Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 8,761 through 8,790 (of 12,326 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: King Arthur #45891
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    On Rothko: I wrote this for my own website back in 2008:

    All art is paradox. But Rothko, perhaps more than any other modern painter, embraced the paradox and threw it profoundly in our faces.

    The canvas is flat. You can’t enter it. You can’t go through it, if it’s hanging on the wall. At least without injury and perhaps a heavy bill from the gallery. But Rothko continuously tells the audience to do just that…

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

    I enjoyed this series a while back. I thot the Rothko film was good. But then I liked Rothko’s stuff:

    w
    v

    in reply to: King Arthur #45883
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Abstract art is ridiculous. … I find it amazing. Pollock must still be laughing in his grave.

    —————–
    Well, I used to think that way myself, and I still do sometimes, when i walk through
    a gallery and see stuff like a coat-hanger sticking out of a watermelon, etc.

    But then I stopped trying to ‘define’ what Art “is” a few years ago. (if you gather quotes by famous artists, btw, you will always find a sentence that starts ‘Art is….’ and for each artist their definition will be different. I happen to collect ‘Art is…‘ quotes, btw 🙂

    One thing that has helped me think and wonder and enjoy and hate ART,
    is to separate the ‘business/corporate/patron’ aspect of it, from
    the artist/doing-art part of it. There’s always been and always going to be
    rich folks who over-pay for ‘art’ or who view art as an ‘investment’ and who influence or control the art ‘market’. And that whole money-dynamic is a different thing
    than ‘art’. Whatever art is. Or isn’t.

    Another interesting thing to me is, some of those ‘abstract’ artists could also paint
    ‘realistic’ pictures very well. They could do the realism thing just fine, and often did early in their careers. So, its not always a case of them not being ‘able’ to do landscapes and fruit baskets and greayhounds chasing foxes and stuff. Sometimes they just got-to rethinking what art is, and what life is, and started exploring weird stuff. Doesn’t make their art ‘good’ btw. Or bad. Ya know. Folks will have different experiences lookin at it.

    I’ve said this before — I used to think Rothko’s ‘one rectangle on top of another’ was bullshit. A child could paint that. Etc. Then one day, i was lookin at one of his paintings and i started tearing up. I got emotional. (apparently this is rather common with Rothko’s paintings) Well, that made me rethink Rothko’s work and i started reading about him, etc. Blah blah blah.

    I dunno what Art is. Its fun to wonder about it, though.

    w
    v
    “Art is either plagiarism, or revolution.”
    –Paul Gauguin.

    “Art is not a mirror held up to reality
    but a hammer with which to shape it.”
    ― Bertolt Brecht

    “Art is the Mirror of our betrayed ideals.”
    ― Doris Lessing, The Golden Notebook

    “Art has nothing to do with clarity, does not dabble in the clear and does not make clear”
    ― Samuel Beckett

    “Art is the lie that enables us to realize the truth.”
    ― Pablo Picasso

    “Art enables us to find ourselves and lose ourselves at the same time.”
    ― Thomas Merton, No Man Is an Island

    “All art is autobiographical; the pearl is the oyster’s autobiography.”
    ― Federico Fellini

    Nature is the art of God.
    ~ Thomas Browne, Religio Medici, 1635 ~

    in reply to: What is "conservatism," really? #45879
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I dont know what it is. Mainly because ‘they’ dont agree on what “it” is.
    There’s many kinds of conservatives, just like there’s many kinds of ‘christians’ and ‘anarchists’ etc.

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/what-is-a-conservative/

    What are our options btw? 🙂

    What are the main political options open to us nowadays,
    here, in America? We can be….what?

    Conservative
    Neo-liberal
    Liberal
    Leftist
    Neo-Con
    Whatever-the-Hell-Trump-Is
    DNC-Democrat
    Libertarian
    Green Party Progressive

    Whet else is out there?

    w
    v

    in reply to: Jill Stein-a genuine question #45875
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    WV: If “views” are her qualifications-as you wrote- there are a million others that are qualified including my gardner who shares those
    views along with myself. Why is she a better candidate than either myself or my gardner?

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

    Yes, but that is exactly my view — I think your gardener could do just fine as President,
    if he/she was a critical thinker, was compassionate, and wise. And had help.

