Let's make fun of Trump, bash him, etc. while we can!

[Eric the Green]

[Odin]

(10-08-2016, 09:39 PM)taramarie Wrote:

(10-08-2016, 09:25 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(10-08-2016, 08:01 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: In view of the reports of crotch grabs, 'vain' may become a triviality in contrast. 'Vile' and 'violent' may be more appropriate.  

Not a woman, I have no idea how those feel. Maybe I would not want to know if I were a woman. I can't imagine doing such.  It's obviously a sexual assault, and were I a judge I would have no qualms about sending someone to jail at the least for a misdemeanor term (if such is all that the law allows) for that deed.

We don't make many jokes about Bill Cosby, once renowned as a comedian and now known as one of the most prolific of serial rapists ever known. I do not know whether the legal definition of rape applies to crotch-grabs.

This forum could become irrelevant as the most important reality about Donald Trump isn't his ludicrous vanity or his vapid mind. There's nothing funny about rape -- or some deed close to rape.

Has he become un-funny enough that we should close down this thread?

He is beyond a joke, especially for people like me. I blew up about him last night and cried myself to sleep because of the fact he is boasting about his sexually abusive behaviour. He is not funny nor admirable. It is not admirable to hurt others. It is not a SJW moment. This is to address abusive behaviour which should not be accepted nor ok to allow someone to make light of abusive behaviour. I still bear the emotional scars of sexual abuse 26 years on. This is clearly not funny and he is not worthy to be a president especially as he does not have the experience and he is a shit business man. Personally he disgusts me.

This shit is horrifying. Sadly there are a lot of crude "macho man" assholes who love this crap and call you a "SJW cuck" if you call them out for their toxic masculinity.

[Odin]

(10-09-2016, 11:22 PM)taramarie Wrote: To the moderator I am not attacking him, I merely am repeating something that he said himself. Eric just wants to deny it. He said he sees nothing wrong with groping unless the woman shows AFTER that she is not for it then he says one should stop. Others saw this too and attacked him for it last year. I will NOT be silenced for speaking the truth!

It's no use, Tara, Eric's not going to learn. For all his pretensions of being an enlightened and progressive person he's still a man of his time. There were a lot of grown men in the 60s and 70s fucking underage girls and not understanding consent.

[Odin]

(10-09-2016, 11:37 PM)Webmaster Wrote: Guys could you please keep your personal disputes out of this; especially if they stem from incidents on the old forum, I don't remember the debate at all and I can't see the posts on the old forum easily so please don't rehash old incidents.

For the record Eric was basically defending behavior amounting to sexual harassment at the least, possibly even mild sexual assault. It was disgusting.

[pbrower2a]

Quote:WASHINGTON ― Donald Trump said his admission that he likes to assault women was just “locker room talk.” He admitted he didn’t pay taxes. He had Bill Clinton’s past accusers seated in the front row. And he promised to prosecute his political rival if he wins.

The morning after the debate where the GOP nominee did all those things, his campaign manager woke up and went on TV to say it was a good thing for voters.

“I think it was a good night for democracy,” Trump’s campaign boss, Kellyanne Conway, said on the “Today” show when asked if the display was good for American politics.

“They really have a contrast. They really have a choice in two candidates this year, in this election cycle, next month,” Conway insisted.

“For those interested in issues, which we talk about every day, there was plenty to hear about in those 90 minutes,” Conway added.

She also detailed some of those issues, briefly touching on Syria and Iraq, while dwelling on the biggies that Trump does indeed talk about every day: Hillary Clinton’s email and Benghazi.

So yes, there was a contrast.

Yes, it may be a good day for democracy, but for reasons that Ms. Conway fails to recognize. Donald Trump sealed his political demise by scaring Republicans into having to decide whether they want to end up on an "enemies list" should he win or keep him from winning.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-10-2016, 07:18 AM)Odin Wrote:

(10-09-2016, 11:37 PM)Webmaster Wrote: Guys could you please keep your personal disputes out of this; especially if they stem from incidents on the old forum, I don't remember the debate at all and I can't see the posts on the old forum easily so please don't rehash old incidents.

For the record Eric was basically defending behavior amounting to sexual harassment at the least, possibly even mild sexual assault. It was disgusting.

