Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 61 through 90 (of 663 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Things I don’t understand #123391
    waterfield
    Participant

    Many of my friends, like most here, don’t like Biden because he’s not progressive enough. OTOH several of my Republican friends say stuff like: “Biden? Who wants to live under socialism or communism?”

    Are the any people left who are not so polarized in their views?

    Well if you’re a real progressive, yeah he’s not progressive enough. That’s just a simple fact. I don’t know why that’s “polarized.” Some progressives will not vote for him for that reason, and some make the pragmatic choice and vote for the guy who is just simply not as bad as Trump.

    As for your Republican friends, they are doing what a lot of right-wingers do these days. Living in amazing delusions.

    I wrote “polarized” simply to illustrate how far apart people are these days. 2 people at a bar. One is a progressive and the other is a Republican. Progressive says “I don’t like Biden because he doesn’t believe in

      socialized

    medicine”. Republican responds “I don’t like him either because he’s a

      socialist”.

    Makes no sense-does it. Which is why the two could never have a talk over a beer. Two different planets.

    in reply to: 2020 Prediction: Trump vs Biden #123063
    waterfield
    Participant

    About 19 days out, I think. Less than 3 weeks.

    No copping out. Time to predict.

    I say Biden by about four points. 51 percent to 47 percent.

    Not a landslide, a win. Kinda like 2012 Obama vs Romney. That was 51 to 47 percent. Obama got 332 electoral votes and Romney got 206. Obama won Florida in that one. 50 percent to 49 percent. Thats 29 electoral votes. I dont think Biden gets Florida so i predict he wins about 300 electoral votes.

    =======================

    You have Biden taking Minnesota., Wisconsin ,Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Florida ? I don’t see him doing that. He could lose all of them but I suspect he will take a couple of those states and could be enough in a nail biter. One think I do think is in play is Texas. He just might take that state. I predict Biden but it’s the same thinking when I always pick the Rams to lose. You win either way. If the Rams lose it’s “I told you so” whereas if they win I’m happy.

    waterfield
    Participant

    I dunno if there’s a single voice that evokes more emotion for me than Judy Garland

    I have one of those. Eva Cassidy’s rendition of Sting’s “Fields of Gold”. She was a relative unknown American singer who sang mostly in N.Y clubs. Sting himself said her singing that song was more powerful and better than his version. What is particularly moving is the fact that when she recorded the song she knew she was dying of cancer. The perfect song given the circumstances. I cannot get through it without breaking down.

    https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=song+fields+of+gold+sung+by+eva+cassidy&view=detail&mid=8136F67BDCB692F29A3E8136F67BDCB692F29A3E&FORM=VIRE0&PC=DCTS&cc=US&setlang=en-US&PC=DCTS&cvid=e6f5163d94fd49fca246018033673853&qs=RI&nclid=5DC49A4820DB81747E48420CE0255F8E&ts=1602365567713

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 1 month ago by waterfield.
    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122712
    waterfield
    Participant

    Sigh. Just when i think Biden has it in the bag.

    Newsweek poll:https://www.newsweek.com/less-month-until-election-donald-trump-doing-better-swing-state-polls-this-time-2016-1535611
    With Less Than a Month Until the Election, Donald Trump Is Doing Better in Swing State Polls Than This Time in 2016

    I’ve never liked the “are you better off ” questions. They assume the worst of Capitalism. It’s all about you. Not about the homeless, not about healthcare, not about education, not about environment, not about criminal justice, etc. Only one’s selfish interests.

    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122655
    waterfield
    Participant

    I was pondering the old conundrum last night about why so many people vote for the GOP, counter to their own interests. And I was thinking that part of it is that those voters, like Trump supporters, are really low information voters, ya know. Nothing new there. But that doesn’t answer the question. They’re low information either way, so how does the GOP get their allegiance?

    “I was pondering the old conundrum last night about why so many people vote for the GOP, counter to their own interests. And I was thinking that part of it is that those voters, like Trump supporters, are really low information voters, ya know. Nothing new there. But that doesn’t answer the question. They’re low information either way, so how does the GOP get their allegiance?”

    Personally, I think that the changing demographics is the engine driving their allegiance. White folks-in the GOP-look at how fast “their country” is changing. Color wise, information technology, gay rights, career changes, women advancements, population increases, etc-“it ain’t what it used to be”. We remember how good things used to be. Computers baffle us-especially when they breakdown-, smart tvs, smart phones, blah blah. Life just seemed to be much simpler and far less stressful. White males especially, 50 plus, yearn for those simple days. Probably due to my age I admit to some of that. I’ve come to hate technology. I tell my wife often when our tv remote breaks down: “I remember when you could walk up to the tv and change the channel with your hand, and I got as much information then as I do today. “. That’s when she gets up and leaves -after throwing the remote at me.

    Anyway, the GOP understands all that and taps into it while the democrats engulf it. IMO GOP voters are intentionally stuck in the sand and either want to go back or at least slow the forward movement down as much as they can. When you add to that malaise the racists, truly ignorant, evangelicals, and wealthy business and corporation owners who want nothing more than getting rid of regulations so they can profit more-well there you have the GOP. I suppose you can add to that Nazis who want to take over the country and now I have to take a nap.

    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122563
    waterfield
    Participant

    Biden is like a gatekeeper. If he wins he will open the gate extremely wide and many different views will be allowed into the arena. If Trump wins the gate will only be open for those who pass his loyalty test.

    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122562
    waterfield
    Participant

    Personally I think you might be wrong on your “rejection” theory. I don’t think progressive values were rejected in the primaries. Rather it was more a fear of Trump winning again if Sanders was the nominee. There is clearly a future for progressives in the Democratic party and for those voters who went to the poles and voted for Biden over Sanders. And that future is likely to be nearer than you think. With some exceptions (racists, etc) progressive values and policies appeal to the same people that Trump caters to. The “system” has not done them right and they want radical changes-whatever they might be.

    That never crossed my mind, but you may be right about that. I remember hearing, both in recorded interviews with voters, and in print that a lot of people were saying that they basically liked Bernie’s positions better, but were worried he wouldn’t win, and just saw Biden as more “electable.”