    Look at Reagan and Bush for example — Did they even write their own speeches? No.
    Did they do their own thinking on 95 percent of the documents the signed? No. I mean, unless you really think Reagan/Bush were experts on Mongolia, technology, border disputes, Asia, a gazillion other things. They didnt know shit about a gazillion things they were asked to be involved in — so, what did they do? They got help. They got advice from people who they though WERE experts in various fields. Thats what they all do. Your gardener could do it.
    Any poster on this board could be President.

    The differences would emerge because of political philosophies which would lead to
    different POLICIES.

    You think being President requires all kinds of experience IN GOVERNMENT. I think being President requires Wisdom, compassion, critical thinking.

    I also think any poster on this board could be a Supreme Court Justice. With a little help from a good law clerk. It aint that hard. WE are lead to ‘believe’ its hard. It aint. I always tell people being an elementary school teacher was WAAAAAY harder than being a lawyer. Most people probly think the opposite though. A lot of work and money go into convincing the average american that being a Judge/Lawyer/President/Politician is hard and should only be the realm of the Elites. Its bullshit.

    Just my opinion. I’m glad you are posting here, btw. We disagree on a gazillion things, but i have learned its not ‘personal’. Just different views. Thats how i look at it now, anyway.

    We need a president that SURFS. I wonder if any of them have?

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    You can make that claim against any candidate by your logic. Trump isn’t bought going in. Just like Perot. But unlike Perot He is in it to win. He knows the parasitic realities of trying to get something done with parasite politicians demanding money. Better infrastructure is in all our interests.

    ————————-

    I think its a fair point that he cant be ‘bought’ by money.
    Like Perot.

    But I also think its a fair question to wonder if he is intoxicated by “power”.
    Ya know. What does Trump really want, and what is influencing him? I dunno.
    Maybe its some sense of altruism, mixed with the usual darker stuff — narcissism, ego, ambition, etc. All the usual stuff, lies, distortions, that Shakespeare wrote about.

    But then, like you noted, you could say that about all the National Politicos.

    Which is why i dont pay much attention to the “personality” stuff, concerning Trump or Clinton or anyone. Its the policies to me. Just the policies. I dont even care how Trump got his money (inheritance, corruption, etc)

    Anyway, its a fascinating election. Just fascinating. Surreal too, as usual.

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    mexicans….

    —————

    Wow. Damn. Counter-Intuitive Facts can be so annoying, LoL.

    More meixcans leaving than coming ? Who knew.

    w
    v

    in reply to: I'm glad Kelly is coaching the 9ers… #45845
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    If he hasn’t learned anything from his time in Philly it could be a disaster.

    http://www.csnphilly.com/the700level/new-eagles-regime-highlights-problems-chip-kellys-methods?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo&yptr=yahoo

    —————-

    I dunno. Mike Martz was asked in an interview about who the good offensive minds were
    and if I’m not mistaken he mentioned Chip Kelly.

    The NFC West has some interesting coaches for sure:

    Carroll
    Arians
    Kelly
    Fisher

    How would you rank them?

    w
    v

    in reply to: Jill Stein-a genuine question #45830
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Her views ‘are’ her ‘qualifications’ to me. Her views reflect ‘wisdom’ and critical thinking, and compassion.

    I dont care that she hasn’t been secretary of state, or a governor or senator
    or part of the system that is destroying the biosphere.

    She’s an outsider, alright. Not an insider. Doesn’t bother me a bit.

    It aint that hard to be President of the United States. George Bush did it for eight years.
    I think a wise, compassionate, critical-thinker
    could somehow muddle through, with help.

    w
    v

    in reply to: Bernie, Jill, Nader, Trump… #45801
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    TYT (The Young Turks for the less internet media savvy, a progressive online news channel that has recently crossed 4 Billion views on YouTube) recently ran a poll for Sanders supporters on their app and in their YouTube video. With over 20,000 responses, the verdict was 17% would vote for Hillary, 83% Never Hillary.

    The hosts were shocked at the disparity. They’ve discounted the validity of the “lesser of two evils” argument over and over, but I don’t think they thought their viewers really took it to heart.

    Also, a vote for Jill Stein isn’t wasted. If we can get her to 15%, that puts her on the national stage.

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

    Yeah, I’m wondering what the numbers show. I’m wondering what percentage of Bernie voters would have to vote for Jill to torpedo Clinton ?

    I would guess this election is going to be very close. Just guessing.

    So, it probably wont take a very high percentage of Bernie voters turning to the Green Party to give Donald Trump the Presidency of the United States.

