|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 22, 2021 9:21:43 GMT -8
I agree.
And that's why I say that the real problem in politics is not the elected official, it's the people who keep electing these officials into office.
When is the last time you can say you had an official in office that wasn't dishonest or that you had what the public would call a well intentioned person in office?
But it is REALLY hard to 'mix it up' when the information that is found out there on mainstream media is slanted and biased. Until you realize this, you're going to be a part of the flock and led with the masses.
At the higher levels of government I don’t think you can find an elected official who’s not dishonest(or disingenuous correct here?) as it applies to their conduct in trying to make the most people happy in order to retain their job during the next election cycle. I’d think a good portion are well intentioned at the onset of their careers, and maybe they always have good intent, but that’s harder to measure or determine at least to my way of thinking. I agree...but that is the real solution to the problem, right?
So instead of people voting in simply to be retaliatory the ideal way to vote would be to vote for the person you think is most honest.
Are there any US politicians that have reputations of being honest and trustworthy?
I'm fairly close to a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters and personal friends with Jeff Weaver who was his campaign manager and by extension I tend to like Bernie for a few reasons - he's more Canadian than most US politicians (  ) but he also seems like an honest guy who has been literally saying the same thing for nearly 50 years. Why does he never make it to the presidency?
How about Ron Paul? I know a little about him. Is / was he trustworthy? He strikes me as being so.
Any others?
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 22, 2021 9:35:18 GMT -8
my thoughts:
the over the top reactionary political bs can best be summed up with the fact that the fbi and the pentagon have concluded that 20-25,000 of our own national guard and active duty troops have to be vetted because of the danger of embedded anarchists? wtf? and we don't think there is a serious danger to this federal republic, except from the outgoing potus?? the free world is laughing at us with this latest dumazz blooper.
i am very disappointed that my government does not trust our own military. know who else does that? communist china, the soviet union and the democratic peoples republic of (north)korea.
they are cheering our pentagon and government today. our sons and daughters in the military are being subject to suspicious intent, to cause anarchy to an inauguration where there won't be any public. good lord, i never in my pizzed off moments thought our government could be this insidious and distrusting of us.
You might find this interesting and disheartening.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveinthecity on Jan 22, 2021 9:41:15 GMT -8
At the higher levels of government I don’t think you can find an elected official who’s not dishonest(or disingenuous correct here?) as it applies to their conduct in trying to make the most people happy in order to retain their job during the next election cycle. I’d think a good portion are well intentioned at the onset of their careers, and maybe they always have good intent, but that’s harder to measure or determine at least to my way of thinking. I agree...but that is the real solution to the problem, right?
So instead of people voting in simply to be retaliatory the ideal way to vote would be to vote for the person you think is most honest.
Are there any US politicians that have reputations of being honest and trustworthy?
I'm fairly close to a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters and personal friends with Jeff Weaver who was his campaign manager and by extension I tend to like Bernie for a few reasons - he's more Canadian than most US politicians ( ) but he also seems like an honest guy who has been literally saying the same thing for nearly 50 years. Why does he never make it to the presidency?
How about Ron Paul? I know a little about him. Is / was he trustworthy? He strikes me as being so.
Any others?
That’s a really tough question. I think the ones who I perceive as being honest are those I see in random interviews like a governor of such and such state, but then I forget their names and don’t really hear or see them again. Ron Paul seems honest, too. I wouldn’t have thought of him. One I think was honest was Arnold Schwarzenegger. Seemed like he really just wanted the experience of having/doing the job of Governor and that’s all he did. I’ll have to revisit the names of some of those who ran for their party’s nomination this past election and see if anything rings a bell. |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 22, 2021 10:02:17 GMT -8
I agree...but that is the real solution to the problem, right?
So instead of people voting in simply to be retaliatory the ideal way to vote would be to vote for the person you think is most honest.
Are there any US politicians that have reputations of being honest and trustworthy?
I'm fairly close to a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters and personal friends with Jeff Weaver who was his campaign manager and by extension I tend to like Bernie for a few reasons - he's more Canadian than most US politicians ( ) but he also seems like an honest guy who has been literally saying the same thing for nearly 50 years. Why does he never make it to the presidency?
How about Ron Paul? I know a little about him. Is / was he trustworthy? He strikes me as being so.
Any others?