    So if you are right, what people pushing for more progressive action need is not to win more people to their positions, but to convince more people that their positions are “winnable.”

    That may be, actually. Dunno.

    I am certain about this. If Biden beats Trump the political move will be to the left and more progressives will become in power. If Trump wins the progressive movement will be pushed back even more especially if the economy rebounds. The analogy is that under Biden progressives will be like swimmer drowning but being able to reach the surface and finally surface and have room to breath. With Trump those same progressives will be trying as hard to reach the surface but unable to. Progressives should not be depressed if Biden wins. On the contrary it will allow them the freedom to breath life into their views.

    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122543
    waterfield
    Participant

    ===============

    Well, its very tempting for leftists like us, to think the best strategy for HIM would be to lean left. But is that really accurate? I am not convinced.

    I keep thinking about the senate: 99-1.

    If i were a corporate-dem, why in the hell would i trust the folks who got the “1” elected, instead of the folks that got the 99 elected.

    Sure the polls say, 60 or 70 percent of folks want M4A etc. But they dont VOTE that way do they. I mean even in a DEM primary, Biden beat Bernie. Straight up. Liberals/Dems had a choice — and they chose AGAINST the leftist.

    So why would Biden lean left? If i were his evil-political-adviser I’d tell Biden to do just what he’s doing. Be bland, and lean towards Right-Center. The DNC strategy.

    I hate it. But it is what it is.

    w
    v

    I was pondering the old conundrum last night about why so many people vote for the GOP, counter to their own interests. And I was thinking that part of it is that those voters, like Trump supporters, are really low information voters, ya know. Nothing new there. But that doesn’t answer the question. They’re low information either way, so how does the GOP get their allegiance?

    And then I thought, well, the GOP appeals to their core…values/lifestyle/myths…whatever. A lot of these people just wanna go to work, have a beer with friends, watch UFC, go to church, shoot some birds, ride their motorbikes, raft the river, whatever. No time to watch BS on the news, or read Atlantic Monthly. It’s not their thing. Life is immediate and local. So the GOP just taps into their gut instincts, their biases, their prejudices, and does so without fearing that they, as governors, will ever be inspected for their actions. These people aren’t following the budgets, or the political movements that swirl in Yemen. The GOP goes straight for the Id, and sometimes the Ego.

    Democrats, OTOH, want to REASON with these people. Educate them on how their policies are better for them, and they are amazed when nobody bites that bait.

    So…I start wondering WHY the Liberals/Left don’t go for the Id appeals as well. I mean…why not?

    And I think that it’s because the Left and Right see other people differently. I am considering that maybe the Right actually has an advantage because they think of the masses as a commodity. People are widgets. They are just a different category of Materials necessary to conduct business on the one hand, and potential consumers of services and products on the other hand. They don’t care about the “human” aspects of their lives whatsoever. They are just there like clay, or steel, or tariffs, or tax breaks…just Things that need to be manipulated to their advantage. Appealing to their Id is just an efficient way to do that.

    Liberals and the Left give them a little more credit than that. They see them as people with human concerns. But they see them as uneducated and, frankly, sometimes stupid. They are raw humans, Uncultivated Humans. So they/we are driven to try to appeal to them through a variety of “Don’t you see that THIS is in your best interest, and THAT is not?” kind of things, and then get frustrated when they turn the channel to The Masked Singer. Ultimately, I think that Liberals tend to look DOWN on the masses because they are FAILING TO GRASP THINGS. And the Left tends to be condescending to everybody, including Liberals, and even other Leftists.

    Well…they HATE being condescended to. Everybody hates being condescended to. And here is where the Right has an advantage. They aren’t condescending to these people because they don’t place any human value on them in the first place. Nobody gets condescending to a horse because it’s a fucking horse. You harness it, and put it to use. So the Right can saddle up the masses partly because they don’t expect anything from them except their direct service. The left wants to…you know…SAVE them. Make their lives better. And when they don’t cooperate, well, it’s because they are Deplorable. They’re morons. They’re backwoods hicks and rubes and yokels.

    So the GOP can bang the identity drums, and the people will march because they hear the drumming, and they feel welcomed.

    The Democrats are hamstrung because they are trying to herd cats with shit like “Build Back Better,” whatever the fuck THAT is supposed to mean. And the Democrats don’t really have anything to offer because they aren’t committed to running on anything that will actually change lives. So it’s easy for the GOP to paint them as the party of giving away crap to OTHER people. And that’s totally believable because they certainly aren’t giving anything to ME. To US. To anybody in MY neighborhood. They’re trying to appeal to the masses without offering them a vision of anything other than Hope and Change and Harmony on the one hand, and a tall stack of Policy Papers on the other. Those just aren’t drumbeats that get them very far.

    Biden is running as a Rorschach Test. He is largely a vacuum with an invitation to everybody to believe he is whatever they want him to be.

    =========

    All food for thought, for sure. There’s a lot there to unpack.

    But what I think about all the fucking time — i cant let it go — is: Biden VS Bernie.

    No republicans involved. None of their games came into play. This was totally a Dem Vote. And the Democrats rejected the Left. Just flat out rejected it. Democrats did that.

    And sure, we all know that the powers-that-be did everything they could to get the Democrats to vote for Biden. All the usual shit. But Bernie’s message was out there. He’d been around for five years. People knew his message. The corporate media may have been tilted against him but people knew he was for an increase in Minimum Wage, free college, and M4A. And the DEMOCRAT voters rejected it. The Rep-thugs didnt even get in the game. The DEMOCRAT VOTERS rejected. Not the elites. The Dem VOTERS.

    And while thinking about ‘that’ lovely dynamic, lets widen the perspective to include all the other Senate/Congressional Elections over the last fifty years. How many times have the DEMS (and Reps) rejected leftwingers? Almost Every fucking time. So, its not just something about Bernie.

    Pretty dark picture. Why do i bring it up? I think its because I’ve spent time in the Left-twitter-bubble the last two days, and I am surprised at how often leftists FAIL to absorb and reflect on the awful historical facts. We are a small group. We are not a large uprising. We are not a great and powerful movement.

