Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 663 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: My Question I’ve never been able to answer #139551
    waterfield
    Participant

    Interesting that Jesus never, ever mentions abortion, contraception, or gay people. Not once. So these right-wing evangelicals who say they’re just following their lord’s words . . . aren’t. They’re getting it from somewhere else. They’re also not getting “life begins at conception” from the Bible, cuz the Jews of that time believed life begins with first breath. That’s still the orthodox view. Etc. etc. In general, I think some people are drawing the wrong lesson from Trump’s rise, and the effectiveness of propaganda overall. And, to me, this has always been incredibly obvious, but it’s forever missed: If a Trump can sell a shit sandwich, and make people love it, that means a skillful salesperson can also sell really great stuff, like the Green New Deal, guaranteed jobs at a living wage, free public schools, cradle to grave, and M4A, for starters. It’s always frustrated the hell out of me that far too many Americans think the horrific success of the right means the Dems need to go further to the right to win. No. They just need to find their own charismatic leaders, movers, shakers, etc. etc. . . . and at least match the right’s all too effective messaging, sales, and marketing. If they do that, America can have really nice things. If they continue with the Republican Lite, it can’t, and people will just vote for the real thing, not the knock-off anyway.

     

    I think what your saying Billy is the Progressives need a good looking, smart, great personality, sense of humor, war veteran who was injured in action, tough

    You know a progressive JFK

    in reply to: My Question I’ve never been able to answer #139538
    waterfield
    Participant

    He’s a snake oil salesman.  And that is precisely what the progressives need. That’s the world we live in and we better get on board.

    in reply to: The coup attempt was much worse than we thought. #139482
    waterfield
    Participant

    The whole scenario seemed so far out there that it was hard for me to believe. Trump grabbing the steering wheel and then attempting to choke the driver. Oh my ! Like a scene out of Cheech and Chong.  In any event I do believe Hutchinson’s report of “being told” by Ornato that he was told by the driver of the described scene. Then again in a court of law we’re dealing with multiple hearsays. And proper objections are made for the very reason this is now playing out.  In any event I doubt Hutchinson lied under oath.

    in reply to: The coup attempt was much worse than we thought. #139474
    waterfield
    Participant

    Yeah-and I wondered what the heck he would have done had his security followed his orders and dropped him off with those marching on the Capital.  Would he have been so stupid as to actually go into the building with the protestors ? Come to think of it-maybe all of mankind would be better off if they had driven him there-the final nail in his coffin.

    in reply to: The coup attempt was much worse than we thought. #139471
    waterfield
    Participant

    I think the security guys will testify differently than reported by Hutchinson.

    in reply to: the new political tweets thread (4/4 2022) #139308
    waterfield
    Participant

    We have relatives in the Bay area. The ONLY thing the recall showed was that even progressive voters can have enough of being afraid to walk their favorite streets downtown. The “City” is a place where people walk to places and it used to be fun and enjoyable. Now-not so much. Whether the D.A. was partly responsible is an open debate but people -progressives included-wanted a change.

    == Its been a while, W. How you doin? w v

    Aging exponentially.

     

     

     

    in reply to: the new political tweets thread (4/4 2022) #139307
    waterfield
    Participant

    What I know from that is directly from relatives who live either in “the city” or in the Bay area. They are all progressive in their political beliefs and expressed real fear from shopping and otherwise enjoying themselves on the streets of SF. Personally, Barbara and I have enjoyed just walking around downtown SF for years-but I’m concerned now from what I’ve heard from our friends.

    in reply to: the new political tweets thread (4/4 2022) #139290
    waterfield
    Participant

    We have relatives in the Bay area. The ONLY thing the recall showed was that even progressive voters can have enough of being afraid to walk their favorite streets downtown.  The “City” is a place where people walk to places and it used to be fun and enjoyable. Now-not so much.  Whether the D.A. was partly responsible is an open debate but people -progressives included-wanted a change.

    in reply to: news on 1/6 aftermaths (starting in June) #139263
    waterfield
    Participant

    The real question I have is how do people fall into such hate and anger? Whatever the reason is why haven’t seen this behavior in past close elections ALA Bush v Gore? What has happened that so many of us believe in unfounded conspiracies.  Maybe we just have too much internet.

    in reply to: news on 1/6 aftermaths (starting in June) #139256
    waterfield
    Participant

    The case that is the strongest against him is not the break in but the many efforts he made to invalidate the election results. This is the face of overwhelming evidence provided to him that there was “no there,there”.

    in reply to: news on 1/6 aftermaths (starting in June) #139245
    waterfield
    Participant

    I doubt Trump will be indicted and if he was I don’t believe-if a jury followed the law -he would be convicted.  Caveat-I don’t know what evidence will be forthcoming in the hearings but given what Cheney’s opening said would be proved-I don’t see it.

