Why do American "anti elite" types think the Kremlin is OK?

[Bronsin]

(08-26-2016, 06:40 PM)Galen Wrote:

(08-26-2016, 07:53 AM)Anthony Wrote: Therefore, unless Boomers bungle badly, both Moscow and Beijing are natural allies of our "crusade" - or at the absolute least can be persuaded to remain neutral, which would be more than enough for "us" to win.

Given their past history I think we can count on them fucking up very badly.

I'm sure we can count on it, what with their current policies with Russia in Syria, the Philipines siding with China, and Saudi Arabia can now be sued for damages of 9/11, you can bet something is gonna get sideways soon.

[Warren Dew]

(08-05-2016, 04:41 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I just have to ask.

Y'all give Kremlin tools like Assange and Snowden a pass.

In your book:

"big bad Western elites" = the devil.

Seriously?

I will concede that Western Corporatism is not ideal.

But look at the current alternatives.

Assange and Snowden are "Kremlin tools"?

All they're doing is what the free press is supposed to do, but abandoned a decade or so ago.

[Eric the Green]

(10-24-2016, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Assange and Snowden are "Kremlin tools"?

All they're doing is what the free press is supposed to do, but abandoned a decade or so ago.

But it appears that the wikileaks against Clinton are supported and encouraged by Putin and the Kremlin, who are hacking the emails, and they also protect Snowden. I don't think they were Kremlin tools originally, and they did good work to bring out suppressed information like the press is supposed to do. But Assange is now working Putin's will, and is motivated by personal revenge and fear of Hillary Clinton and what she might do to him.

[Eric the Green]

(08-26-2016, 06:40 PM)Galen Wrote:

(08-26-2016, 07:53 AM)Anthony Wrote: Therefore, unless Boomers bungle badly, both Moscow and Beijing are natural allies of our "crusade" - or at the absolute least can be persuaded to remain neutral, which would be more than enough for "us" to win.

Given their past history I think we can count on them fucking up very badly.

Galen considers "The Boomers" to be a political party. Granted that the majority of older white Boomer men have forgotten their roots, and have fallen blindly in behind folks like Galen and his misguided ideas.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-24-2016, 05:18 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-26-2016, 06:40 PM)Galen Wrote:

(08-26-2016, 07:53 AM)Anthony Wrote: Therefore, unless Boomers bungle badly, both Moscow and Beijing are natural allies of our "crusade" - or at the absolute least can be persuaded to remain neutral, which would be more than enough for "us" to win.

Given their past history I think we can count on them fucking up very badly.

Galen considers "The Boomers" to be a political party. Granted that the majority of older white Boomer men have forgotten their roots, and have fallen blindly in behind folks like Galen and his misguided ideas.

I don't know that 'forgotten their roots' is fair.  The heart of any awakening lasts only a few years.  Review the history of the Great Awakening and Second Great Awakening.  The evangelical fervor, music and camp revivals lasted only a few years, then faded or moved to another area of the country.  This matches the emotional, musical, political and cultural peaks of the Summer of Love through 1968.  You just can't sustain that sort of intensity in a mass movement.  Granted, putting on one's bell bottoms and trekking to San Francisco for the summer was a much greater commitment and experience than wearing an 'I'm with Hillary' button.  I know I'm with Hillary, but it would be silly and counter productive to sew up some bell bottoms and tuck a flower in my hair.

Then there is the National Malaise.  When America was Great, when our Greatest Generation was flourishing, we were always ready to commit tons of energy to solving the next problem.  There was a firm national belief that no matter the challenge, we were up to it.  We could contain communism, push gender and civil rights, and clean up the environment while flying to the moon.  The Greatest Generation's tremendous energy and resolve has since been scorned as 'tax and spend liberalism'.  This scorn might not be entirely misplaced.  We really didn't have the economic and cultural strength to keep bearing burdens and paying prices forever.  The Malaise of the Carter years followed by the downsizing of government during the Reagan Bush Bush years was a reasonable reaction to the hubris and over extension of the Missionary / GI fervor.  Eternal energy and optimism was hard when Watergate, the fall of Saigon, the oil crisis and hostage crisis were falling on each other's heels.  The belief that we could solve any and all problems all at once became obviously no longer true.