    99-1.
    The DEM voters freely and knowingly and willingly chose Biden over Bernie.

    w
    v

    Personally I think you might be wrong on your “rejection” theory. I don’t think progressive values were rejected in the primaries. Rather it was more a fear of Trump winning again if Sanders was the nominee. There is clearly a future for progressives in the Democratic party and for those voters who went to the poles and voted for Biden over Sanders. And that future is likely to be nearer than you think. With some exceptions (racists, etc) progressive values and policies appeal to the same people that Trump caters to. The “system” has not done them right and they want radical changes-whatever they might be.

    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122542
    waterfield
    Participant

    ===============

    Well, its very tempting for leftists like us, to think the best strategy for HIM would be to lean left. But is that really accurate? I am not convinced.

    I keep thinking about the senate: 99-1.

    If i were a corporate-dem, why in the hell would i trust the folks who got the “1” elected, instead of the folks that got the 99 elected.

    Sure the polls say, 60 or 70 percent of folks want M4A etc. But they dont VOTE that way do they. I mean even in a DEM primary, Biden beat Bernie. Straight up. Liberals/Dems had a choice — and they chose AGAINST the leftist.

    So why would Biden lean left? If i were his evil-political-adviser I’d tell Biden to do just what he’s doing. Be bland, and lean towards Right-Center. The DNC strategy.

    I hate it. But it is what it is.

    w
    v

    I was pondering the old conundrum last night about why so many people vote for the GOP, counter to their own interests. And I was thinking that part of it is that those voters, like Trump supporters, are really low information voters, ya know. Nothing new there. But that doesn’t answer the question. They’re low information either way, so how does the GOP get their allegiance?

    And then I thought, well, the GOP appeals to their core…values/lifestyle/myths…whatever. A lot of these people just wanna go to work, have a beer with friends, watch UFC, go to church, shoot some birds, ride their motorbikes, raft the river, whatever. No time to watch BS on the news, or read Atlantic Monthly. It’s not their thing. Life is immediate and local. So the GOP just taps into their gut instincts, their biases, their prejudices, and does so without fearing that they, as governors, will ever be inspected for their actions. These people aren’t following the budgets, or the political movements that swirl in Yemen. The GOP goes straight for the Id, and sometimes the Ego.

    Democrats, OTOH, want to REASON with these people. Educate them on how their policies are better for them, and they are amazed when nobody bites that bait.

    So…I start wondering WHY the Liberals/Left don’t go for the Id appeals as well. I mean…why not?

    And I think that it’s because the Left and Right see other people differently. I am considering that maybe the Right actually has an advantage because they think of the masses as a commodity. People are widgets. They are just a different category of Materials necessary to conduct business on the one hand, and potential consumers of services and products on the other hand. They don’t care about the “human” aspects of their lives whatsoever. They are just there like clay, or steel, or tariffs, or tax breaks…just Things that need to be manipulated to their advantage. Appealing to their Id is just an efficient way to do that.

    Liberals and the Left give them a little more credit than that. They see them as people with human concerns. But they see them as uneducated and, frankly, sometimes stupid. They are raw humans, Uncultivated Humans. So they/we are driven to try to appeal to them through a variety of “Don’t you see that THIS is in your best interest, and THAT is not?” kind of things, and then get frustrated when they turn the channel to The Masked Singer. Ultimately, I think that Liberals tend to look DOWN on the masses because they are FAILING TO GRASP THINGS. And the Left tends to be condescending to everybody, including Liberals, and even other Leftists.

    Well…they HATE being condescended to. Everybody hates being condescended to. And here is where the Right has an advantage. They aren’t condescending to these people because they don’t place any human value on them in the first place. Nobody gets condescending to a horse because it’s a fucking horse. You harness it, and put it to use. So the Right can saddle up the masses partly because they don’t expect anything from them except their direct service. The left wants to…you know…SAVE them. Make their lives better. And when they don’t cooperate, well, it’s because they are Deplorable. They’re morons. They’re backwoods hicks and rubes and yokels.

    So the GOP can bang the identity drums, and the people will march because they hear the drumming, and they feel welcomed.

    The Democrats are hamstrung because they are trying to herd cats with shit like “Build Back Better,” whatever the fuck THAT is supposed to mean. And the Democrats don’t really have anything to offer because they aren’t committed to running on anything that will actually change lives. So it’s easy for the GOP to paint them as the party of giving away crap to OTHER people. And that’s totally believable because they certainly aren’t giving anything to ME. To US. To anybody in MY neighborhood. They’re trying to appeal to the masses without offering them a vision of anything other than Hope and Change and Harmony on the one hand, and a tall stack of Policy Papers on the other. Those just aren’t drumbeats that get them very far.

    Biden is running as a Rorschach Test. He is largely a vacuum with an invitation to everybody to believe he is whatever they want him to be.

    =========

    All food for thought, for sure. There’s a lot there to unpack.

    But what I think about all the fucking time — i cant let it go — is: Biden VS Bernie.

    No republicans involved. None of their games came into play. This was totally a Dem Vote. And the Democrats rejected the Left. Just flat out rejected it. Democrats did that.

    And sure, we all know that the powers-that-be did everything they could to get the Democrats to vote for Biden. All the usual shit. But Bernie’s message was out there. He’d been around for five years. People knew his message. The corporate media may have been tilted against him but people knew he was for an increase in Minimum Wage, free college, and M4A. And the DEMOCRAT voters rejected it. The Rep-thugs didnt even get in the game. The DEMOCRAT VOTERS rejected. Not the elites. The Dem VOTERS.

    And while thinking about ‘that’ lovely dynamic, lets widen the perspective to include all the other Senate/Congressional Elections over the last fifty years. How many times have the DEMS (and Reps) rejected leftwingers? Almost Every fucking time. So, its not just something about Bernie.

    Pretty dark picture. Why do i bring it up? I think its because I’ve spent time in the Left-twitter-bubble the last two days, and I am surprised at how often leftists FAIL to absorb and reflect on the awful historical facts. We are a small group. We are not a large uprising. We are not a great and powerful movement.