    Zooey was noting how awful the Dem-Rep choice is this time around. But think about it — is it REALLY that different than in past years? Really? Are Trump-the-billiaire-business-man and Clinton-the-insider all that different from the McCains and Kerrys and Bushs and Bill-Clintons and Obamas and Nixons etc? I dunno. I dont think they are that different. Trump has that outsiders ‘talk-radio’ demeanor but is he REALLY worse than GW ?

    w
    v

    in reply to: King Arthur #45749
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    You might go with that but art doesn’t. Art picks things up from the past and alters and recombines them. It just does..

    —————-

    I dont think Art does. Or doesn’t. I dont think anyone can say what art “just does”.

    Some does, some doesnt. Just depends on who is talking about it.

    BT likes his myth-movies one narrow way. You like a broader spectrum of myth-movies.

    w
    v

    Remember most of my declarations are based on history, not philosophy. I look at what happened and happens, and don’t compare it to some reasoned-to ideal.

    And yeah art has always done that.

    In fact Homer didn’t originate the epic of troy. He was one of the many who re-worked that story through the ages.

    Maybe I could have put it this way—among the many things art has always done and still does, is (etc.)

    And that’s just true.

    So I embrace the history, and don’t care about the philosophical declarations about oughts and shoulds. I make history-based declarations about been theres and done thats.

    What I say has absolutely nothing to do with what I like or don’t like. It is just true. Taken as a whole art is always re-doing things (among the other things it does.) That wasn’t supposed to mean every single individual artist in every single art does that. BUT taken as a whole yes that always happens and always will happen.

    Where I disagree is that I don’t think the fact that that is always happening means the later guys have to stay clear of what the earlier guys did or they will be reprimanded. I always just look around and say, yeah well different people are always doing that, so what.

    —————–
    Well, I’m talking about posting, really. How to post. How not to post.

    So, i will bow out of this thread.

    w
    v

    in reply to: King Arthur #45742
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    You might go with that but art doesn’t. Art picks things up from the past and alters and recombines them. It just does..

    —————-

    I dont think Art does. Or doesn’t. I dont think anyone can say what art “just does”.

    Some does, some doesnt. Just depends on who is talking about it.

    BT likes his myth-movies one narrow way. You like a broader spectrum of myth-movies.

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I probly dont worry ‘quite’ as much about him as most leftist
    cause i know the system wont let him do a lot of what he wants to do.

    That’s what they used to say at first in Maine about LePage.

    People don’t say that anymore.

    You would be amazed at how much someone can do. And get away with.

    ==============
    I know that is your thing, but Trump is not Lepage,
    and the Nation is not Maine. So, while i see the analogy,
    i also dont quite see the ‘sameness’ to it.

    I mean why do you think Trump is Lepage and Lepage is Trump? Why?

    w
    v

    in reply to: King Arthur #45738
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    http://www.zimbio.com/quiz/hpbWxCCmzMR/Game+Thrones+Character

    I am in the same quadrant with Stalin, Gandhi and John Snow.

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Trump is not that complicated to me. He is, first and foremost–a con man. He will be whatever he has to be to win. …

    But he will seek his personal interests above all else….

    Who is Donald Trump and what does he want?

    A con man who wants what is best for Trump.

    Everyone else can have what is left.

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

    I dunno. I dont really see him as a con man. I mean not anymore than
    any other national Dem or Rep.

    I tend to see him more like i saw Palin or Quayle or Reagan — I think he actually
    believes in most of what he is saying. I dont think he is ‘self-reflective’ and i think he
    has a pretty simple, black and white, simplistic view of the world. A business-peson’s view.
    In a way its kindof Norman-Rockwell-ish. If Norman painted modern billionaire robber-barrons.

    Whatever he is, he is more Pat Buchannon than William F Buckley.

    But he’s not Pat Buchannon either. He’s got a bit of Jerry Springer in him.

    I probly dont worry ‘quite’ as much about him as most leftist
    cause i know the system wont let him do a lot of what he wants to do.

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Well there’s been five posts so far — six including mine — and no-one has said anything about actual real Trump POLICIES. I dont think thats an accident.

    Reagan got elected by being vague on real, actual policies. He just kinda tapped into…somethin…’shining cities on hills’ and stuff.

    w
    v

    My post answered each question. I addressed his policy regarding ILLEGAL immigration and its effect on the US worker. Could have addressed its effect upon the US taxpayer but that wouldn’t have mattered with you.

