Half-baked Republican Presidential Fruitcakes (and fellow confections)

Samaris

robindch wrote: »

Is it worth adding to the ongoing soap-opera trainwreck combo which is #45's presidency? It might have taken him six months to threaten violence and war, but at least god's on his side:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/08/god-has-given-trump-authority-to-take-out-kim-jong-un-evangelical-adviser-says/

That was gobsmacking. Funnily enough, I'd been having a debate with my fiance about current dangers to the world, and I was taking the view that Islamic fundamentalism is currently the greatest religious danger (although Christian fundamentalism is dangerous in the West and in parts of Africa).

Then that happened about an hour after and I had to concede the point

silverharp

somebody is smoking something, Pay to Pray?

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/08/hillary-clinton-devotionals/535941/

Hillary Wants to Preach

Religion is playing a big role in Clinton’s post-election tour. What does she have to gain from sharing her faith now?

Hillary Clinton wants to preach. That’s what she told Bill Shillady, her longtime pastor, at a recent photo shoot for his new book about the daily devotionals he sent her during the 2016 campaign. Scattered bits of reporting suggest that ministry has always been a secret dream of the two-time presidential candidate: Last fall, the former Newsweek editor Kenneth Woodward revealed that Clinton told him in 1994 that she thought “all the time” about becoming an ordained Methodist minister. She asked him not to write about it, though: “It will make me seem much too pious.” The incident perfectly captures Clinton’s long campaign to modulate—and sometimes obscure—expressions of her faith.

Hotblack Desiato

[monty python fake woman's voice]Well I'm glad I didn't vote for her[/monty python fake woman's voice]

This is eerily prescient. Just needs the hair a bit more.. well you know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tj9M34DzAKo

robindch

Samaris wrote: »

That was gobsmacking.

Well, there's no doubt that #45 is the soap opera which continues to give. Yesterday, after #45 delivered his "fire and fury" comment yesterday, Tillerson tried to tone things down by claiming that #45 "was sending a strong message to North Korea in a language that Kim Jong Un would understand"; then a WH spokesman said that Tillerson shouldn't be talking about military matters; then #45 doubles down in prose which could have been written by a frightened, talentless eight year old:

#45 wrote:

I will tell you this, if North Korea does anything in terms of even thinking about attack of anybody that we love or we represent or our allies or us they can be very, very nervous. I'll tell you why… because things will happen to them like they never thought possible.

Elsewhere, it's turned out that #45's out-of-the-blue tweet demanding that USG prevent transgender people from serving in the US military was served up very shortly after the FBI conducted an early-morning raid on the house of his former election campaign manager, Paul Manafort (a guy who was paid at least $17 million dollars by the Party of The Regions, the probably defunct pro-Kremlin Ukrainian party whose president, Victor Yankovich, fled the capital in February 2014 when his secret police abandoned him after the Maidan massacre, precipitating Putin's theft of Crimea and his ongoing invasion and war in the Donbass). Some suspicious people have suggested that the raid, then the arrival of the distracting tweet, were not unrelated.

Oh yes, and #45's took time out today to thank Putin for requiring the State Department to fire 755 staff at the US Embassy in Moscow.

I'm sure there's more.

Samaris

I wish an adult would come into the room, smack Trump and Kim around the ears and send them to opposite corners without their toys for a bit. Honest to god, has anything this bloody childish happened in international relations since...well, probably since the phonecalls in January - oh, and there was Qatar...okay, this is about par for the course after all.

But seriously. International nuclear chicken between two puffed-up fools, neither of whom can back down or speak as leaders (or even adults) who just keep shoving each other closer to the brink. Maybe this will keep up until the end of Trump's presidency or maybe one or the other will go too far and the midden will hit the windmill. Who bloody knows? Not like there's not nearly 7billion other people on this planet who don't want to see nuclear war in their lifetimes thank you. Trump and Kim's explosive penis-waving contest is the most important thing.