True.

[gabrielle]

(10-10-2016, 03:20 PM)taramarie Wrote: What is a cuck? We do not have this term in NZ.

http://www.gq.com/story/why-angry-white-...ople-cucks

[Bob Butler 54]

It's looking more and more like the American People are rigged against Trump, and will have to be put on his Enemies List...  

[Eric the Green]

Is he getting ready to do something here??

[Ragnarök_62]

(10-10-2016, 03:20 PM)taramarie Wrote: What is a cuck? We do not have this term in NZ.

* cuckoo award for <insert crazy something there>





*cuckoo = crazy stupid people/ institutions like

Sears Holdings Corporation (SHLD)
Add to watchlist

Nasdaq


GS - NasdaqGS Real Time Price. Currency in USD


11.33-0.34 (-2.91%)
At close: 4:00 PM EDT



FAIRHOLME CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC

16,291,673
Feb 24, 2016
LAMPERT EDWARD S
31,177,861
Sep 30, 2016
SCHRIESHEIM ROBERT A
45,103
Aug 16, 2015
BOIRE RONALD D
42,591
Oct 15, 2014
MUNJAL LEENA
3,492
Jun 1, 2016
JAFFE ERIC D
1,861
Jun 1, 2016
KAMLANI KUNAL S.
500
Dec 9, 2014

because:   http://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SHLD/key-...ics?p=SHLD

[Eric the Green]

(10-10-2016, 07:18 AM)Odin Wrote:

(10-09-2016, 11:37 PM)Webmaster Wrote: Guys could you please keep your personal disputes out of this; especially if they stem from incidents on the old forum, I don't remember the debate at all and I can't see the posts on the old forum easily so please don't rehash old incidents.

For the record Eric was basically defending behavior amounting to sexual harassment at the least, possibly even mild sexual assault. It was disgusting.

Your behavior is also why you are still on ignore, Mr. Odin. Your posts are mostly insults and name calling, against many posters here. These against me are no different. Well, back to not reading your disgusting posts.

[Ragnarök_62]

(10-10-2016, 07:12 PM)taramarie Wrote: <snip>
That is not what the source defined it as that Gabrielle shared. Read the definition in the source. It was quite interesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuckold .  What a weird word.   It starts out as meaning essentially a "man duped by a cheating wife into investing in bastards she bore."

This relates to the cuckoo bird that dupes other birds into raising its young. Those cuckoos that lay their eggs into other birds' nests thusly create bastards for the other birds.



I think this is the linkage between the bird, cuckold, and cuck.  

It's a strange mutation though.  A term that mutates from "sucker" to emasculated.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-10-2016, 09:48 PM)taramarie Wrote: Thoughts?

The above video is spot on.  The civil rights and political correctness movements have made it improper to openly express racism.  (It would also seem that sexism isn't far away when racism is present.)  While the racism has been forced undercover, while it hasn't been expressed as openly over the last 40 years, it didn't go away.  

Racism has been a foundation of GOP economics as well.  The Democrat's War on Poverty was perceived of as taxing the many to buy black urban votes...  and not without reason.  The LBJ era Democrats were quite blatant about buying black votes.  The Republican rejection of any sort of entitlement program intended to relive urban problems grew out of the racism talked about in the above video.  It's a significant part of the Southern Strategy.

CBS ran a few polls of their own recently.  78% of the voters in Pennsylvania backing Trump and 75% of the voters in Ohio backing Trump say "ending political correctness" is one reason they are backing him.  "Ending political correctness" is a not so subtle code phrase for returning to the sort of open racism routinely practiced by Trump.  

I'd add that trickle down economics has been a failure under both Bushes, but it has been and will remain a staple of Republican policy.  Supply side is an extension of the idea that rural whites should not be taxed to provide money for urban blacks.  It is obvious that supply side is a failure, but the racist motivations remain and sustain the push to maintain the policy.

I'm not saying that every Republican is working primarily from racist and sexist motivation, and I wouldn't go as far as Hillary's 50% number, but there are a lot of deplorable people in the GOP.

