve probably seen the recent BBC Sherlock series with Benedict Cumberbatch? If not, it’s some good stuff. I’ve also really enjoyed an American network comedy called “The Good Place.” And “Mad Men” is dear to me. And a little too close to reality ;)
-
Oh, absolutely!
The left has stretched the definition of racism so much that everything they don't like is "racist." It lost its power. Cliche. Worn-out.
But we had this discussions many forum posts ago. For example, that Mexican judge... When a Supreme Court Justice claims that a Latina judge will always make a better decision than a white judge... what's that? I would say her opinion, but if you want equivalence within your stretched definitions, that's racism.
FWIW I don’t think it’s a stretch to consider Sotamayor’s comments “racist” in that instance. There’s a caveat, though, which I’ll go into when I’m off my iPad and back onto a desktop.
-
Another series for which I have access but not desire is Game of Thrones. Watched one or two, and thought nope, c'est pas pour moi.
I must have massive receptor failings.
:-(
The door of the lighthouse was ajar. They pushed it open and walked
into a shuttered twilight. Through an archway on the further side of
the room they could see the bottom of the staircase that led up to the
higher floors. Just under the crown of the arch dangled a pair of feet.
"Mr. Savage!"
Slowly, very slowly, like two unhurried compass needles, the feet
turned towards the right; north, north-east, east, south-east, south,
south-south-west; then paused, and, after a few seconds, turned as
unhurriedly back towards the left. South-south-west, south, south-
east, east. ...
]
I read this stuff some years ago. Welcome to the new world.
Take care...
-
FWIW I don’t think it’s a stretch to consider Sotamayor’s comments “racist” in that instance. There’s a caveat, though, which I’ll go into when I’m off my iPad and back onto a desktop.
If a white judge had said that he thought that white people make better judges because of this that or something else, we would consider that a racist remark. We shouldn't be defining ourselves as better than others based on race. I thought we're past that already. In America, each person stands on their own.
But I understand where she was going with that. That her experiences as a Latina gave her a different perspective in deciding cases. Actually more than the race question is another more important consideration. Her point was that her experiences as a Latina would help her arrive at decisions that non Latinos wouldn't consider. So what she said was that experiences count more than what the Constitution says. This idea we can throw the constitution away and decide based on experiences and feelings is what legislating from the bench is all about. It ignores what the constitution means. Justices should not be doing that. They are not there to make moral judgments but rather legal ones.
-
It might be familiarity breeding contempt, but the accents drive me nuts. As much as I dislike the old, 40s- 70s television news reader voices, the recent vogue for thickish regional offerings - a sop to political correctness and faux equality - makes me switch right off.
If you think you have difficulty with British regional accents, imagine what it's like for people here in the States. My wife and I routinely switch on the "closed captions" when watching TV series from the U.K. One need go no further for proof of Shaw's quip about two countries separated by a common language.
On the other hand, neither of us has much difficulty understanding the dialogue in the occasional dramatic imports from Australia or New Zealand that show up on our cable TV service. Although our accents are different, perhaps we colonials all share some sort of underlying common speech pattern.
What really impresses me, though, is how perfectly British actors, as well as those from down under, routinely learn to mimic an American accent. I'm often surprised to discover that an actor who speaks what my radio voice coach used to call "classic Midwestern" (the U.S. broadcast industry's equivalent of the Beeb's former standard for spoken English) actually spent his or her formative years an ocean away from here. Some of our thicker regional dialects―e.g., from Appalachia―pose more of a challenge, but they're typically difficult for American actors, too.
Unfortunately, this linguistic virtuosity only seems to cross the Atlantic in one direction. We've seen a couple of plays in London theaters with a cast that included American actors, and their attempts to sound British were pathetic.
-
If you think you have difficulty with British regional accents, imagine what it's like for people here in the States. My wife and I routinely switch on the "closed captions" when watching TV series from the U.K. One need go no further for proof of Shaw's quip about two countries separated by a common language.
On the other hand, neither of us has much difficulty understanding the dialogue in the occasional dramatic imports from Australia or New Zealand that show up on our cable TV service. Although our accents are different, perhaps we colonials all share some sort of underlying common speech pattern.
What really impresses me, though, is how perfectly British actors, as well as those from down under, routinely learn to mimic an American accent. I'm often surprised to discover that an actor who speaks what my radio voice coach used to call "classic Midwestern" (the U.S. broadcast industry's equivalent of the Beeb's former standard for spoken English) actually spent his or her formative years an ocean away from here. Some of our thicker regional dialects―e.g., from Appalachia―pose more of a challenge, but they're typically difficult for American actors, too.
Unfortunately, this linguistic virtuosity only seems to cross the Atlantic in one direction. We've seen a couple of plays in London theaters with a cast that included American actors, and their attempts to sound British were pathetic.
Maybe because like the Australians and New Zealanders, we too are British outcasts. :)
-
We love the mystery series Vera set in Northumberland. We had to buy a new tv to understand some of the actors. It did help a little.
