Draining The Swamp

POSTED BY: SHINYGOODGUY
UPDATED: Friday, June 13, 2025 02:56
VIEWED: 32850
PAGE 5 of 29

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE

SECOND

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 5:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
ANOTHER deflection SECOND.

Nice deflection SECOND. YOU, SECOND. YOU. Will you endlessly drag the GOP and Trump and the Russian red herrings thru every criticism of the Dem Party?

I was asking about YOUR personal moral judgment, not about "the [stupid] American people" whom you constantly hide behind at the same time that you berate them.

So, let's keep this simple: Do you approve or disapprove of Democrats destroying nations abroad, with the result that those nations become more tyrannical and less prosperous than before?

Why, or why not?

I have other comments about that post, but I want to keep this focused on your moral choices.

I don't care. I picked that attitude up from the Jehovah's Witnesses. The world is all Satan's, all the time, and why should I care since Jehovah will very soon annihilate the wicked in Armageddon? (Hasn't happened, but maybe God overslept?) Jehovah's Witnesses saw all political parties and nations controlled by the devil.

And as a fact it is not the Democrats destroying. It is American generals in the Pentagon. And they are Republicans, which is not odd in the least, especially if you have listened to Trump's bellicose attitude toward Iran and N Korea and using A-bombs on "terrorists". Congress keeps force-feeding the Pentagon with too much ammo and the Pentagon uses the excess ammo violently. There is always another shipment coming next month of hellfire missiles and the Generals need to either find new targets or build new warehouses to store the excess missiles. The choice comes down to either new targets or shutdown the hellfire factory. http://swampland.time.com/2012/11/05/does-the-military-vote-really-lea
n-republican/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

SIGNYM

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 6:10 PM

Quote:
And as a fact it is not the Democrats destroying.-SECOND

More deflection.

Are you saying that President Obama had nothing to do with destroying Ukraine, Libya, Syria, and Sudan?

That Presidents are just along for the ride?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

SECOND

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 6:19 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
And as a fact it is not the Democrats destroying.-SECOND
More deflection.

Are you saying that President Obama had nothing to do with destroying Ukraine, Libya, Syria, and Sudan?

That Presidents are just along for the ride?

Yes, I am. When was the last time America had a declaration of War? 1942. No declarations since then. That would not be how a country runs when the people at the very top are actually making the topmost decisions.
www.senate.gov/pagelayout/history/h_multi_sections_and_teasers/WarDecl
arationsbyCongress.htm

And are you saying Ukraine, Libya, Syria, and Sudan are not Putin projects?

Why was Putin so visibly distressed by the killing of Gaddafi?
www.quora.com/Why-was-Putin-so-visibly-distressed-by-the-killing-of-Ga
ddafi

Putin saved my life, says ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/11692593/Vladimir-Put
in-saved-my-life-says-ousted-Ukrainian-president-Viktor-Yanukovych.html

Sudan president to visit Putin in Russia
www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/sudan-president-to-visit-puti
n-in-russia

Why Putin Is So Committed to Keeping Assad in Power
http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/10/07/putins-russia-is-wedded-to-bashar-
al-assad-syria-moscow/

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

SIGNYM

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 6:31 PM

Quote:
I don't care. I picked that attitude up from the Jehovah's Witnesses. The world is all Satan's, all the time, and why should I care since Jehovah will very soon annihilate the wicked in Armageddon? (Hasn't happened, but maybe God overslept?) Jehovah's Witnesses saw all political parties and nations controlled by the devil. - SECOND

Are you saying that "you don't care" that Democrats destroyed nations because the world is an evil place anyway?

If that's so, then why would you care about even lesser transgressions, like booting illegal aliens out of the country?

Quote:
And as a fact it is not the Democrats destroying.-SECOND

More deflection.
Are you saying that President Obama had nothing to do with destroying Ukraine, Libya, Syria, and Sudan?
Rhat Presidents are just along for the ride? - SIGNY

Yes, I am. When was the last time America had a declaration of War? 1942. No declarations since then. That would not be how a country runs when the people at the very top are actually making the topmost decisions.

Well, all you've shown by THIS statement is that CONGRESS isn't doing its job, but is instead relying on the PRESIDENT (who is, after all COMMANDER IN CHIEF) to handle military actions.

So, you haven't carved out any space for Obama with this argument. In fact, all you've done is throw even more responsibility onto his shoulders. Also, this is counterfactual to known events, like Obama personally handling the secret drone "kill list" and agitating to destroy Libya.

Quote:
And are you saying Ukraine, Libya, Syria, and Sudan are not Putin projects?- SECOND

Are you a complete lunatic? Was it Putin who destroyed these nations?

SECOND, here's a thought on your twisted logic: If Presidents are just along for the ride, then GWB can be forgiven for destroying Afghanistan and Iraq.