There is a happy medium somewhere between all out LBJ tax and spend and Trumped Up Trickle Down.  I note the Democrats aren't recycling their glory days, talking about a New New Deal or reminding people that the days America was Great was the days of Tax and Spend Liberalism.  They are pushing for a return to the government helping the people achieve worthy goals, but they aren't going to ask folk to bear any burden or pay any price.  They'll be nudging the throttle forward in moderation.  We might celebrate and wish for a return to a time when America was Great, but we aren't as a people great enough to be great.  Given a choice between greatness and a tax cut, too many of us would chose the tax cut plus an (expletive deleted) bald faced lie that greatness comes through tax cuts.

Nudging the throttle forward would be a good thing.  Energy is no longer cheap.  There are too many people in a world growing warmer.  A blind cockeyed optimism that we can do whatever we feel like doing would be misplaced.

At the same time, problems can't be left unsolved forever.  Hillary's policies are a step in the right direction, but the throttle needs to be pushed somewhat more.

[Ragnarök_62]

(10-24-2016, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-05-2016, 04:41 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:pid=6835 Wrote: I just have to ask.

Y'all give Kremlin tools like Assange and Snowden a pass.

I beg to differ. Assange and Snowden are the actual press agents nowadays.   And ... again, the lamestream media is too hung up on its own agenda or shilling for the highest $ to even know how to do its job.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2016/10/v...facts.html
In your book:

Quote:"big bad Western elites" = the devil.

Seriously?

Yes, they're lying sacks of shit.

Assange and Snowden are "Kremlin tools"?

All they're doing is what the free press is supposed to do, but abandoned a decade or so ago.

Exactly.  The so called "free press" are nothing but flock of fucking parrots.  All they do is parrot the shit assorted think tanks, government offices, and politicians feed them.  That's just one reason I don't mess with pay TeeVee.

* Parrot award for the lamestream media.

[Warren Dew]

(10-24-2016, 05:16 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Assange and Snowden are "Kremlin tools"?

All they're doing is what the free press is supposed to do, but abandoned a decade or so ago.

But it appears that the wikileaks against Clinton are supported and encouraged by Putin and the Kremlin, who are hacking the emails, and they also protect Snowden. I don't think they were Kremlin tools originally, and they did good work to bring out suppressed information like the press is supposed to do. But Assange is now working Putin's will, and is motivated by personal revenge and fear of Hillary Clinton and what she might do to him.

Putin took Snowden in to score a public relations coup against the U.S.  But if the U.S. weren't moving toward a Soviet style police state in the first place, Snowden wouldn't have had anything to reveal.  While Putin certainly doesn't permit any similar press freedom in Russia, I certainly don't mind if he ends up promoting it in the U.S., even if he's under the misimpression that freedom of the press weakens us.

The DNC has such poor computer security - let's not forget giving Sanders Clinton's information even when Sanders didn't ask about it - that I doubt it takes the Kremlin to hack them.  That said, revelations about the corruption of Clinton in particular and our entire political system in general are in the public interest, even if Putin is helping.  It's not like today's Democrats would have objected to the Watergate revelations had the Kremlin been "deep throat".

[Mikebert]

(10-24-2016, 07:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: It's not like today's Democrats would have objected to the Watergate revelations had the Kremlin been "deep throat".

The error in your analogy is that it is not the Republicans who are accepting of a Kremlin deep throat. The Republican party trusts the Russians considerably less than I do, and I don't trust them at all. It is Trump who trusts the Russians.

For me the two big questions not talked about in this campaign are (1) why is Trump running and (2) why wont Trump release his tax returns?  When you consider the likely answers to these questions why Trump is so blasé about Putin becomes more clear.

[Ragnarök_62]

Quote:The book "The Naked Capitalist" was written by those tin foil, too-crazy-for-even-the-JBS, loons - the Skousens.

There is no association between nakedcapitalism and Skousens' book

[Warren Dew]

(10-24-2016, 08:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-05-2016, 04:41 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I just have to ask.

Y'all give Kremlin tools like Assange and Snowden a pass.

In your book:

"big bad Western elites" = the devil.

Seriously?

I will concede that Western Corporatism is not ideal.

But look at the current alternatives.

Assange and Snowden are "Kremlin tools"?

All they're doing is what the free press is supposed to do, but abandoned a decade or so ago.

The free press are supposed to do espionage?

They published the Pentagon Papers, which were classified Top Secret.  Press freedom is a constitutional issue, which trumps espionage, which is merely an issue of federal law.

[Eric the Green]

(10-24-2016, 10:13 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 08:10 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 05:08 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-05-2016, 04:41 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: I just have to ask.