-
I’m with you, Rob. Neither Breaking Bad nor GoT really grabbed me. You’ve probably seen the recent BBC Sherlock series with Benedict Cumberbatch? If not, it’s some good stuff. I’ve also really enjoyed an American network comedy called “The Good Place.” And “Mad Men” is dear to me. And a little too close to reality ;)
Taste's an odd thing, isn't it? I found GoT gripped me almost from the outset and didn't let go (until the slightly disappointing 7th series and the hugely disappointing 8th): as my wife was away, I binged through 60 hours in only a little over a month. In contrast, I found Sherlock irritating beyond measure and I couldn't see the comedy in The Good Place.
Breaking Bad and Mad Men are on my list, as are The Wire (with subtitles, as the one episode I watched might as well have been in ancient Greek) and, as I very much enjoyed the original, the US version of House of Cards.
I do recommend Succession, too. I've not reached the end yet, but it's awfully good.
Jeremy
-
We love the mystery series Vera set in Northumberland. We had to buy a new tv to understand some of the actors. It did help a little.
A good sound system matters, but I'm finding more and more that the "dramatic" musical score interferes with voices. It might be my aging hearing. It's especially bad when actors are speaking softly to each other, in full keeping with the conversation, but if you're going to do that, turn off the damn music. I can tell when a plot turns dramatic, you don't need to hit me over the head with it.
If you like Vera, you'll probably like Shetland.
-
I’ll check that out Robert.
-
A good sound system matters, but I'm finding more and more that the "dramatic" musical score interferes with voices. It might be my aging hearing. It's especially bad when actors are speaking softly to each other, in full keeping with the conversation, but if you're going to do that, turn off the damn music. I can tell when a plot turns dramatic, you don't need to hit me over the head with it.
If you like Vera, you'll probably like Shetland.
I bought a speaker bar that has a switch that amplifies voices while keep background sounds down. I too have age hearing problems with background noise. The sound bar helps a little. If I still can't hear, I'll switch the captions on.
-
I've no great affinity with, love of, or knowledge of the American way of life but thoroughly enjoyed Breaking Bad.
"The Wire" was a far better show and covered more interesting things. I enjoyed Breaking Bad but I think the prequel, Better Call Saul is more nuanced.
-
Covid-19 might be good business for Netflix, Acorn, etc.
Berlin Babylon on Netflix is wonderful. Third season just dropped about a week ago. It is reportedly the most expensive television project produced in Germany.
-
"The Wire" was a far better show and covered more interesting things. I enjoyed Breaking Bad but I think the prequel, Better Call Saul is more nuanced.
Yup, I also enjoyed Better Call Saul.
-
"The Wire" was a far better show and covered more interesting things. I enjoyed Breaking Bad but I think the prequel, Better Call Saul is more nuanced.
I have 'Saul too, but didn't follow through on that one, either.
All that said, with enforced isolation beginning here in Spain, it may be the time when this beggar has no choice but to dip in again. It's also possible that mood-at-moment-of-consumption plays a part in receptivity. We'll probably find out soon enough.
But hey, as long as the CC remains open for business...
:-)
-
I have 'Saul too, but didn't follow through on that one, either.
All that said, with enforced isolation beginning here in Spain, it may be the time when this beggar has no choice but to dip in again. It's also possible that mood-at-moment-of-consumption plays a part in receptivity. We'll probably find out soon enough.
It won't be long until enforced isolation comes to the UK.
In terms of photography this should have been a busy time for yours truly, but illness meant the cancellation of an extended trip to India earlier in the year and thanks to Covid 19 the last couple of days has seen the cancellation of trips to Morocco and Greece.
F*^k it, it seems like those boxed sets are coming out yet again!
-
And then for something more off the wall there is Grand Tour and the original Top Gear. The three lads are quite amusing and the cars delightful. Even my wife finds them enjoyable.
-
Eagerly awaiting the new tv series Covid 19.
Not!
-
Eagerly awaiting the new tv series Covid 19.
Let's hope we're around for Covid 21. Reminds me of the old joke about the Pentagon containing the pessimists planning for World War III and the optimists planning for World War IV.
Jeremy
-
Let's hope we're around for Covid 21. Reminds me of the old joke about the Pentagon containing the pessimists planning for World War III and the optimists planning for World War IV.
Jeremy
Pity they didn't plan for Nature's war on us all!
:-)
-
Let's hope we're around for Covid 21. Reminds me of the old joke about the Pentagon containing the pessimists planning for World War III and the optimists planning for World War IV.
Jeremy
Ha-ha.
Good one
-
Ha-ha.
Good one
"Оптимисты учат английский язык, пессимисты китайский, а реалисты изучают автомат Калашникова?" (ц) xUSSR
optimists learn English, pessimists - Chinese, realists - AK47
-
As told on Radio Yerevan:
Question: What is worse than a young pessimist?
Answer: An old optimist
-
Pessimist: things are so bad, they can’t get any worse!
Optimist: oh, yes, they can!
-
Pessimist: things are so bad, they can’t get any worse!
Optimist: oh, yes, they can!
Good one!
;-)