That’s a really tough question. I think the ones who I perceive as being honest are those I see in random interviews like a governor of such and such state, but then I forget their names and don’t really hear or see them again. Ron Paul seems honest, too. I wouldn’t have thought of him. One I think was honest was Arnold Schwarzenegger. Seemed like he really just wanted the experience of having/doing the job of Governor and that’s all he did. I’ll have to revisit the names of some of those who ran for their party’s nomination this past election and see if anything rings a bell. Oh man, I see Arnold as a schmoozer and a lifer politician even though he wasn't one.  There was a LOT of talk about him gaming his bodybuilding career (I followed him closely as a young kid).
I mean, he cheated on his wife with his maid. That alone says a lot. 
I didn't follow him politically but I always did consider him to just be one big fake and lump him in with Newsom who is another phony POS....but maybe he was a good governor?
Another guy that comes to mind is Jesse Ventura. He came across to me as a very credible, honest, down to earth dude who won by a landslide on a shoestring budget. He took a lot of heat from that controversy with Chris Kyle (who ended up being a liar) and now Jesse lives in Mexico and off the grid.
But the pattern here is that you don't go very far in politics if you're that sort of 'down to earth' and honest person.
The big machine just doesn't allow it.
|
|
|
|
Post by barry on Jan 29, 2021 14:03:56 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 8:14:57 GMT -8
What is happening in the news is that Dems are now starting to label Repub followers as 'domestic terrorists' and many prominent members of the guv are getting on board. AOC, Brennan (ex CIA) and others are starting to divide the country by stating that these 'domestic terrorists' are a threat within the US and labelling them as dangerous as Obama Bin Laden.
Brennan was quoted as saying that finding Obama was like a 'needle in a haystack' but that the domestic terrorists are like finding 'many needles in many haystacks'
This is pretty scary stuff that is not going to end well. Force never fixes anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 8:26:07 GMT -8
Ooh! Ooh! Defend Marjorie Taylor Greene next  |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 8:47:46 GMT -8
Ooh! Ooh! Defend Marjorie Taylor Greene next I don't have a political angle and the only thing I want to defend is the truth.
I don't know anything about her but I do know that labelling half of your population as domestic terrorists won't end well at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 8:51:31 GMT -8
Ooh! Ooh! Defend Marjorie Taylor Greene next I don't have a political angle and the only thing I want to defend is the truth.
I don't know anything about her but I do know that labelling half of your population as domestic terrorists won't end well at all.
But if we ignore these domestic terrorists it will end even worse. |
|
|
|
Post by steveinthecity on Jan 31, 2021 8:57:24 GMT -8
Ooh! Ooh! Defend Marjorie Taylor Greene next I don't have a political angle and the only thing I want to defend is the truth.
I don't know anything about her but I do know that labelling half of your population as domestic terrorists won't end well at all.
I’m not able to see the linked article, but is someone in the article(preferably someone presumably lucid and sane) labeling half the population as “domestic terrorists”? |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:03:46 GMT -8
I don't have a political angle and the only thing I want to defend is the truth.
I don't know anything about her but I do know that labelling half of your population as domestic terrorists won't end well at all.
But if we ignore these domestic terrorists it will end even worse. It's just a fake label and politicians throw labels on groups of people simply to make riling up the masses against the the 'bad' side that much easier.
Now that the pandemic is on it's way out and dying down (surprise, surprise, after the election) and that fear in people is going to fade they need to create a new fear to keep people on the edge of their seats and manipulate them.
If you didn't label them as domestic terrorists and just let intelligence do their job and root them out, wouldn't that be a more elegant solution without actually diving the population? Why the need to push the 'domestic terrorist' angle?
There always has to be a boogeyman! There always has to be a new villain for politicians to face to keep the general public distracted and fixated.
In similar fashion, I said the same thing back in Transplant's Fake News discussion thread 4 years ago when they were talking about the Russian collusion investigation with Trump.
I said that the only reason the Intelligence agencies would make such an announcement of an investigation was to politicize the investigation. If they cared about the Russia involvement and it was serious they wouldn't announce it. They'd just take care of it silently the way Intelligence agencies are supposed to operate.
And guess what? I was right. The Russian 'investigation' was a smear campaign started by Clinton and found no proof of Russian collusion. It was all a political farce meant to rile the people against Trump.