    —————-
    Yeah, Immigration seems to be a core fundamental issue to Trump.

    He talks about it a great deal. I dont watch tv or watch the ‘news’ much so I’m
    just beginning to see how important that issue is to Republicans. Does Hillary talk about Immigration as much as Trump?

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I dont think much of that article.

    The writer actually equates denying the evidence of climate change, or evolution
    with being against using animals in research?

    That is apples and oranges. Or apples and ethics.

    I mean, one category is simply denying or ignoring scientific evidence/consensus.

    And the other category has nothing to do with denying scientific evidence. Its simply arguing science takes a backseat to compassion for animals. Now whether you agree or disagree with animal-activists, you cant equate them to evolution deniers.

    w
    v

    in reply to: Wagoner on Gaines #45728
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Gaines is the first to admit that a position room without Jenkins has taken some getting used to. He said Jenkins was the jokester of the room and the leader he and his teammates followed
    ——————-

    Didnt know JJ was thot of as a ‘leader’.

    w
    v

    in reply to: buzzing #45711
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    One would think a swarm of food, would mean
    more birds. Flocks of fat birds.

    But no. I have hardly seen any birds since the beasts
    began to rise from the Earth.

    During Cicada Boom, Birds Mysteriously Vanish

    w
    v

    in reply to: King Arthur #45709
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    But the truly unforgivable, grand-canyon-sized hole in my movie life is due to the absence of one about Cuchulain (pronounced, Cu-hool-in), the Irish Achilles. I have no idea why Hollywood hasn’t gone there. They could go back to Sutcliff for that, too, with her Hound of Ulster. Or Morgan Llywelyn’s Red Branch. Or much further back in time to Lady Gregory’s Cuchulain of Muirthemne

    But make it they must!!

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

    “….The female characters are vivid and self-motivated. The saga is overlaid with episodes which could be echoes of ancient myths, for instance the story of the two shapeshifting swineherds. There are sections of great poetry embedded in the text, particularly the lament of Emer on Cuchulain’s death.”

    Shapeshifting Swineherds?

    There’s a political joke in there somewhere.

    I always liked reading about myths and legends when i was young,
    but so far, i haven’t seen Hollywood do that stuff very well.
    Show me a sword in a movie, and I’ll show you a
    bad movie. Just my opinion.

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    There were quite a few articles on Trump supporters and their views on race, gay people, Muslims and so on, throughout his campaign.

    Here’s one of them:

    Measuring Donald Trump’s Supporters for Intolerance

    It’s stunning to think so many of his supporters thought the slaves shouldn’t have been freed; love the confederate flag; want all gay people banned from America, along with Muslims, etc. etc.

    —————-
    Well he seems to have picked up the David Duke supporters. The angry white racist crowd.

    But Trump is not David Duke. He’s somethin different. But he’s got that streak in him, looks like.

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    wiki continued, fwiw. Kinda funny seeing all the ways he’s described. Like an inkblot test:

    Trump is a protectionist, according to free-market advocate Stephen Moore and conservative economist Lawrence Kudlow.[25]

    Scales and rankings

    Crowdpac

    In 2015, Crowdpac gave Trump a ranking of 0.4L out of 10L. In 2016, Crowdpac gave Trump a ranking of 5.1C out of 10C, shifting Donald Trump more to the conservatism spectrum.[26]

    On the Issues

    The organization and website On the Issues has classified Trump in a variety of ways over time: as a “moderate populist” (2003);[27] a “liberal-leaning populist” (2003-2011);[28] a “moderate populist conservative” (2011-2012);[29] a “libertarian-leaning conservative” (2012-2013);[30] a “moderate conservative” (2013-2014);[31] a “libertarian-leaning conservative” (2014-2015);[32] a “hard-core conservative” (2015);[33] a “libertarian-leaning conservative” (2015-2016);[33][34] and a “moderate conservative” (2016–present).[35]

    Economic policy…

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    The Wiki article on Trump is excellent, I’d say. Not that I’ve read it. But it looks like its worth reading.

    Here’s the beginning of it:

    Trump’s political positions are widely viewed as populist.[8][9] Among academics, political writers, and pundits, Trump and his politics have been classified in greater detail, but in varying ways.