    Yes-a conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence-but unless the evidence shows conduct BEFORE June 6th by the President that is close to giving the signal to go ahead and storm the Capital I doubt a prosecuting attorney would want to take the case.  To me the point of these televised hearings is to show how terrible the President was during the events along with some of his closest advisors and he should never be considered when it comes to 2024.  And of course maybe to save Congress in November.

    in reply to: Buffalo shooting #138929
    waterfield
    Participant

    The “Replacement Theory” is accurate.

    The full theory says not only that POC are gaining #s on the white population, but that it is deliberate and conscious, and when the white population is small enough, POC will just kill off all the remaining white people. It isn’t just an observation of demographical trends, it’s a bonkers, hateful, paranoid conspiracy theory. And my thing is…even if whites will be replaced…so fucking what? Only half-blood whites? M’kay. What they don’t understand is that it is that way already. They’re aren’t any pure blood anythings.

    [quote quote=13892

     

     

    I understand that is the white Supremacy take-i.e. its deliberate-which I why I said their reasoning was wrong.  The white anglo saxon good ole USA of the 50s is indeed being “replaced” if for no other reason than people of color are bringing into this world more children than white couples.  Billy said it best-we are a mixed salad. Something that should be praised not feared.  50-100 years from now America’s “face” will look a lot different than today and certainly totally different than in the 50s.  A natural happening.  And that is what “I” meant re “replacement”.

    in reply to: Buffalo shooting #138922
    waterfield
    Participant

    The “Replacement Theory” is accurate.  But not for the reasons normally given.  The “face of America” has, over the years, been getting darker and darker.  While immigration is a factor the primary reason is white couples are not having babies and people of color are.  There is nothing that can or should be done about it.  Same thing about the affects of an overpopulated planet. Nothing nefarious-it just is what it is.  My hope is that our grandchildren will be able to accept an ever changing world without feeling they must do something to stop it like killing off people that look different.

    • This reply was modified 2 years, 6 months ago by waterfield.
    in reply to: political tweets #136927
    waterfield
    Participant

    “Consider the possibility” this is precisely the same conspiratorial bs the right wing has advanced re vaccinations producing poison into your blood stream.

    If you don’t understand this comparison then you can join all those followers of Alex Jones -its no different whether its left or right.

    in reply to: Roe Vs. Wade looks like it could be coming to an end. #134332
    waterfield
    Participant

    Congress cannot impose a speeding limit that applies uniformly across the country and it cannot-for the same constitutional reason-codify Roe v Wade uniformly across all states. We live in a Republic. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution defines the powers of the U.S. Congress. It grants some powers exclusively to Congress, such as legislation regarding immigration, bankruptcy, and currency. It is limited and what not specified is left to the states. The article above is bogus.

    in reply to: our reactions to the GB game #134211
    waterfield
    Participant

    Because they have better O lines and protection for their Qbs and they have better corner backs and safeties than the Rams.

    in reply to: political tweets #131491
    waterfield
    Participant

    ” Biden is still mass-murdering people of color all over the globe”

    Goodbye.

    in reply to: WV-Big day at Jaws #127067
    waterfield
    Participant

    I’m with you on that.

    in reply to: I don’t understand stuff #126598
    waterfield
    Participant

    Why do I need to “read” about anarchism when I see with my own eyes groups of people breaking into the US Capitol looking for senators with a noose, and cop ties, shouting the election has been stolen and trying to overturn the results-in the name of overthrowing the existing authority. If that isn’t anarchy then who cares.

    Because Anarchy is actually a theory, one that disapproves of concentrated power.

    Concentrated power responded to that philosophical threat to its existence by deliberately portraying Anarchy as chaos.

    Now people think anarchy and chaos are synonyms. But they aren’t. So that’s why.
    .

    Yeah, W, there’s 2 versions of the word.

    Just putting things in black and white.