Professor Moriarty

Samaris wrote: »

I wish an adult would come into the room, smack Trump and Kim around the ears and send them to opposite corners without their toys for a bit. Honest to god, has anything this bloody childish happened in international relations since...well, probably since the phonecalls in January - oh, and there was Qatar...okay, this is about par for the course after all.

But seriously. International nuclear chicken between two puffed-up fools, neither of whom can back down or speak as leaders (or even adults) who just keep shoving each other closer to the brink. Maybe this will keep up until the end of Trump's presidency or maybe one or the other will go too far and the midden will hit the windmill. Who bloody knows? Not like there's not nearly 7billion other people on this planet who don't want to see nuclear war in their lifetimes thank you. Trump and Kim's explosive penis-waving contest is the most important thing.

Even more good news. If a nuclear strike is planned as a strategic intervention, then the decision is filtered through several people. However, if Trump believes that an ICBM has been launched and is targeted at the US or an ally, he has approximately 15 minutes to decide if he will retaliate. And he has absolute authority in such circumstances.

Samaris

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Even more good news. If a nuclear strike is planned as a strategic intervention, then the decision is filtered through several people. However, if Trump believes that an ICBM has been launched and is targeted at the US or an ally, he has approximately 15 minutes to decide if he will retaliate. And he has absolute authority in such circumstances.

Is it even 15? I thought it was 5, and it's certainly pretty short if the US decide to go for the whole punching-missiles-out-of-the-sky approach (which they may not, because it will be very embarrassing if they miss). As well as the epeening, it only takes one mistake, one dodgy report, one dodgy leaked report that the Tweeter in Chief sees on Fox & Friends in a White House with a rubbish chain-of-communication and -command for a hasty decision to be made that could have way-too-imaginable consequences.

It's not even malevolence I fear, it is sheer bat**** stupidity.

Professor Moriarty

Samaris wrote: »

Is it even 15? I thought it was 5, and it's certainly pretty short if the US decide to go for the whole punching-missiles-out-of-the-sky approach (which they may not, because it will be very embarrassing if they miss). As well as the epeening, it only takes one mistake, one dodgy report, one dodgy leaked report that the Tweeter in Chief sees on Fox & Friends in a White House with a rubbish chain-of-communication and -command for a hasty decision to be made that could have way-too-imaginable consequences.

It's not even malevolence I fear, it is sheer bat**** stupidity.

Between 12 and 25 minutes depending on where it was launched during which time Trump must decide if it is a false alarm and whether to respond. All in Trump's tiny hands.

robindch

Samaris wrote: »

Maybe this will keep up until the end of Trump's presidency or maybe one or the other will go too far and the midden will hit the windmill. Who bloody knows?

He's going to run out of countries very quickly at this rate - he's just threatened Venezuela with an unspecified "military option". The Pentagon rolled back immediately, and there's no word from Tillerson or the GOP. Perhaps they'll make some comment in time.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-venezuela-military-idUSKBN1AR2GR

#45 wrote:

The people are suffering and they are dying. We have many options for Venezuela including a possible military option if necessary.

Samaris

robindch wrote: »

He's going to run out of countries very quickly at this rate - he's just threatened Venezuela with an unspecified "military option". The Pentagon rolled back immediately, and there's no word from Tillerson or the GOP. Perhaps they'll make some comment in time.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-venezuela-military-idUSKBN1AR2GR

I saw that and my automatic reaction was an explosive "SERIOUSLY?!"

You know the way that Trump has a semi-miraculous way of having accused someone else of something that he inevitably ends up doing? He said this about Obama a couple of years ago;

http://heavy.com/news/2017/08/trump-twitter-obama-north-korea-war-poll-approval/

It's ironic and ridiculous, but he's done it plenty of times now. I think he does honestly just ascribe his own personality traits to others when he wants to do them down. I wish that tweet hadn't shown up again, because it's looking more and more likely.

recedite

The Venezuela thing is interesting in that the president there has violated the fundamental principles of a republic; the separation of powers. He has blatantly and proudly taken control of the judiciary, and then persuaded them to strip the national assembly (parliament) of its legislative powers. Then replaced that with an alternative parliament of his supporters which he calls the constitutional assembly.