    99-1.
    The DEM voters freely and knowingly and willingly chose Biden over Bernie.

    w
    v

    Not sure your right on your “rejection” theory. I don’t think that was about not agreeing with the policies advanced by Sanders as much as a fear that Trump would win if Sanders was the nominee. I believe there is clearly a future for progressive policies and values in the Democratic party. And that could be nearer than you think.

    in reply to: Biden, Trump, the left, elections… #122539
    waterfield
    Participant

    Liberals ARE condescending. Leftists, too. Maybe Leftists even more so. And so the masses hate universities and experts and everybody whom they feel look down their noses at them.
    .

    ================

    Well, i dunno, but I know that I find myself being condescending all the time. I also find myself fighting my own habit of being condescending all the time.
    I do it. But i try not to do it. And the pattern repeats.

    Why do i do it? Because I am dealing with people who choose some weird Bible phrase over Science. Religion over Science.
    Or, they choose some comforting political-myth over actual History.

    So when I as a leftist am trying to communicate with a right-winger it is a huge challenge. How does one communicate with someone who believes in Myths/Religions and rejects History/Facts/Science?

    It often either devolves into me being condescending, Or, I just find a way to change the subject to Football.

    But….I do NOT find rightwingers being condescending to ME. Mainly they just pray for me, or shake their heads.

    So, my personal experience has been that lefties are condescending and righties are not.

    w
    v

    My answer is never to tell people they are “wrong”. But to ask them questions-much like taking a deposition. If one says science doesn’t know everything-my question is “why do you say that”. Then they will say something like “I had a friend who…” Then I ask “do you personally know of others”. At some point the message comes across without them feeling they are looked down upon by someone who comes off as “having all the answers”. Might and likely won’t change their opinions but might give them a pause to think a second time about an issue. “Why do you ” are three very powerful words.

    in reply to: The Big News #122156
    waterfield
    Participant

    The drugs he is taking are a bad sign, a sign of desperation, or something close to that. You don’t use the POTUS as a lab rat. OTOH, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Trump ordered it because he’s the kind of guy who would go against medical advice and demand he gets his way. So who knows?

    Then…there is the fact that the info coming out from the WH and the Drs and every reliable anonymous source is conflicting.

    There is also the fact that the photos and video are also sketchy. OTHO, no matter what happens here, people are going to be accusing every single fucking thing of being sketchy, one way or another.

    I don’t know. I think he has it, and I think it’s serious, all the other crap aside.

    I am deeply ambivalent (is that a thing? can a person be “deeply” ambivalent?) about all this. The literature major in me wants the guy to come out of Walter Reed in a box because the poetic justice burrito with extra irony on the side is just fantastic. I mean…who had all the Bag Guys dying in the 2020 Season Finale? I did not see this coming. Especially after all the foreshadowing that led me to expect it to happen in April/May. And then nothing. A few false leads with Paul and Gaetz. Then several episodes later, Herman Cain dies, but nobody remembers who he is, so it gets a couple of sassy tweets, and that’s it.

    But now, suddenly, the GOP opens the Ark of the Covenant in the Rose Garden, and Nazi faces start melting all over the place.

    There is also the possibility that Trump’s death would derail the Proud Boy Express. One of my apprehensions heading into the next two months is that Trump idiotically incites violence at the polls and afterwards. After the debate, these guys are talking proudly about how they are standing by, and just waiting for the word to cut loose on protesters. If he’s not around to make that call, chances are they don’t massacre a crowd of people.

    OTOH, Trump has a chance to become a martyr here. Like…you know…Jesus. People would be singing his praises a generation from now as he becomes a symbolic rallying point. Will they go out and commit violence anyway? Seems like they’ve come out of the woodwork a little too far now to be able to slink back into it.

    Then there is the part of me that wants the much calmer, if less dramatic story line. Trump recovers, gets completely repudiated at the polls, cannot contest the results because there’s just no fucking hope, and he leaves office in January only to get served by SDNY, get convicted, and spend the rest of his life penniless, behind bars, as his kids all go to separate prisons, and the government seizes all his properties to pay his tax bills. I think, on the whole, I like this story line better…but I just have a hard time picturing someone that powerful ever getting the hammer.

    Whatever… The next two months are going to make us forget about the first nine, I think.

    There is a more simple storyline. He survives, loses the election, and goes back to his real estate business-and oh yeah screwing people.

    in reply to: Trump-“a big fat asshole” #121991
    waterfield
    Participant

    I know people who-when asked why they don’t want to vote for Biden-say its because they don’t want this country to become “socialism”.

    I’ll tell you what I think. I think when Biden is accused of that, since he’s a conservative candidate deeply identified with the corporate and big money domination of politics, he is going to reinforce their prejudices by disavowing social democracy and also by acting like socialism and FDR style social democracy are the same thing. So Biden reinforces their blind spots by disavowing the idea that he is “socialist” and by attacking progressives for being “socialist.”

    An honest progressive or social democracy candidate could stand up and defend that stuff, opening many people’s minds in the process, and diminishing the kind of red scare tactics common in American politics.

    The best I can tell what your saying is if a Trumpee says to me “hey Biden is a socialist” I should NOT respond “no he’s not”. What I should instead say is “hey there is a lot to be said for socialism-let me explain why socialism is so much better than what we have now”. And that will convince the Trumpee that Biden is not a socialist !

    in reply to: Trump-“a big fat asshole” #121966
    waterfield
    Participant

    I know people who-when asked why they don’t want to vote for Biden-say its because they don’t want this country to become “socialism”.

    I’ll tell you what I think. I think when Biden is accused of that, since he’s a conservative candidate deeply identified with the corporate and big money domination of politics, he is going to reinforce their prejudices by disavowing social democracy and also by acting like socialism and FDR style social democracy are the same thing. So Biden reinforces their blind spots by disavowing the idea that he is “socialist” and by attacking progressives for being “socialist.”

    An honest progressive or social democracy candidate could stand up and defend that stuff, opening many people’s minds in the process, and diminishing the kind of red scare tactics common in American politics.

    I have no idea what your saying. To me the simple answer is that people tell them he’s a socialist. They believe it. They likely don’t even listen to Biden. But my real question was what do progressives think when they hear people tell them Biden is a socialist.