    Liberal economist and columnist Paul Krugman disputes that Trump is a populist, arguing that his policies favor the rich over those less well off.[10] Harvard Kennedy School political scientist Pippa Norris has described Trump as a “populist authoritarian” analogous to European parties such as the Swiss People’s Party, Austrian Freedom Party, Swedish Democrats, and Danish People’s Party.[11] Political satirist and columnist Walter Shapiro and political commentator Jonathan Chait describe Trump as authoritarian.[12][13] Conservative commentator Mary Katharine Ham characterized Trump as a “casual authoritarian,” saying “he is a candidate who has happily and proudly spurned the entire idea of limits on his power as an executive and doesn’t have any interest in the Constitution and what it allows him to do and what does not allow him to do. That is concerning for people who are interested in limited government.”[14] Charles C. W. Cooke of the National Review has expressed similar views, terming Trump an “anti-constitutional authoritarian.“[15] Libertarian journalist Nick Gillespie, by contrast, calls Trump “populist rather than an authoritarian”.[16]

    Legal experts spanning the political spectrum, including many conservative and libertarian scholars, have suggested that “Trump’s blustery attacks on the press, complaints about the judicial system and bold claims of presidential power collectively sketch out a constitutional worldview that shows contempt for the First Amendment, the separation of powers and the rule of law.”[17] Law professors Randy E. Barnett, Richard Epstein, and David G. Post, for example, suggest that Trump has little or no awareness of, or commitment to, the constitutional principles of separation of powers and federalism.[17] Law professor Ilya Somin believes that Trump “poses a serious threat to the press and the First Amendment,” citing Trump’s proposal to expand defamation laws to make it easier to sue journalists and his remark that Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos will “have problems” if he is elected president.[17]

    Republican opinion journalist Josh Barro terms Trump a “moderate Republican,” saying that except on immigration, his views are “anything but ideologically rigid, and he certainly does not equate deal making with surrender.”[18] MSNBC host Joe Scarborough says Trump is essentially more like a “centrist Democrat” on social issues.[19] Journalist and political analyst John Heilemann has characterized Trump as liberal on social issues,[20] while conservative talk radio host and political commentator Rush Limbaugh says that Heilemann is seeing in Trump what he wants to see.[21]

    Trump is nativist in the opinion of Washington Post editorial page editor Fred Hiatt.[22] Conservative writer and editor Rod Dreher, a Trump opponent, writes that the term “nativist” is laden with negative connotations and is typically used as a pejorative;[23] Rich Lowry, the editor of National Review, instead calls Trump an “immigration hawk” and supports Trump’s effort to return immigration levels to a historically average level.[24]…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Donald_Trump

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photowv.
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Trump on Waterboarding, fwiw:

    ===================================
    In December, Trump started demanding that the US target the families of ISIS members in addition to “bombing the sh*t” out of the terrorist organization. He went further in February, advocating for torture as a method of interrogation.

    “I would bring back waterboarding, and I’d bring back a hell of a lot worse than waterboarding,” Trump declared in the February debate just ahead of the New Hampshire primary. Calls for bringing torture back became a regular applause line at rallies, despite the likelihood that both of these ideas would require the American military to obey orders that violate international laws and federal anti-torture statutes.

    Pressed at a debate on March 3 over whether the American military would obey his order to violate international laws and the Geneva Convention to do such things, Trump insisted they’d listen to him, despite condemnation from military leaders and conservatives.

    “Frankly, when I say they’ll do as I tell them, they’ll do as I tell them,” he said.

    2. The military shouldn’t break the law, after all.

    He then reversed this position the very next day, on March 4, in a statement to the Wall Street Journal, saying he “will not order military or other officials to violate those laws and will seek their advice on such matters.”

    3. The laws forbidding torture should be changed so no one has to break them.

    Not long after terrorist attacks in Brussels killed at least 28 people and injured dozens more on March 22, Trump called in to CNN to expand on his call to legalize waterboarding.

    “Look, I think we have to change our law on the waterboarding thing, where they can chop off heads and drown people in cages, in heavy steel cages and we can’t water board,” Trump told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. “We have to change our laws and we have to be able to fight at least on almost equal basis.”

    When Blitzer reminded Trump that military leaders don’t support torture and that it violates international agreements that the United States has signed, Trump called opposition to torture a “political decision.”

    “I would say that the eggheads that came up with this international law should turn on their television and watch CNN right now, because I’m looking at scenes on CNN right now as I’m speaking to you that are absolutely atrocious,” Trump said. “And I would be willing to bet, when I am seeing all of the bodies laying all over the floor, including young, beautiful children laying dead on the floor, I would say if they watched that, maybe, just maybe they’ll approve of waterboarding and other things.”