Y'all give Kremlin tools like Assange and Snowden a pass.

In your book:

"big bad Western elites" = the devil.

Seriously?

I will concede that Western Corporatism is not ideal.

But look at the current alternatives.

Assange and Snowden are "Kremlin tools"?

All they're doing is what the free press is supposed to do, but abandoned a decade or so ago.

The free press are supposed to do espionage?

They published the Pentagon Papers, which were classified Top Secret.  Press freedom is a constitutional issue, which trumps espionage, which is merely an issue of federal law.

You have a point; except that espionage is mentioned in the constitution too-- at least in regard to "treason": giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

[Warren Dew]

(10-24-2016, 08:00 PM)Mikebert Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 07:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: It's not like today's Democrats would have objected to the Watergate revelations had the Kremlin been "deep throat".

The error in your analogy is that it is not the Republicans who are accepting of a Kremlin deep throat. The Republican party trusts the Russians considerably less than I do, and I don't trust them at all. It is Trump who trusts the Russians.

For me the two big questions not talked about in this campaign are (1) why is Trump running and (2) why wont Trump release his tax returns?  When you consider the likely answers to these questions why Trump is so blasé about Putin becomes more clear.

The analogy illustrates that both parties only object to that kind of revelation when it hurts them rather than the other party.

As for trusting the Russians, that issue doesn't come up, since we're not being asked to take a Russian promise on faith.

I think it's obvious Trump is running because he's bored, and he won't release his tax returns because it would be stupid to release hundreds of thousands of pages of tax returns and believe the press couldn't find something in them to blow out of proportion and hurt him with.  Perhaps you have a conspiracy theory about that, though?  Maybe even one as credible as the one that says Trump is running at the behest of Clinton to lose to her on purpose?

[Eric the Green]

(10-24-2016, 07:04 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: Exactly.  The so called "free press" are nothing but flock of fucking parrots.  All they do is parrot the shit assorted think tanks, government offices, and politicians feed them.  That's just one reason I don't mess with pay TeeVee.

Although your award is well-deserved, your statement is another example of the well-noted Rags tendency to over-do things and your appreciation of the blatant. Red and black! (or "black and white" as it's also known). The press still employs or contracts with reporters, which (since I occasionally watch network and local news) I can see do actual travel to places where news happens and do eyewitness reporting on the scene. So, some actual news is still available from the MSM, sometimes!

Sensibility, sensitivity, subtlety and nuance. I DO recommend occasional indulgence in them.

[Warren Dew]

(10-24-2016, 10:22 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 10:13 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Press freedom is a constitutional issue, which trumps espionage, which is merely an issue of federal law.

You have a point; except that espionage is mentioned in the constitution too-- at least in regard to "treason": giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The Russians are not the "enemy" in a constitutional sense since we are not at war with them.

Espionage laws could still apply to government employees like Ellsberg and Manning, but not to press organs like The New York Times and Wikileaks.

[Eric the Green]

(10-24-2016, 10:24 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I think it's obvious Trump is running because he's bored, and he won't release his tax returns because it would be stupid to release hundreds of thousands of pages of tax returns and believe the press couldn't find something in them to blow out of proportion and hurt him with.  Perhaps you have a conspiracy theory about that, though?  Maybe even one as credible as the one that says Trump is running at the behest of Clinton to lose to her on purpose?

It seems a plausible theory-- until you realize that Trump beat a flock of losers, anyone of which would have been easy for Hillary to beat, when you get down to it. Because the Republicans are frankly bankrupt as a party. They have nothing to offer, and haven't for quite some time now. And it doesn't look like they have any viable candidates for the future either, unless The Donald's own daughter Ivanka Trump someday becomes a real and viable one.

[Eric the Green]

(10-24-2016, 10:31 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 10:22 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(10-24-2016, 10:13 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: Press freedom is a constitutional issue, which trumps espionage, which is merely an issue of federal law.

You have a point; except that espionage is mentioned in the constitution too-- at least in regard to "treason": giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

The Russians are not the "enemy" in a constitutional sense since we are not at war with them.

Espionage laws could still apply to government employees like Ellsberg and Manning, but not to press organs like The New York Times and Wikileaks.

Those are good points too. We are not at war with Russia, although we have atomic weapons pointed at them and they at us. Wikileaks is not merely a press organ, though, since it is directly conspiring with Russia to criminally hack into American computers in order to influence our elections.