    You asked what a progressive thinks. If you want to know that, then follow along here–you may not be getting an expected answer. And as a progressive what I think when people say Biden is a socialist is that Biden helps keep the red scare bs about socialism going because as a conservative he adamantly compounds the error. He says “no I am not that bad thing.” Reinforcing the red scare way of thinking.

    In contrast, an honest progressive would point out that being an FDR style social democracy advocate in the USA is not the same as what most people think socialism is. (And most people are wrong about what socialism is too, never mind the confusion where they mix up social democracy and socialism.)

    An honest progressive would not compound the error, he would bring clarity and open discussion to that issue.

    WV gave more or less the same answer.

    Well, we’ve heard it all before. Obama was a ‘socialist’ etc.

    The fact that those propaganda-advertising-marketing-lies WORK so well, tells us
    a great deal about the political-IQ’s of millions and millions and millions of American citizens.

    Hell, Bernie’s not really even a socialist in any hardcore sense of the word. He’s more of an FDR kinda guy.

    No no. I think WV said it best. No complicated intellectual answer. People are stupid.

    in reply to: Trump-“a big fat asshole” #121942
    waterfield
    Participant

    Really was no “debate” so your right-pointless.

    I wonder what Progressives think when the right attempts to make Biden out as a socialist and lots of people believe it. I know people who-when asked why they don’t want to vote for Biden-say its because they don’t want this country to become “socialism”.

    ================

    Well, we’ve heard it all before. Obama was a ‘socialist’ etc.

    The fact that those propaganda-advertising-marketing-lies WORK so well, tells us
    a great deal about the political-IQ’s of millions and millions and millions of American citizens.

    Hell, Bernie’s not really even a socialist in any hardcore sense of the word. He’s more of an FDR kinda guy.

    We’re in the home stretch. Anything can happen this last month.

    I’m tuning out the day-to-day political stuff. The various outrages of the week.
    My brain informs me, i need to turn toward Nature, for a while. Trees. Birds. Caterpillars.

    w
    v
    “I suspect that the real moral thinkers end up, wherever they may start, in botany.”
    ― Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

    Birds. You might find this interesting. I’ve been to the museum outside of Jackson Hole, Wy.

    in reply to: Trump-“a big fat asshole” #121941
    waterfield
    Participant

    I know people who-when asked why they don’t want to vote for Biden-say its because they don’t want this country to become “socialism”.

    I’ll tell you what I think. I think when Biden is accused of that, since he’s a conservative candidate deeply identified with the corporate and big money domination of politics, he is going to reinforce their prejudices by disavowing social democracy and also by acting like socialism and FDR style social democracy are the same thing. So Biden reinforces their blind spots by disavowing the idea that he is “socialist” and by attacking progressives for being “socialist.”

    An honest progressive or social democracy candidate could stand up and defend that stuff, opening many people’s minds in the process, and diminishing the kind of red scare tactics common in American politics.

    I have no idea what your saying. To me the simple answer is that people tell them he’s a socialist. They believe it. They likely don’t even listen to Biden. But my real question was what do progressives think when they hear people tell them Biden is a socialist.

    in reply to: Trump-“a big fat asshole” #121926
    waterfield
    Participant

    That is what David Axelrod said the public saw in last night’s debate. However, this study shows Americans value more about policies and actions from the President as opposed to his morality and unethical behavior. If true it only affirms my conviction that we have become a society where the only thing that counts is “what’s in it for me”. Sad.

    Op-Ed: Trump may be immoral, but most Americans don’t care

    ===============

    Well, its complicated isnt it. I know a lot of Rightwing-Evangelical-Christians.
    And to them, Abortion is Genocide. So, if you believe abortion is mass-murder-on-a-huge-scale, then voting for a complete jerk is totally justified if he is going to save all those ‘lives’. So, in that sense, those voters are NOT “whats in it for me” type voters. They are thinking of others. To them, liberal-professionals are the selfish ones thinking only of themselves.

    …I assume the debate was pointless at this point. I dunno, but i assume, all the undecideds have decided by now. 33 days left.

    w
    v

    Really was no “debate” so your right-pointless.

    I wonder what Progressives think when the right attempts to make Biden out as a socialist and lots of people believe it. I know people who-when asked why they don’t want to vote for Biden-say its because they don’t want this country to become “socialism”.

    in reply to: Centrists on BLM and Cops #121738
    waterfield
    Participant

    The main problem I (as a leftist) have with them is this — Yes, they are right to point out that Race does not explain the Facts/Stats.
    Plenty of POOR-whites are killed by police.
    And yes, plenty of POOR-blacks kill other POOR-blacks. Many more than the Cops are killing.

    These are all excuses the racists use, so they can argue that there’s no racism.

    If you are black you have a statistically greater chance of being stopped, searched, arrested, held, tried, and convicted. And you then get a longer sentence. That’s if you don’t get killed in the first place.

    A very good example is drugs. The percentage of whites and the percentage of blacks who do any kind of illegal drugs is about equal. But you are far more likely to be pulled over and searched for drugs if you are black.

    And poor whites kill poor whites. Killing tends to happen in the neighborhood.

    What stats don’t say about the so-called black on black crime thing is that the percentage of violent crime in areas economically defined by poverty are always high, regardless of race.

    Which gets us back to WV’s point about why is there poverty. The centrist, conservative, and racist answers are all the same. They did it to themselves.

    ….

    “Which gets us back to WV’s point about why is there poverty. The centrist, conservative, and racist answers are all the same. They did it to themselves.”

    That’s right only progressives know what causes poverty. BTW: I resent being put in the same group as “racists”. I have never once wrote or said that people in poverty “did it to themselves”. There are so many reasons whey poverty exists not only in this country but across the world. There are many “racists” in this country who are in poverty and would argue they did not do it too themselves. There are many “conservatives” in this country who are in poverty and will deny they did it to themselves. There are progressives, centrists, liberals, in poverty who deny the notion that they did it to themselves. Your lumping of “centrist, conservatives, and racists” into the same -“they did it to themselves”-bag
    speaks more to your own progressive bias than anything.

    in reply to: Centrists on BLM and Cops #121704
    waterfield
    Participant

    Well-to be honest I found each of those features to be quite candid and persuasive and consistent with my opinions on the subject. I also did not hear any one of them say they do not support BLM. Their concern is how people with a preconceived notion bias will affect their reaction to a black being killed during an interaction with the police.