Meanwhile the legitimate National Assembly has activated two provisions in their constitution

This Constitution shall not cease to be in effect if it ceases to be observed due to acts of force or because or repeal in any manner other than as provided for herein. In such eventuality, every citizen, whether or not vested with official authority, has a duty to assist in bringing it back into actual effect.

Article 350

The people of Venezuela, true to their republican tradition and their struggle for independence, peace and freedom, shall disown any regime, legislation or authority that violates democratic values, principles and guarantees or encroaches upon human rights.

I would assume they have also appealed to Washington for military help in restoring their democracy/separation of powers.

As there are no nukes in the country, this should be a safe bet for Trump to assert some power. "Restoring freedom" abroad is always popular with the US voter, and this seems to be a fairly straightforward situation, unlike some previous ones, like Iraq and Syria. If Trump intervenes and succeeds, he will be lauded as a hero by the legitimate national assembly of Venezuela, and by most of the Venezuelan people. And Trump loves to be lauded.

Maduro and his crowd will of course try to label it as "US imperialism", but that label won't stick because any US ground troops would return home very quickly.

So unlike with the NK situation, I'd guess the likelihood of US military action quite high for Venezuela.

Samaris

The problem is that both Venezuela and NK are issues at the moment and ones that might need intervention. I just wish that it wasn't Trump in the position of organising any intervening. NK was always eventually going to be a problem, they've been working on these missiles for decades and their clear purpose is to be able to have some pointed at a large American city. Understandably, the Americans object strongly to this position, whether or not Kim feels it neccessary. So eventually these viewpoints were going to run headlong into each other.

recedite

Samaris wrote: »

they've been working on these missiles for decades and their clear purpose is to be able to have some pointed at a large American city. Understandably, the Americans object strongly to this position

Yes, but the Americans and the Russians have been pointing missiles at each other for a long time. They have both learned to live with it. Neither side attacks the other because they both fear the consequences.
NK wants to be in that (relatively) secure position too, and they have probably achieved it at this stage.

PopePalpatine

That reminds me, Venezuela has the most oil reserves of any country...and guess what was Trump's biggest complaint about the Iraq War while on the campaign trail?

Samaris

recedite wrote: »

Yes, but the Americans and the Russians have been pointing missiles at each other for a long time. They have both learned to live with it. Neither side attacks the other because they both fear the consequences.
NK wants to be in that (relatively) secure position too, and they have probably achieved it at this stage.

NK is also bonkers though and god knows what they'll do. Also, Russia and the US was a weapons-pointed-at-each-other deal. It's understandable that the US doesn't want to be needing to point weapons at both Russia and NK (who Russia keep helping out, possibly while giggling). The Cold War wasn't exactly fun times for anyone, come to that, and it took that before things settled down to the status quo.

Also..now what for nuclear proliferation. It has been a thing for a while of no more nuclear spread...unless your country is bat****, belligerent and determined and can bully it through for reasons involving pointing them at other countries (or, this being Kim, possibly attempting to execute people with them). I don't think this is the message that anyone wants!

However, it's happened now so...I don't know now what either. I'm just afraid of what Trump will decide is a good idea. This is a man that actually could declare war over Twitter.

Peregrinus

recedite wrote: »

The Venezuela thing is interesting in that the president there has violated the fundamental principles of a republic; the separation of powers. He has blatantly and proudly taken control of the judiciary, and then persuaded them to strip the national assembly (parliament) of its legislative powers. Then replaced that with an alternative parliament of his supporters which he calls the constitutional assembly.