When talking about spirals of violence, I have noted that the active spiral of violence is centered around Black Lives Matter opposing a racist justice system.  Again, not every cop is deplorable, but there are enough deplorable cops to be a significant problem.  If I believed in wishful thinking, I'd want more focus on economics, less on legal equality, but the legal equality questions are life and death, and are thus more the focus of the spiral of violence.

But the economic and policy aspects of racism are tied together at a level that a lot of people don't want to talk about, don't want to think about.

If Trump has done anything positive it's that folks are going to have to talk about it.  When racism, sexism and Southern Strategy were left in the shadows and silence with a wink and a nod, the Republicans could pretend to be a respectable main line party.  I don't know at this point if it can stay in the shadows and silence.  Trump has shown that openly racist and sexist demagogues can win Republican primaries.  It looks like they can't win the presidency, they can't win a national election with both Democrats and Republicans voting, but they can win Republican primaries.  In rural areas, they can then win the general election for congress or state offices.

So, what is the GOP going to be?  Will Trump style overt open racism and / or sexism become the norm?  I doubt open sexism will fly.  Few among the GOP will want to abandon the white female vote.  That's why the Billy Bush - Trump tape was rejected by a lot of Establishment GOP.  While insulting other minorities was perfectly acceptable, it is absolutely key to keep at least some of the women's vote.  Still, I expect a conflict between 'establishment' GOP who keep the Southern Strategy subtle and unspoken, and a more overt Trump style open pursuit of the deplorable vote.

[pbrower2a]

Garry Kasparov Verified account
‏@Kasparov63

Trump's "President Day 1" checklist: 1 Jail opponent. 2 Media crackdown. 3 Support Assad. Coincidentally, that was also Putin's checklist.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-10-2016, 11:39 PM)taramarie Wrote: Residue beliefs from earlier years no doubt. Why is it within one political party? Why would they not want equality? I am sorry if these seem like stupid questions but you have to understand the culture that I was raised in. We are not culturally different in a political sense. THANKFULLY as I see how it is ripping America apart. I am just shocked tbh. I cannot fathom why equality is not desirable for people and why it is under debate in this year of 2016. To me when i read what it was like here in NZ in the 1950s I see America in a similar light. It is like looking back in time.

It's at least as profound a question as stupid.  I'll try to take it seriously.

Let's suppose you were writing a Declaration of Independence, and want some glorious high flying words to justify overthrowing existing government.  Do you write...

"We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all male white property owners are created equal..."

Well, no.  That doesn't sound like a universal truth, does it?  If one is going to invoke the Creator, one's universal truths have to be more universal.  So, from the very start America was founded on a lie.  The ideals say equality.  It's right at the very beginning of our founding document.  In fact, white male wealthy folk were a heck of a lot more equal than anyone else.  The struggle to make the reality match the words is perhaps the central struggle of America.

If it is neat to be equal, some people find it even neater to be superior.  Call The Donald Exhibit A, an arrogant white male who considers himself superior to just about anyone else.  He's a selfish, racist, sexist narcissist.  If one is an actor trying to portray such a character on the stage, one would have to convince one's self that while performing the play that it is cool and neat to grab one's co-star by her crotch.  It is cool and neat to show how stupid and inferior the characters are who have darker skin pigmentation.  It is cool and neat, if one's character is frustrated in any way, to gain revenge and humiliate, to put other characters in their proper inferior place.  Equality is for the inferior.  Only a cuck would be satisfied with equality.  A white male should never be satisfied with equality.  

(Yes, the above paragraph outlines a vile stereotype.  If you try to apply the vile stereotype to all Republicans one ends up closing one's mind.  If one applies it only to The Donald, one might not be too far out.  As always, beware confusing the vile stereotype that outlines a flaw that might be shared to varying degrees over a broad culture with an accurate description of every individual within the culture.  Hopefully, the above mentioned play is in the style of an old Greek tragedy, where the main character's flaws doom him to all sorts of awful stuff.  If one follows the traditional theme, his awful behavior in the early acts leads inevitably to painful disaster in the final scenes.  The 2016 election does seem to be drifting in that direction.)

For a good sized part of our country's history, blacks were owned and women could not own property.  That is a problem for a country whose ideals start with 'all men are created equal'.