    A preconceived notion bias is where some will look at that video and take it to mean these scholars do not support BLM or somehow are defending criminal cops when in fact more than one calls these cops murderers. Whether it fits one’s preconceive notion bias or not the truth of the matter is that there are justifiable actions involving cops killing blacks and there are justifiable actions involving cops killing whites.

    It’s also a preconceived notion bias when one turns the percentage data on its head to support their bias as was explained by the Columbia professor.

    in reply to: the fires #121511
    waterfield
    Participant

    We can’t breath in California… .. it’s surreal… air quality in San Jose has been very unhealthy for over a month.

    Last weekend it was 109 in San Jose… luckily the coastal fog has rolled in to cool things down… but it camouflages the “smoke smell” thus, the bad air quality is still very much in the air… We have ashes to wipe down everyday from forest fires that are miles away.

    This is much worse than the Paradise Fire from last year…

    I’m beginning to feel sick from all of this shitty air…and I consider myself a healthy person…

    The fog is extremely important. It’s caused by the variation between the surface air temperature and the sea temperature. As the oceans continue to warm this variance is less and less. Over the last 20 years we have seen less and less foggy days which of course means we are seeing warmer and warmer days along the coast. I recall growing up seeing several foggy and low overcast days along the coast. Now-very, very infrequent. Ocean surface IS getting warmer.

    in reply to: RIP RBG #121327
    waterfield
    Participant

    So…that looks like game, set, and match to me. They’ll fill that seat before November, and that’s the end of it.

    Not completely. Democrats can go to McConnel and say this: ” If you insist on getting an appointment through before the election here is what will happen IF the Dems take the white house and the senate. Because the Constitution does not address the number of SC Justices we will make sure we have 13 justices on the SC. ” This is more than possible since the number has changed over the years. It is the one card that the Dems can play.

    in reply to: police violence #121173
    waterfield
    Participant

    from The Police Are Lying in LA and the Media Is Falling for It—Again
    In the wake of the brutal shooting of two police officers, the sheriff’s department is trying to fabricate a case against Black Lives Matter, and journalists are playing along.

    https://www.thenation.com/article/society/la-shooting-police-lies/

    Skepticism of police statements should be a basic requirement of competent journalism, but it is particularly critical in times like this, when police have a reason to lie. The police are angry at the attempted murder of two officers, and they want other people to be angry, so they are not even trying to provide an accurate account of events. Instead, they are trying to build a case against Black Lives Matter.

    Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva (whose office tweeted out the misleading story about “protesters” at the hospital) could barely contain his contempt for BLM protesters in his statement about the shooting. “This is just a somber reminder that this is a dangerous job, and actions and words have consequences. Our job does not get any easier because people do not like law enforcement,” Villanueva said. “It pisses me off. It dismays me at the same time.”

    In this statement, Villanueva is trying to draw a direct line between the “actions and words” of protesters to the attempted murder of police officers. He seems less interested in drawing a line from police brutality and the murder of Black people to the attempted murder of police officers.

    The reality is that we don’t know why the suspect tried to kill those two officers, but we can see with our own eyes that his actions were wrong and dangerously misguided. Speculation into his motives is irresponsible absent evidence. It’s wrong for journalists to speculate, and it’s wrong for journalists to repeat the unverified, potentially unhinged speculations of the LA County sheriff without any evidence whatsoever.

    It’s not like the social justice organization ambushed two police officers in a parked car. It’s not like social justice organizations have a history of targeting police officers for murder. But the person who did target and ambush police officers appears to be Black and thus, apparently, it’s all our faults. That’s how racial profiling works, don’t you know.

    So the police already have their villain, and they are enacting their retribution. On Sunday, LA County sheriff’s deputies shut down a “protest encampment” across from LA City Hall. The holdouts had been there for months, living peacefully, but cops cleared it mere hours after the shooting. Cops claim it was taken down because of “deteriorating conditions,” but nobody is required to be addled enough to believe them.

    The inability and unwillingness of the media to accurately report on police lies and sensationalism will have the effect of excusing additional acts of police brutality. The police will point to the one guy who shot police officers (for reasons not yet known) and the one dude who shouted “I hope y’all die” as justification for cops to go out on the street tonight and violate the constitutional rights of Black people, or beat Black people, or kill Black people. And by refusing to call out police hysteria, the media will make that hysteria seem reasonable.

    Given the stakes, it’s not too much to ask the media to do its job. It’s not too much to ask journalists to act like journalists instead of stenographers. If I can restrain myself from being a snarky, irresponsible axe-grinder when it comes to “blue lives,” it’s not too much to ask mainstream sources to think before retweeting or republishing the latest round of blue lies.

    I have respect for Mystal but to refer to the brutal attempted assassination of two innocent officers in their car as “wrong and misguided” is itself incompetent journalism. “Misguided” ? This is way beyond the pot calling the kettle black. Here’s the video: let me know if you think this was a simple case of being “misguided”. Two cops now fighting to stay alive. One a 31 year old mother and the other a young 24 year old man.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54137838

    in reply to: police violence #121164
    waterfield
    Participant

    from The Police Are Lying in LA and the Media Is Falling for It—Again
    In the wake of the brutal shooting of two police officers, the sheriff’s department is trying to fabricate a case against Black Lives Matter, and journalists are playing along.

    https://www.thenation.com/article/society/la-shooting-police-lies/

    Skepticism of police statements should be a basic requirement of competent journalism, but it is particularly critical in times like this, when police have a reason to lie. The police are angry at the attempted murder of two officers, and they want other people to be angry, so they are not even trying to provide an accurate account of events. Instead, they are trying to build a case against Black Lives Matter.

    Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva (whose office tweeted out the misleading story about “protesters” at the hospital) could barely contain his contempt for BLM protesters in his statement about the shooting. “This is just a somber reminder that this is a dangerous job, and actions and words have consequences. Our job does not get any easier because people do not like law enforcement,” Villanueva said. “It pisses me off. It dismays me at the same time.”