Meanwhile the legitimate National Assembly has activated two provisions in their constitution . . .

None of which is any business of the United States'.

recedite wrote: »

I would assume they have also appealed to Washington for military help in restoring their democracy/separation of powers.

I wouldn't assume that at all. In the first place, if they had done anything of the kind we would certainly have heard about it. In the second place, such a call would undoubtedly alienate the Venezeulan people, who would regard it as treasonous or humiliating or both, and why would the Parliament want to alienate popular support?

As there are no nukes in the country, this should be a safe bet for Trump to assert some power. "Restoring freedom" abroad is always popular with the US voter, and this seems to be a fairly straightforward situation, unlike some previous ones, like Iraq and Syria. If Trump intervenes and succeeds, he will be lauded as a hero by the legitimate national assembly of Venezuela, and by most of the Venezuelan people. And Trump loves to be lauded.

recedite wrote: »

Maduro and his crowd will of course try to label it as "US imperialism", but that label won't stick because any US ground troops would return home very quickly.

I kind of doubt that! It hasn't been the usual pattern.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

The Venezuela thing is interesting in that the president there has violated the fundamental principles of a republic; the separation of powers. He has blatantly and proudly taken control of the judiciary, and then persuaded them to strip the national assembly (parliament) of its legislative powers.

It's a little unusual that you seem to disapprove of some political shenagians when they happen in Venezuela, but seem broadly cheerful when similar things happen in Russia - where Putin has full control over the judiciary, and where there's a legislature which has reasonable legislative power in theory, but in practice, would prefer to remain in one piece rather than many, spread over a wide area :rolleyes:

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

None of which is any business of the United States'.

True, but if there was ever a case for foreign intervention, this is it.

Peregrinus wrote: »

I wouldn't assume that at all. In the first place, if they had done anything of the kind we would certainly have heard about it.

Peaceful protest has got them nowhere, and a large number of people have been killed by the security forces. So their only option is to call in outside help. I would not expect any contacts with Washington to be made public. If there is going to be a US military intervention, it would most likely happen very suddenly and decisively, without prior warning or public notification.

Peregrinus wrote: »

In the second place, such a call would undoubtedly alienate the Venezeulan people, who would regard it as treasonous or humiliating or both..

Its a tricky call alright.
On the one hand, half the country is out protesting and would love a bit of outside help.
On the other hand, nobody likes to be invaded. And people in Latin America, and particularly in left-wing Venezuela, have been conditioned to think of the US as an aggressive imperialist power, prone to interfering in their affairs (with some justification)

robindch wrote: »

It's a little unusual that you seem to disapprove of some political shenagians when they happen in Venezuela, but seem broadly cheerful when similar things happen in Russia

Its the direction they are moving in that counts. In Venezuela, things are going rapidly downhill.
In Russia, things are much better now than they were under communism, or subsequently under Yeltzin when the oligarchs conspired with western banksters to seize the nations wealth and hide it in offshore accounts, including Ireland. So while Putin may have his own oil interests in Russia, at least he keeps a lid on the other former oligarchs and keeps his own private assets in the country.

Samaris

I think things are coming towards a brink. Domestically, Trump is under investigation, there is rioting going on between white supremacists and counter-protesters, he is being condemned for his mealy-mouthed wibbling about it (and being cheered by the goddam KKK) and he keeps making threats of military intervention - isn't North Korea OR Venezuela enough to be dealing with? And his polling numbers have risen while he tough-talks NK.

There is nothing about this that bodes well at all.

PopePalpatine

Someone will be along shortly to tell us those aren't white supremacists mowing down people and marching in pseudo-military formation in Charlottesville, just "free speech activists".

Turtwig

Samaris wrote: »

I think things are coming towards a brink. Domestically, Trump is under investigation, there is rioting going on between white supremacists and counter-protesters, he is being condemned for his mealy-mouthed wibbling about it (and being cheered by the goddam KKK) and he keeps making threats of military intervention - isn't North Korea OR Venezuela enough to be dealing with? And his polling numbers have risen while he tough-talks NK.