    Philosophical anarchism is a 19th and 20th century political vision which argues that hierarchical social structures corrupt humanity. Here’s an example of that tradition and its way of thinking from Chomsky: “power that isn’t really justified by the will of the governed should be dismantled.” ― Noam Chomsky, On Anarchism

    In the popular everyday use of the word is, as you say Z, it just means chaos.

    In a leftist context, W, since we’re aware of philosophical anarchism we tend not to use the word in the popular, everyday sense.

    So if there are two versions one of which is the “popular everyday use of the word” why is the everyday sense of the word less correct than the one defining it as a political theory ? Much like the use of the word “Nigga” means something to a white supremist that is different than what the word means to a rap singer. Wiki in part says that the meaning of anarchy as a political theory is what is given to it by anarchists. So who are they to say that the use of the word by the everyday guy in his backyard cooking steaks is wrong ? That is what in philosophy is called “absolutism”. Besides, the word “anarchy” actually comes from the medieval latin word “anarchia” and the Greek word “anarchos” meaning without ruler or rules. It’s not a huge bridge to cross to understand that no rules means chaos. So to me “anarchy” can equally mean 1)a political philosophy and 2)a volitional movement (chaos) as a means to accomplish a society free from authority. Those idiots breaking into the Capitol most certainly do not understand the political theory of anarchism but they certainly wanted to tear down the existing hierarchy, leaving our society-as we know it-without rules.

    At bottom here is that words (anarchy) have meanings depending on various classificatory purposes. There is no absolutism when it comes to using words-anarchists don’t get to tell people what anarchy is other than to themselves.

    in reply to: I don’t understand stuff #126560
    waterfield
    Participant

    Biden a socialist? I have conservative friends tell me that. And a few are not dumb. I watch interviews of these anarchists in D.C. and its like ” we won’t let Biden turn this country into “socialism”. Then I come here and its like Biden is no different than a free market capitalist.

    It is no wonder to me that, from a political standpoint, we are so far apart in our views. You guys here must laugh when you hear Trump supporters yell about Biden and his band of socialists.

    I just can’t figure this stuff out anymore.

    ===

    Well, for starters, anyone who calls the Rightwing-fascists, ‘anarchists’
    probably needs to read a little about anarchism.

    But, yes, I always laugh when i hear Trumpies
    calling Biden/Obama/Clinton a ‘socialist.’

    But thats how it is, in the merry old land of Oz.

    w
    v[/quote

    Why do I need to “read” about anarchism when I see with my own eyes groups of people breaking into the US Capitol looking for senators with a noose, and cop ties, shouting the election has been stolen and trying to overturn the results-in the name of overthrowing the existing authority. If that isn’t anarchy then who cares.

    in reply to: Ashli Babbitt-radicalized woman #126549
    waterfield
    Participant

    I didn’t see it as whitewashing her conduct or casting her as a martyr. I read it as depicting a crackpot filled with anger. Rather than posting it as an excuse for her conduct I posted it hoping for insights on just how someone like her could get that way because clearly there are many like her-far more than I ever thought.

    I didn’t see you as excusing her. My responses were to the article. I don’t assume that everything everyone posts is always them using substitute editorials to speak for their own view. It’s a recent event with wide, deep roots, and at times like this, people just post things as they come in.

    In terms of our own somewhat different perspectives, on first impressions, I did see the article as more white-washy than you did. But that’s not a big deal. You could be right.

    I looked at it like a background check on a person of interest as opposed to an opinion article. I like to read obituaries for the same reason. What was she like; what is her background; any past extremist involvement; anything that could have triggered her down this path ? Stuff like that.

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by waterfield.
    in reply to: Ashli Babbitt-radicalized woman #126545
    waterfield
    Participant

    That’s a strangely white-washing article.

    She defied cops and guards with weapons drawn to get into the house of representatives while it was in session because she believed that the election was stolen.

    That’s a crackpot conspiracy theory.

    I don’t care how “sincere” or “good” she was, she was in the process of trying to harass congress in session because she bought into a stupid Trump lie.

    There’s not much there to respect or value.

    I would never wish her fate upon her if it were up to me, but still–she’s not this honorable martyr.