    In this statement, Villanueva is trying to draw a direct line between the “actions and words” of protesters to the attempted murder of police officers. He seems less interested in drawing a line from police brutality and the murder of Black people to the attempted murder of police officers.

    The reality is that we don’t know why the suspect tried to kill those two officers, but we can see with our own eyes that his actions were wrong and dangerously misguided. Speculation into his motives is irresponsible absent evidence. It’s wrong for journalists to speculate, and it’s wrong for journalists to repeat the unverified, potentially unhinged speculations of the LA County sheriff without any evidence whatsoever.

    It’s not like the social justice organization ambushed two police officers in a parked car. It’s not like social justice organizations have a history of targeting police officers for murder. But the person who did target and ambush police officers appears to be Black and thus, apparently, it’s all our faults. That’s how racial profiling works, don’t you know.

    So the police already have their villain, and they are enacting their retribution. On Sunday, LA County sheriff’s deputies shut down a “protest encampment” across from LA City Hall. The holdouts had been there for months, living peacefully, but cops cleared it mere hours after the shooting. Cops claim it was taken down because of “deteriorating conditions,” but nobody is required to be addled enough to believe them.

    The inability and unwillingness of the media to accurately report on police lies and sensationalism will have the effect of excusing additional acts of police brutality. The police will point to the one guy who shot police officers (for reasons not yet known) and the one dude who shouted “I hope y’all die” as justification for cops to go out on the street tonight and violate the constitutional rights of Black people, or beat Black people, or kill Black people. And by refusing to call out police hysteria, the media will make that hysteria seem reasonable.

    Given the stakes, it’s not too much to ask the media to do its job. It’s not too much to ask journalists to act like journalists instead of stenographers. If I can restrain myself from being a snarky, irresponsible axe-grinder when it comes to “blue lives,” it’s not too much to ask mainstream sources to think before retweeting or republishing the latest round of blue lies.

    Talk about coloring something: ” his actions were wrong and dangerously misguided.” Wrong and dangerously misguided? How about reporting what it was: a brutal assassination of two innocent police officers sitting in a patrol car close to a metro station with a history of crime. There to protect innocent passengers. One officer was a 31 year old woman with a young son and the other a 24 yr old male officer.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54137838

    waterfield
    Participant

    You and I think alike a lot. The fact that “Defund the Police” has to be explained works for Trump. Whoever came up with that slogan wasn’t thinking beyond their nose.

    in reply to: police violence #120888
    waterfield
    Participant

    First, the police won’t say anything right now.

    They do it all the time, W. How often do you read stories about police violence? In Kenosha they were saying immediately Blake was suspected of having a knife.

    Any attempt you make to exonerate these guys, I am just going to generally not be all that sympatico with. It’s a national crisis and I don’t feel like whitewashing it.

    You do not beat a guy senseless for refusing to show ID when he is not suspected of anything. You just don’t. That is not how policing ought to work.

    And this just strikes me as being completely out of touch:

    Something “triggered” the altercation and that something isn’t shown on the video.

    There is an entire generation right now seeing through those old excuses, W.

    ,,,

    How in the world can a statement that says “whatever triggered the altercation is not shown on the video” is an “excuse” ? It is a statement of “fact” ! Saying it is an “excuse” is agenda driven and turns objective people off. What I wrote was nothing more but black and white impartiality. Lets wait and see what comes from the investigation. I will give you this. If you have an agenda I can see how you could interpret my impartiality as actually being supportive of the police. Truth is I’ve been on the other end representing victims of police brutality and what I’m saying is I can see how the story may be coming from the officers. If that means I’m supporting the police then-well I’m lost.

    in reply to: police violence #120841
    waterfield
    Participant

    The only thing that makes any kind of sense is that the vehicle may have resembled a stolen car or in fact was reported stolen and the broken light was simply a way to talk to the driver. That might also explain probable cause and the need to ask for ID of the passengers as possible participants in a crime. Right now have to wait to see what the investigation determines. Hard to tell whether the one cop was bitten or not but something caused an injury to his hand. Anyway, I suspect the cop’s story won’t be about a broken tail light but will focus on “suspicious” conduct especially when the driver has no ID. That will be the defense and maybe suffice in Georgia for probable cause.

    If that were the case the police would say so. Don’t you think?

    Hitting a guy in the mouth will cut your hand. Right?

    W this fits a profile. Cops are more likely to stop, search, arrest, and use force against black men.

    They beat the guy up because he defied them by asking why they needed his ID since he was just a passenger.

    The issue wasn’t probable cause, he had a tail light out…that is sufficient grounds to pull a guy over.

    They had NO grounds to ask for the passenger’s ID but then they will make one up soon enough.

    from https://www.kff.org/disparities-policy/press-release/poll-7-in-10-black-americans-say-they-have-experienced-incidents-of-discrimination-or-police-mistreatment-in-lifetime-including-nearly-half-who-felt-lives-were-in-danger/

    When asked about interactions with law enforcement during their lifetimes, 4 in 10 (41%) Black Americans say they have been stopped or detained by police because of their race, and 1 in 5 Black adults (21%), including 3 in 10 Black men, say they have been a victim of police violence.

    When asked about incidents just in the past year, 3 in 10 (30%) Black Americans say they personally experienced unfair treatment by police during traffic stops and other encounters. That is nearly three times the share of Hispanic Americans (11%) and ten times the share of White Americans (3%) who report such unfair treatment by police in the past year.