There is nothing about this that bodes well at all.

Nope, but even if you subtract Trump the United States is a very dangerously polarised nation at the moment. Trump, assuming he goes, will just be a symbol for a much more deep rooted problem.

Samaris

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Someone will be along shortly to tell us those aren't white supremacists mowing down people and marching in pseudo-military formation in Charlottesville, just "free speech activists".

Yeah, they're already out in force. Haven't you heard it's all the leftists faults? Sure, the poor little demonised white supremacists only want to subjugate the lesser races and anyone that doesn't agree with them, and don't they have the right to their opinions, marches and mowing people over with cars?

Turtwig wrote: »

Nope, but even if you subtract Trump the United States is a very dangerously polarised nation at the moment. Trump, assuming he goes, will just be a symbol for a much more deep rooted problem.

I really don't know what's going to happen in the US now. It is horrifying and tragic. And even if Trump was removed, his successors aren't exactly great shakes either. Even the Democrats don't seem to be able to raise anyone above the parapet who has a chance of leading the country out of this morass. And it is awful that so many countries are, to a greater or lesser extent, buying into the same claptrap as an excuse to unleash their worse demons.

It will pass, as it always has before. But I don't know how many people will die in the meantime.

Edit: I've been angry, frustrated, horrified and saddened by some of the stuff going on over the past year. Oddly enough, it's only in the last few days that I've actually felt afraid.

oscarBravo

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Someone will be along shortly to tell us those aren't white supremacists mowing down people and marching in pseudo-military formation in Charlottesville, just "free speech activists".

...and the people protesting against actual self-identified Nazis aren't ordinary decent people but "antifa" and just as bad as the Nazis themselves.

Don't worry, the right-wing spin merchants are in full swing over on Politics.

silverharp

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Someone will be along shortly to tell us those aren't white supremacists mowing down people and marching in pseudo-military formation in Charlottesville, just "free speech activists".

leaving aside the first part of your statement which is dumb, are you second guessing the ACLU?

Atomic Pineapple

It's pretty astonishing that it's only been 70 years since World War II ended, yet we have Americans using the swastika as a symbol of their "patriotism", emboldened by their very own president to do so. It really makes you question whether humanity actually has a chance of making it past our primitive self destructive nature in time.

jooksavage

Some of those sieg-heiling apes' grandfathers risked life and limb against Nazi Germany. Too bad they can't come back to knock some sense into their progeny.

frostyjacks

Though you may disagree with the protesters the other day, they were merely exercising their constitutional rights. It was the counter-protesters who instigated the violence, and it's they who are mainly responsible for the death of that woman. If people don't like what white America has to say, don't listen to them. It's that simple.

Delirium

frostyjacks wrote: »

Though you may disagree with the protesters the other day, they were merely exercising their constitutional rights. It was the counter-protesters who instigated the violence, and it's they who are mainly responsible for the death of that woman. If people don't like what white America has to say, don't listen to them. It's that simple.

How so? were they driving the car?

MrPudding

Delirium wrote: »

How so? were they driving the car?

No, but they made the really nice far right people really, really, cross, therefore it was their own fault that they got run down.

Really Delirium, this is very basic victim blaming, not sure how you can't get it.

MrP

PopePalpatine

frostyjacks wrote: »

Though you may disagree with the protesters the other day, they were merely exercising their constitutional rights. It was the counter-protesters who instigated the violence, and it's they who are mainly responsible for the death of that woman. If people don't like what white America has to say, don't listen to them. It's that simple.

Did you regurgitate this from the Daily Stormer? :rolleyes:

Those walking examples disproving the idea there's a white "master race" are not "white America" any more than "Alive!" is "Catholic Ireland".