And if the world is an evil place anyway, why get upset about lesser evils and not greater ones?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

SECOND

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 6:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Well, all you've shown by THIS statement is that CONGRESS isn't doing its job, but is instead relying on the PRESIDENT (who is, after all COMMANDER IN CHIEF) to handle military actions.

So, you haven't carved out any space for Obama with this argument. In fact, all you've done is throw even more responsibility onto his shoulders. Also, this is counterfactual to known events, like Obama personally handling the secret drone "kill list" and agitating to destroy Libya.

Quote:
And are you saying Ukraine, Libya, Syria, and Sudan are not Putin projects?- SECOND
Are you a complete lunatic? Was it Putin who destroyed these nations?

All the Pentagon has to do is say the word "appeasement" and a weak-minded President is off to war. That strategy has worked for the Pentagon since Truman.
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2017/10/the_stigma
_around_appeasement_is_raising_the_risk_of_conflict_with_north.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

SIGNYM

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 6:47 PM

So every President, from Truman through Trump, is a pawn of the Pentagon.

What about the CIA? Are Presidents pawns of the CIA?

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

SECOND

Tuesday, October 17, 2017 10:14 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So every President, from Truman through Trump, is a pawn of the Pentagon.

What about the CIA? Are Presidents pawns of the CIA?

If you had read the link, you would have seen that JFK did not fall for the nonsense spouted from the mouth of Air Force General Curtis LeMay during the Cuban Missile Crisis, as just one example. If you knew any American history, you'd know that Eisenhower did not fall for his Generals' empty headed nonsense, either. If you had watched the Vietnam War on PBS a couple weeks ago you would see LBJ and Nixon as morons anxiously waiting for their lying Generals to give them the promised victories. If you knew anything about Congress, you'd know that 90% of them always fall right in line whenever the Pentagon says that negotiation is appeasement. You can find hundreds of aggressive actions the USA has taken where the people at the top (Congress, White House) let the Pentagon decide what needs to be done because they don't have the self-confidence to rudely tell the Generals to shut the fuck up.

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

SECOND

Wednesday, October 18, 2017 4:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So every President, from Truman through Trump, is a pawn of the Pentagon.

What about the CIA? Are Presidents pawns of the CIA?

Why is the Washington Swamp's default position always to blowup another country or, when that seems too excessive, call the CIA? It is the way the Swamp makes decisions that is at fault.

A General recommends a military strike to the President to solve a little terror problem that popped like a pimple, but the General is unconcerned about alternatives because it is really the President's responsibility to decide. The President leans toward a wait and see response, but that General is very persuasive, completely confident in the USA's firepower, and has 30 years experience, while the President is not confident enough to wait when there is an instant solution with a hellfire missile. Then Congress will not make a declaration of war, but most of the individual Congressmen would not make a public stand against war, either. Then the electorate is fearful and wants to see action now, now, now. And then where is a Peace movement anywhere in the USA? If it is out there, it certainly keeps quiet.

If you run a meeting properly in the White House, a group decision can be wiser than the decision by anyone in the meeting. But Americans don't know how to run meetings properly, do they? Especially meetings about defense. Americans have made hundreds of bad decisions since WWII about when to use the military. I don't expect America to stop itself and start again thinking clearer. The Swamp keeps changing Presidents, but the same old faulty methods of making decisions are staying unchanged. I must remark that some Presidents use the methods worse than others:

Trump’s chief of staff, Gen. John Kelly, is acknowledging the president’s incompetence. At a White House briefing on Thursday, Kelly tried to reassure the press and the public about his boss. Instead, Kelly inadvertently confirmed that he and other aides are struggling to protect Trump from himself.

Here are three key moments from the briefing. (The following is actually a joke made about the briefing, but the real article has real examples.)

Reporter: "Mr. Kelly, is your job hard?" John Kelly: "Remember that movie where a monkey is playing with a detonator and the horrified people are trying to convince the monkey to give it back without pressing the button?”

More on John Kelly accidentally telling the Truth about Trump at
www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/10/john_kelly_a
ccidentally_told_the_truth_about_trump.html

The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly

SHINYGOODGUY

Thursday, October 19, 2017 10:04 PM

And another thing: you give lots of rhetoric but nothing in terms of facts, numbers. How much did the Obama Administration spend on air travel from day one until the end of his administration? Do you have any factual information? Or are you just gonna give the usual InfoWars bullshit response?

Before you give me any of that Fake News crap, Price never denied that he didn't have those expenditures. But he did offer to pay for his "seat" on those jet planes that he chartered, which is really ridiculous. It's like ordering the best dinner at your daughter's wedding and making everyone pay, but the father of the bride offers to pay just for his plate.