    First, the police won’t say anything right now. That’s not how the union works or is it how it should work given the investigation is moving forward. Second, I know nothing about what happened other than the video. The only people that “know” are those involved. Those that proclaim some were at fault or were not have fault without knowing the facts -all-are either blindly supporting the police or blinding following an agenda that dictates in these situations it’s always the cops at fault. What I am saying is that I can see how this will be framed by the police union or even the officers themselves. And that is they saw a car resembling one reported stolen and used a broken taillight to make the stop. Once the driver did not show any ID the combination likely -according to Georgia State law-gave them probable cause to, at a minimun, ask or order the occupants to step outside. For whatever reasons something then triggered the altercation. I’m not saying those ARE the facts but I am saying that will likely be the story line and its credibility will hopefully be determined by the investigation. Something “triggered” the altercation and that something isn’t shown on the video. As you pointed out the injured hand could simply be the officers hitting the victim. But its just as consistent with the officer’s statement that he was bitten by the victim. I wouldn’t rush to judgment until all the facts are determined by those in charge of determining just that.

    in reply to: police violence #120843
    waterfield
    Participant

    The cops are trained not to say anything in defense of their actions unless and until they are faced with an investigation. So no they wouldn’t be saying anything in their own defense. I know nothing about what took place other than watching the video. Those who make opinions based on that particular video are usually agenda driven either defending the actions of the police or criticizing the cops. What I am saying is that I can see the story or explanation coming from the police as follows: We saw a car resembling one reported to be stolen so we used the broken taillight as a means to make the stop and talk to the driver. When the driver had no ID that gave us probable cause to, at a minimum, ask the occupants to step outside so they could determine, safely, if this was indeed a stolen car. At some point, not shown on the video, something triggered the altercation. We have no idea what that was. Yes the officers hand could have been cut or injured when he was hitting the victim or as equally consistent when he was bitten as he claimed on the spot. Once again, no one other than those involved know. A witnesses video can reveal great stuff in a dispute but it can also hide material facts. I say we wait until the investigation, already ongoing, is complete.

    in reply to: police violence #120831
    waterfield
    Participant

    Graphic Video Shows Georgia Cops Brutally Beat Unarmed Black Man Bloody ‘For Not Having His ID’

    link https://newsone.com/4013363/georgia-police-brutality-video-unarmed-black-man/

    A video of showing police brutalizing an unarmed Black man was making the rounds on social media Saturday morning and showed multiple cops beating him bloody and apparently unconscious on a street, and it was purportedly all because he either did not have his ID on him or did not show it to the cops.

    An officer with the Clayton County Sheriff’s Office has been placed on administrative leave and an investigation was underway for what police described as “a video posted on social media involving a Deputy using physical force on a man.” Clayton County Sheriff Victor Hill “ordered his entire Internal Affairs Unit to come in and begin an investigation,” according to a press release.

    The video was first posted to Instagram on Friday night by someone who said the victim was her cousin. It was not immediately clear if she was the one who filmed it, but she said it happened earlier that day.

    The footage showed at least two officers smothering the man with their bodies on a street in an apparent attempt to restrain him. When both officers of the peace trained in de-escalation tactics could not manage to place one man in handcuffs, one cop repeatedly punched him in the face until he was not only bloody but also apparently unconscious.

    This was all happening as the man’s apparent young son was watching.

    It did not appear that the Black man was resisting.

    The video opened up with the two cops wrestling with the Black man and one even punching him in the face. When the person filming tells the cops to stop punching him, the cop says, “he’s biting my hand.” The same cop then presses the man’s head into the pavement as the man yells, “I’m gonna die!” and “I can’t breathe!”

    The woman filming the video screams, “No, don’t kill him! He said he can’t breathe!”

    That’s when the same cop decided that punching the man in the face multiple times was the best course of action.

    “We can’t get him in handcuffs,” one cop says as a third officer is seen rushing into the frame to assist.

    The Black man’s legs can be seen shaking as the three cops still can’t manage to put an unconscious man in handcuffs.

    As the cops step away briefly, the video shows blood streaming from the unresponsive man’s face.

    According to the Instagram post, the man was in a ride-sharing car, perhaps a Lyft, when the driver was pulled over because his “tail light was out.” The driver “didn’t have his License.” When the cops asked the passengers (“my cousin and his girl”) for their IDs, they asked why it was necessary to identify themselves when they had done nothing wrong.

    That’s when, according to the IG post, the cops “told him to get out the car and this what happened”:

    The only thing that makes any kind of sense is that the vehicle may have resembled a stolen car or in fact was reported stolen and the broken light was simply a way to talk to the driver. That might also explain probable cause and the need to ask for ID of the passengers as possible participants in a crime. Right now have to wait to see what the investigation determines. Hard to tell whether the one cop was bitten or not but something caused and injury to his hand. Anyway, I suspect the cop’s story won’t be about a broken tail light but will focus on “suspicious” conduct especially when the driver has no ID. That will be the defense and maybe suffice in Georgia for probable cause.

    in reply to: Zooey #120822
    waterfield
    Participant

    Love Auburn-especially the old Placer County Courthouse. My son lives in Fair Oaks so we are there often-at least we were before COVID. I understand your skies are pretty crappy now with falling ash, etc.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 2 months ago by waterfield.
    waterfield
    Participant

    Charles Manson is alive and well and out there someplace directing the Boogaloo Boys-or whatever they call themselves.

    in reply to: Activists must stop being activists now #120514
    waterfield
    Participant

    Nothing wrong with swimming in the ocean. Unless your swimming straight into the mouth of a Great White Shark. Trump loves and hopes the protests continue because he knows it works against Biden-no matter if 99.9% or the protesters are peaceful. A few weeks back my son-a huge Sanders supporter-picked up my grandson at a ski clinic on Mt. Hood. He then drove his family to Portland, a city he loved and had thoughts of moving there. He could not get out of Portland any faster as he said “Dad, I’ve never seen a city is such chaos”. Buildings were on fire and every where he turned there was scary violence.” So from his personal experience I have no reason to believe the protests were “peaceful”. Maybe other cities and towns are different but not so in Portland. When I talk to Trump supports more than one will say “look at what’s happening in Portland. That’s what will happen in every city if Biden is elected.

    My personal opinion is that it is better to win first and then do what’s right (i.e. protest) That is the only way the goal of protests can ever hope to be accomplished. First comes the power and then comes the concrete action. Scaring voters that black and brown gangs are coming to destroy everything you care and love does work ! Lets not fumble the ball right into Trump’s hands.

    As every trial lawyer knows it’s not about the “truth” or the “facts”-it’s simply about “perception”. Who is in the right-that’s what’s important.

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 2 months ago by waterfield.
Viewing 30 posts - 61 through 90 (of 663 total)