    I didn’t see it as whitewashing her conduct or casting her as a martyr. I read it as depicting a crackpot filled with anger. Rather than posting it as an excuse for her conduct I posted it hoping for insights on just how someone like her could get that way because clearly there are many like her-far more than I ever thought.

    in reply to: I don’t understand stuff #126531
    waterfield
    Participant

    Hey you guys ! I know what socialism is; I know my conservative friends are “nutz”; I know that calling Biden a socialist is simply “mane calling”. I get all that. My point is how can we ever come close to bridging these gaps as long as there is suck a divergence of opinions-regardless of whether one view is fact or scientific based. ? Personally, I don’t think the people that believe Biden is a socialist are “nutz”. I think they are simply ignorant. Not stupid but ignorant-meaning misinformed. But how do people allow themselves to be so misinformed. I’m sure they truly believe they are “informed” but clearly they are not. I suppose I’m sounding like somewhat of an elitist by calling them ignorant and maybe that even drives them “nutzier”.

    There’s an article in today’s L.A. Times about the air force woman who was killed during the siege of the Capital. I’m going to post it separately after this. It’s about her path to becoming a radical and if I take anything from it it’s (for her) about anger over immigration fueled by social media which has led her into the QAnon darkness. It doesn’t sound like she’s some hillbilly from the caves of W. Virginia ignorant of what’s going on. She served in the air force in Iraq, smart enough to own a business in San Diego, considers herself to be a “patriot” BUT seems filled with anger over “what’s happening to her country” that needs to be taken back.

    I know there are plenty of theories and actual explanations over how and why people like “these” get so angry. The best I can come up with is something my wife says: A changing demography that best can be described, in the eyes of the Trumpers, as a cultural eclipse. Their “way of life” is being overrun by people that look different-meaning black and brown people. But no one says just “way of life” are they talking about. And of course this is all fueled by those who sincerely believe that “God” has created the United States of America to be divine in the face of the evils of the world and we are here in this country to fix it. Who can forget that enormous cloth sign , larger than any “flag” by rioters “JESUS SAVES” while at the same time seeing the Confederate flag march through the Capital. My question as always: What gives?

    in reply to: Transition Tomfoolery #125719
    waterfield
    Participant

    W–thanks for the article, but just remember that all posted articles have to have links. I added it this time.

    I thought I went through this before and was told that since many don’t subscribe to the L.A.Times I couldn’t just link to the article. So I just copy and paste. I need a tutor.

    You misunderstand.

    I did not say supply a link ONLY. Yes that won’t work with the Times.

    But once you do supply an article, yes you absolutely have to add a link to it. As I did myself in this case by editing it into your post. All posted articles of any kind must have links. Or you are potentially getting the owner of the site in trouble for copyright issues.

    Just go back and look. I edited in a link after the author’s name. Any time an article is posted it should include a link that way.

    If a post contains an article and no link, I have 2 choices. Either I add the link myself, or I delete the post. Usually I add the link myself.

    Got it. Thx/

    in reply to: Biden-anyone believe he can take office? #125573
    waterfield
    Participant

    Can anyone explain to me how those people in that video came to be that way ? I don’t think it’s just a matter of ignorance. I think there is something else-but I don’t know what that is. The closest I can come is they hate their own personal life status and have to look outside themselves for what caused their hopes and dreams to not be fulfilled. And Trump is the first “politician” to come along and preach just that.

    in reply to: Transition Tomfoolery #125523
    waterfield
    Participant

    W–thanks for the article, but just remember that all posted articles have to have links. I added it this time.

    I thought I went through this before and was told that since many don’t subscribe to the L.A.Times I couldn’t just link to the article. So I just copy and paste. I need a tutor.

    in reply to: Transition Tomfoolery #125516
    waterfield
    Participant

    My question is -as always-how did half this country come to this? What factors entered into this equation? Here is an article by an X Republican on the state of mind for most Republicans today compared to Democrats.

    ==

    Op-Ed: Forget compromise. The GOP isn’t likely to accept Biden — ever
    Kurt Bardella 7 hrs ago

    https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-12-11/republicans-democrats-trump-politics-ideology

    Anyone who has been following the current Republican-led effort to undermine democracy and orchestrate a coup has probably asked themselves, “When are Republicans going to stand up to Trump and admit that Joe Biden won the election?”

    I’m sorry to say, that’s the wrong question, because the answer is never.

    Many people have said in recent weeks that it feels like Republicans and Democrats live on completely different planets. I wish it were that simple. In reality, what’s happening is that one side sees a planet where the other sees nothing because they don’t even care to look. Democrats believe in facts, while Republicans have learned to believe in a world they make up for themselves.

    Whether or not you agree with them, Democrats are largely defined by positions on issues like education, environment, social justice, healthcare, etc. These are policies that can be debated, though reaching consensus within the party’s ranks is always a struggle. Even now, you see the Democrats squabbling over Biden’s Cabinet appointments.