    Current position: Trump says he’s against violating international laws or ordering others to do so, but wants to change the laws to legalize, at minimum, waterboarding.
    http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/full-list-donald-trump-s-rapidly-changing-policy-positions-n547801

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photowv.
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    He does focus a lot on an issue that does not affect WV much, and i dont follow the issue much: Immigration.

    ====================================
    Trump released a comprehensive policy plan for immigration reform — something many other Republican candidates have yet to do.

    In it, Trump lays out what he plans to do…Most notably, the plan promises widespread deportation, including the “mandatory return of all criminal aliens,” or undocumented immigrants who have been convicted of crimes.

    “We’re going to keep the families together, but they have to go,” he said on Meet the Press. Neither in his interview nor in the plan, however, did Trump say how this would be accomplished.

    Trump’s plan said that he would end what’s known as birthright citizenship, which guarantees citizenship to almost all people born within U.S. borders, regardless of the legal status of their parents. That right is guaranteed under the 14th Amendment. A number of other Republican candidates have also expressed support for this idea, including New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Sen. Rand Paul, and Sen. Lindsey Graham.

    As for border security, Trump doubled down on his pledge to have Mexico build and pay for an enormous wall across the border. Under the Trump administration, the U.S. would impose various penalties on the Mexican government and its officials until it agreed to build and pay for the wall.

    “Mexico must pay for the wall and, until they do, the United States will, among other things: impound all remittance payments derived from illegal wages; increase fees on all temporary visas issued to Mexican CEOs and diplomats (and if necessary cancel them); increase fees on all border crossing cards — of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays); increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays); and increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico [Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options].”

    Under Trump’s plan, businesses would be required to hire “American workers first”; monetary penalties would be increased for people who overstay their visas; and the J-1 visa jobs program, which allows kids from other countries to participate in things like summer exchange programs, would be terminated. Trump’s plan also calls for tripling the number of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, which are in charge of enforcing immigration laws.

    The plan may be difficult to implement. Many of the initiatives, such as tripling the number of ICE officers, would require huge increases in federal funding — increases that would most likely have to be approved by Congress.

    Interestingly, the most frequent source Trump cites to back up the ideas in his plan is the right-wing news site Breitbart News. At least six of the conservative site’s articles are linked to in Trump’s plan, far more than any other source. Trump has done numerous exclusive interviews with the site, which on Sunday reported that his immigration plan would “get Americans back to work.”

    Donald Trump Just Released An Actual Policy Plan

    • This reply was modified 9 years, 11 months ago by Avatar photowv.
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Well there’s been five posts so far — six including mine — and no-one has said anything about actual real Trump POLICIES. I dont think thats an accident.

    Reagan got elected by being vague on real, actual policies. He just kinda tapped into…somethin…’shining cities on hills’ and stuff.

    w
    v

    in reply to: time to take the political compass poll again #45661
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Anyway, back to my point — which was NOT about what ‘label’ we arbitrarily chose — the point is, do you understand that we are NOT Democrats. And do you understand that there are such things as “leftists” (or whatever label u want to use) who cant stand Obama, Clinton, the Republicans and the rest of the “system” politicians. Do you get that? Not lecturing here, just asking if you get that?

    WV, I think you’re asking too much from “conservatives,” who really aren’t conservatives anymore. They’re right-wing radicals. The current American iteration is well to the right of the Reagan conservative, and they keep moving to the right. They pretty much do this each time the Dems stake out more of their old territory — which is constant — and feel the need to always and forever be to their right. The Dems are now planted firmly on the center-right, own it, after it was vacated by Republicans. The Republicans have in turn purged their ranks of the old guard, the Eisenhower Republicans, etc. . . . even the McCain of 2000 version.

    This new breed of faux-conservative has been brainwashed to unprecedented degrees for forty years, and pretty much everything is the End of the World!!! for them. The slightest move from the Federal government means the Apocalypse is nigh. Reagan played into this with his talk about Medicare meaning the total end of all freedom for Americans. And with Obama? A year before he took office, you had large numbers of Republicans thinking he was the anti-christ. That number is roughly 25% now. Majorities believed he was foreign-born, a Muslim, a secret agent sent to destroy America, a Marxist, socialist, bogeyman, etc. etc.