Oh, and tell me the Alt-Right will travel by bicycle because they are not part of the "establishment" (what a load of crock).

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
Quote:
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
I must admit I did not think that Donald J. Trump would ever reach the White House. Never in a million years would I have ever guessed it. Well, it shows how dumb I am.

I mostly loathe the Salamander-in-Chief, mainly because he's a slimebag, but personal feelings aside, he has done a masterful job at keeping his campaign promises. He's done so well in most, whoop-de-doo! but I would like to focus your attention to the topic of the thread at hand, namely:

Draining the Swamp.

Tom Price, the head of the Health and Human Services Department, lovely man and rotten scumbag:

Wasting taxpayer's money - uses PRIVATE JETS to fly about the country at the cost of an estimated $400,000 in five months. His predecessor, Kathleen Sebelius, in 8 years in office, took one such flight to visit 3 remote villages in Alaska. Price took one such trip from D.C. to Philly costing $25,000.00 - One flight. Now that is very "swampy."

SGG
And now, Price "resigns" under fire. Good riddens, I say......and now on to the other stupid fucks trying to sneak by and do as Trump does.

real smart.

SGG
That guy must have thought it was still the Obamination years, wasting government funds on air travel.
Using government contracted carriers on government approved and bidded travel with government oversight endorsement and recommendation, that is just uncalled for - Obama and Moochelle never stooped to reasonable standards like that!

SHINYGOODGUY

Thursday, October 19, 2017 10:14 PM

Before I answer your veiled attempt at "high-jacking" this thread, I want to ask you and your cohort something:

You guys keep saying "establishment" this and "establishment" that....I know it's code for something; would you care to explain exactly what you guys mean by "establishment" candidates (for example). My definition might be slightly different than yours.

I ask because it seems to be a major sticking point.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
As long as "establishment" candidates make it to Congress and the Presidency, IMHO the answer is pretty much "yes".

Oh, the Dems and the Repubs are different flavors, but when it comes to issues that affect the 0.01%, they pretty much sing from the same hymnbook.

Here's how I see the Dem establishment:
WAR
When it comes to making war, the Dems are just as war-mongering as the Repubs. Bush destroyed Afghanistan and Iraq, but Obama managed to destroy Libya and Ukraine, split Sudan, and tried to destroy Syria. BOTH parties moved our NATO forces towards Russia, but the Dems made a critical geopolitical error: They decided to "pivot to Asia" ( 2010 https://thediplomat.com/2017/01/the-pivot-to-asia-was-obamas-biggest-m
istake/) which forced China into the arms of Russia, and then their absurd sanctions and economic warfare against Russia forced Russia into the arms of China.

The difference in flavor? The Dems (Obama, Hillary, Kerry) favored proxy warfare and hybrid warfare, propelled by CIA/ State Department/ NGO/ Saudi-funded terrorist organizations, whereas the Repubs have generally favored the official military and big boots-on-the-ground actions.

FINACIALIZATION
Both the Dems and the Repubs are anxious to meet the desires of the 0.01% Bill Clinton gave up on financial regulation when he repealed Glass Steagall and signed the Commodities Futures Trading Act. The consequences weren't apparent until 2008. Both Bush and Obama tossed money at banks that speculated fraudulently, and despite Dodd-Frank, NEITHER party has reined in the rampant speculation (on credit) since then. And Dodd-Frank, due to its complexity, is preventing smaller banks - like community banks - from opening. There are answers to the problems, but I see no difference between the parties in how they treat financialization. Warren has made some weak-kneed moves towards "consumer protection", Kamala Harris, the up-and-coming CA Senator, caved in by accepting Obama's lack of banker prosecution ... the underlying weakness of the Dem position runs pretty much up and down the party.

The difference in flavor? The Dems are willing to make tiny concessions to "the people" as long as they don't impact the bottom line of the financialists.

TRADE
Both parties have pushed for greater international "free trade", once again favoring the 0.01%. Nixon "opened up China" with a special trade deal. Bill Clinton pushed for, and got, NAFTA, and CAFTA, and awarded China permanent normal trade relations, which helped them achieve acceptance into the WTO. GWB, according to the official website "increas[ed] the number of countries partnered with the U.S. on free trade agreements (FTAs) from three to 16". Obama attempted even broader scope "free trade" agreements with TTIP (Atlantic nations) and TPP (Pacific nations). Only Trump has pushed back on this, and he's being maneuvered into giving up many of his goals here, too.

The difference in flavor? None, as far as I can tell.

Anyway, I have to get busy, but I can give you a much longer disquisition on how I think the parties are the same and where they're flavored differently on issues like the deficit, the economy, and social issues. But overall, on anything that really matters, just plan on being stabbed in the back by both parties.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT PAGE