    The GOP isn’t built for debate — which is why you don’t see any reporting about the GOP being in disarray. But you can’t call this consensus, which would imply agreement achieved after rigorous discussion. At this point, if Trump were to tell his supporters that the Earth is flat and the elitist scientists have been lying all along, they would play along and raise questions about the scientists’ faulty instruments.

    This is why, despite zero evidence, the majority of Republicans still believe Trump’s lie that the election was rigged and that he won. A Washington Post survey found that only 26 Republicans, out of 249 in both the House and Senate, would acknowledge Biden’s victory.

    At the most basic level, Republicans view the world through the lens of villains and heroes — a posture that gives them an advantage in political warfare. They create the villains and cast themselves as the heroes. For the better part of this decade, Republicans have cast figures like Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton as the enemy. They use words like “socialists” and “extreme” to scare their voters into believing that the Democrats are coming to take away life as they know it.

    They operate with the thinking that any attack will send Democrats into retreat mode. They believe the very thing that makes Democrats Democrats is a weakness they can exploit and weaponize. And in some ways, they are right.

    Being inclusive, especially as a Democrat, in this political climate is downright tedious and exhausting. I left the GOP four years ago because I could no longer reconcile the party’s words and actions with my moral compass. As I spent more time having conversations with Democrats, I realized a truth I hadn’t been prepared for: Democrats care about — and will argue over — everything.

    Republicans, however, have managed to boil down their entire identity into bumper-sticker-ready catchphrases like “build the wall,” “drain the swamp” or the more recent refrain, “stop the steal.”

    How have they been able to do this?

    Because the Republican Party has no diversity of thought. Getting everyone to march to the same beat is easy because no one would dare challenge the conductor of the orchestra.

    During my time working for Republicans on the House Oversight and Reform Committee, the committee, led by California Rep. Darrell Issa, unleashed an investigative tsunami against the Obama presidency. These so-called investigations were nothing more than public relations vehicles to attack Obama administration officials.

    Whether it was pursuing documents from Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner or holding Atty. Gen. Eric Holder in contempt of Congress, I never saw any dissent from the Republicans about the overtly political agenda. If anything, they wanted the committee to be even more aggressive. Members like Reps. Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows, who have become central figures in Trump world, first rose to prominence on Issa’s oversight committee.

    Republicans also don’t have to worry about how their words might hurt or offend someone because they truly do not care. Unlike Democrats, Republicans don’t have to concern themselves with navigating different racial, geographic or socioeconomic boundaries because they don’t like to acknowledge differences. They view the world through the same lens.

    According to a new Gallup survey, 89% of Republicans don’t believe the voting process worked well. There is probably no going back from this level of cynicism, and there’s every likelihood that the GOP will spend every moment of the Biden presidency trying to delegitimize him.

    The Republicans are already setting up for a comeback. They have unburdened themselves from the limits imposed by inconvenient facts. They see fresh opportunity with a Democratic Party in conflict with itself. If the Democrats aren’t careful, they could lose Congress in 2022 and the White House in 2024.

    Joe Biden was right. This election was a battle for the soul of our country. That battle has only just begun.

    Kurt Bardella is a senior advisor to the Lincoln Project. He is a former aide to California Republican Reps. Darrell Issa and Brian Bilbray and was an aide in the California State Senate and Assembly. @KurtBardella

    This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

    in reply to: Transition Tomfoolery #125471
    waterfield
    Participant

    I listen and watch her. She is a no nonsense professor who has no flim flam in her talks and opinions. She’s very straightforward and comes as close as one can come to being apolitical. Just the facts, just the facts.

    I love her talks.

    But what’s going on now with the latest challenge is downright terrifying. At least to me. With half the country saying “Jesus is my savior and Trump is my President”, Texas arguing they can tell voters in other states their votes don’t count, 100 Republicans in Congress supporting the
    latest brief it’s all scary and coming close to a 3rd world coup attempt.

    in reply to: Amazing stuff-right here L.A. City Hall #124952
    waterfield
    Participant

    I think I (we) would be so much happier if we focused on the artists and not the lunatics.

    in reply to: Amazing stuff-right here L.A. City Hall #124847
    waterfield
    Participant

    Well…damn.

    Humans.

    I thought of all people you would appreciate this group.

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 663 total)