Making public announcements screams political manipulation and the side screaming the loudest is the one doing the manipulating.
This case with 'domestic terrorists' is no different.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 9:09:28 GMT -8
But if we ignore these domestic terrorists it will end even worse. It's just a fake label and politicians throw labels on groups of people simply to make riling up the masses against the the 'bad' side that much easier.
Now that the pandemic is on it's way out and dying down (surprise, surprise, after the election) and that fear in people is going to fade they need to create a new fear to keep people on the edge of their seats and manipulate them.
If you didn't label them as domestic terrorists and just let intelligence do their job and root them out, wouldn't that be a more elegant solution without actually diving the population? Why the need to push the 'domestic terrorist' angle?
There always has to be a boogeyman! There always has to be a new villain for politicians to face to keep the general public distracted and fixated.
In similar fashion, I said the same thing back in Transplant's Fake News discussion thread 4 years ago when they were talking about the Russian collusion investigation with Trump. I said that the only reason the Intelligence agencies would make such an announcement of an investigation was to politicize the investigation. If they cared about the Russia involvement and it was serious they wouldn't announce it. They'd just take care of it silently the way Intelligence agencies are supposed to operate. And guess what? I was right. The Russian 'investigation' was a smear campaign started by Clinton and found no proof of Russian collusion. It was all a political farce meant to rile the people against Trump.
Making public announcements screams political manipulation and the side screaming the loudest is the one doing the manipulating.
This case with 'domestic terrorists' is no different.
Anyone who tried to or actually did strike/gas a police offer in some fashion at the Capitol is a domestic terrorist. |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:14:01 GMT -8
I don't have a political angle and the only thing I want to defend is the truth.
I don't know anything about her but I do know that labelling half of your population as domestic terrorists won't end well at all.
I’m not able to see the linked article, but is someone in the article(preferably someone presumably lucid and sane) labeling half the population as “domestic terrorists”? I'm not sure if you listen to Tucker Carlson or not but he had a video called "Tucker: The American Government Is At War With It's Own People" and he strung together several sources.
Again, find holes in the message rather than the messenger.
I also listened to AOC's (Cortez') post about the Capitol storming about a week ago and it was an overly emotional appeal about Right wing radicals comparing them to terrorists. My BS detector was sounding off quite a bit.
There's a lot of different sources but the general sense I'm getting is that there is a growing tide of agreement that right wingers are the target of this fight against domestic terrorist and that they are using comparisons to 9/11 as a way to fan the flames of disapproval and riling up the American people.
It screams of political agenda to me (again) just as it did with the whole Russian collusion thing 4 years ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Jan 31, 2021 9:16:59 GMT -8
Making public announcements screams political manipulation and the side screaming the loudest is the one doing the manipulating. This case with 'domestic terrorists' is no different.
Anyone who tried to or actually did strike/gas a police offer in some fashion at the Capitol is a domestic terrorist. I don't know if they are terrorists or just criminals (I think terrorist is extreme) for striking a police officer.
Why are BLM rioters not terrorists? They are destroying property, hurting people and lawless.
Nobody can seem to answer that question.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Jan 31, 2021 9:22:16 GMT -8
I’m not able to see the linked article, but is someone in the article(preferably someone presumably lucid and sane) labeling half the population as “domestic terrorists”? I'm not sure if you listen to Tucker Carlson or not but he had a video called "Tucker: The American Government Is At War With It's Own People" and he strung together several sources. Again, find holes in the message rather than the messenger.
I also listened to AOC's (Cortez') post about the Capitol storming about a week ago and it was an overly emotional appeal about Right wing radicals comparing them to terrorists. My BS detector was sounding off quite a bit.
There's a lot of different sources but the general sense I'm getting is that there is a growing tide of agreement that right wingers are the target of this fight against domestic terrorist and that they are using comparisons to 9/11 as a way to fan the flames of disapproval and riling up the American people.
It screams of political agenda to me (again) just as it did with the whole Russian collusion thing 4 years ago.
Jebus, not Tucker Carlson again icon_facepalm Any position you espouse using him as your evidence just enforces the idea that you are a whackjob conspiracy loon. |
|
) but he also seems like an honest guy who has been literally saying the same thing for nearly 50 years. Why does he never make it to the presidency?
There was a LOT of talk about him gaming his bodybuilding career (I followed him closely as a young kid).