    They were fed this nonsense 24/7 by hate radio, their churches, and their reps, and it’s never stopped. This is why they can never see Obama for what he is — a true conservative, an pre-Reagan Republican. They’ve been told for years and years that he was, quite literally, the devil, that he “palled around with terrorists,” that he’s a Muslim secret agent, blah blah blah.

    So they’re just never going to see how lucky they were that he was elected. They got an actual conservative in office, who implemented actual conservative policies, most of them falling waaaaay short, which was to be expected. But who gets the blame? “The left.” Even though Obama implemented center-right government. They couldn’t have written a better script.

    And while you’re obviously, self-evidently correct about the massive gulf between leftists and Obama, if you spend any time on “conservative” websites or websites with large participation by “conservatives,” it’s pretty much an article of faith among them that Obama is “far left,” as are the Dems in generally. They simply believe in the myths, legends and propaganda handed down to them from hate radio, the Birchers, the religiously wrong, the Randians and so on. Now, bnw may not be like his peers, but I haven’t seen any evidence that he differs from them on this issue. He thought it was absurd when I said Obama has governed as a conservative — which he has — and I don’t think he’ll ever understand that the Republican party is no longer conservative in the slightest. It’s a radical, far-right party now. The Dems are now the true conservatives in America.

    —————–
    Well, i dunno. I really dont know much about the Republicans anymore.
    You might be right. Or left. I dunno. 🙂

    At any rate, I like having bnw around. I like the idea of trying to converse,
    trying to understand, trying to find common political ground once in a while,
    and trying to find ‘human’ common ground where it…can be found.

    I just aint into ‘arguing’ anymore. That’s just me. I’m too old now, for that 🙂
    Really, just too old for it.

    w
    v

    w
    v

    in reply to: MSM aflutter over new law #45660
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    Yup. I agree with all that, basically.

    …on the test though, if ya make it too long
    people like me wouldn’t take it. Too busy, attention span too short, etc.

    w
    v

    in reply to: Goff the Week 1 Starter? #45654
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I dont think anyone CAN know at this point.
    Cause Fisher doesn’t know at this point.

    Just depends on how Goff and Keenum (and Mannion?) play in pre-season.

    And….just to throw in more weirdness — what if Mannion outplays
    the other two 🙂

    w
    v

    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    When they said “the lesser of two evils” and “hold your nose and vote”,
    I don’t think people who casually support Hillary have any idea how bad she is.

    She’s Obama without the charm, heart, and humanity and with loads more personal ambition.

    I cringe at the thought of that first White House Correspondents Dinner…
    &
    I’ve got some kind of worrisome head cold and I’d rather have that than watch Hillary try to be funny for 15 minutes…

    —————————

    Yup. This is going to be ugly beyond belief.

    Both are going very negative… and we’ll be lucky if we survive it 🙂

    Weirdly, both will be right about the other. Thats the thing.
    They both have plenty of ACCURATE VALID mud to sling. Both are total-loathsome-weasels.
    Both.

    The Billionaire-lying-racist-demogogue vs the Millionaire-lying-warmongerer.

    And millions and millions and millions of american citizens are gonna walk
    into the polls, and happily vote for one or the other. And they dont have to. But they will — cause they dont want to….”waste their vote”.

    w
    v

    in reply to: time to take the political compass poll again #45645
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I remember it wasn’t that long ago when your lefties here were more self identified as “progressives”..

    —————–
    Well, this small group of leftists has been calling itself ‘leftists’ for about a decade now, but ‘progressives’ is fine with me. Its just a label.
    I dont really care what label is used, leftist, progressive, far-left, radical, libertarian-socialist, tree-hugging-green-commie-pinko, Peoples-democratic-Iconoclasts-and-Organic-Gardening-Club…. The ‘name’ doesn’t matter.

    Some of us had a discussion about it many years ago, and kinda hashed out what name made the most sense. We bandied about some labels. Some folks thot ‘liberal’ made sense, but then we thot liberal made us sound like Democrats, which we definitely are NOT. So, ‘leftist’ seemed a nice semi-vague, label for “way to the left of the Democrats”.

    Anyway, back to my point — which was NOT about what ‘label’ we arbitrarily chose — the point is, do you understand that we are NOT Democrats. And do you understand that there are such things as “leftists” (or whatever label u want to use) who cant stand Obama, Clinton, the Republicans and the rest of the “system” politicians. Do you get that? Not lecturing here, just asking if you get that?

    w
    v

Viewing 30 posts - 8,761 through 8,790 (of 12,326 total)