And I have to reprise my opinion on world views and values.  They are anchored deep.  They are virtually unchangeable and unquestionable.  If one believes that the Bible is Truth, it follows that the theory of evolution is bogus, that science has to be mistaken.  No amount of evidence or logic can trump a deeply imbedded world view.  If one grows up in a racist sexist culture, it's cool to grab a lady's crotch, it's cool to insult and denigrate any minority, it's cool to expect the best jobs and the highest salary.  It might not just be cool, it might be perceived as a Right, to be expected.  It is firm.  It is there.  It is unquestionable.  It is Truth.  (Not.)

And then there are folk who just as arrogantly, stubbornly, irrationally, and irredeemably insist that all humans are created equal.  They too infest the country.  They present major problems to those who want to manifest their inherent superiority.  They push political correctness.  They are....  annoying.

How did the current manifestation of the equality question take shape?  FDR's New Deal started an ethic of supporting the common man, of protecting the many from the blatant flaws in our society.  Starting in the 1950s, the civil rights movement started pointing out firmly that racism was a blatant flaw in our society.  I don't feel it necessary to review MLK's career, but that was the core of it.  The Democrat's and GI's habit (or values, or world view) was one of attacking problems head on.  It didn't matter if they were defeating Fascism, containing Communism or flying to the moon, the GIs couldn't turn down a challenge, and took up racism as one of their many projects.  While MLK was the hero and chief crusader, JFK and LBJ pushed the key legislation through congress.  It became a Democratic thing, and attracted black votes to the Democrats.

The War on Poverty was another LBJ 1960s era project that attempted to solve the problem of poverty in the inner cities.  Again, this was the time America was Great.  The GIs couldn't leave a problem unsolved, a challenge unmet.  This being the era of Tax and Spend, a core part of the solution was spending a lot of tax money to improve the lives of poor inner city blacks.  This too brought a lot of black voters into the Democratic party.

While Nixon gets the credit for the 'Southern Strategy' described in the above video, if Nixon hadn't come up with it, somebody else would have.  If one party is collecting a whole bunch of minority voters, the other party is going to seek out the racist vote.  Inevitable might not be the right word, but then again it might be the perfect word.

Through the unravelling, lots of folks didn't want to go back to the demonstrations, riots and unrest of the late 1960s.  This doesn't mean the tensions weren't there, that the battles weren't being fought while not talking about it openly.  The Republicans have been trying to subdue any and all entitlement programs.  They have used the bogus 'supply side' theory to justify it, though supply side has repeatedly failed whenever tried.  The Republican policy has been to do as much as they can to attract the racist vote while trying not to be too blatantly obvious about it.

Enter Trump.  He is being blatantly obvious about it.  This just isn't about Trump, though.  He's just blowing out a dam that is a lot bigger and more potent than he is.  The tensions go all the way back to the Declaration of Independence, the ideal of equality pushing against the practical reality that some folks consider themselves superior and insist on acting superior.  The problem of race resurfaces and erupts from time to time.  The 1960s brought the last major breaking of the equilibrium.  Trump seems to be trying to roll back the gains of the 1960s, encouraging and personifying the racist and sexist behavior that was the norm before the Blue Awakening, the civil rights movement and the feminist movement.

And as the video states, The Donald has the Republican base as the ideal population to rally.  From Nixon's time on, the GOP built their rank and file as racist with intent and purpose.

(In other notes, I have proposed that supply side, demand side and balanced budgets all have conflicting but appropriate places in setting a flexible responsive financial policy.  When talking pure economics, I still believe this.  I have also proposed that the Republicans have pushed supply side well beyond the point of reason, resulting in repeated financial collapses.  While I'll stick with the notion that in the proper circumstances and in moderation supply side can be beneficial, the above should suggest one reason why supply side is being pushed by Republicans way beyond the point of reason.  Reason has nothing to do with it.  Supply side is driven in part by something far uglier than reason.)

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-11-2016, 01:50 AM)taramarie Wrote: "And then there are folk who just as arrogantly, stubbornly, irrationally, and irredeemably insist that all humans are created equal.  They too infest the country.  They present major problems to those who want to manifest their inherent superiority.  They push political correctness.  They are....  annoying."

But we are equal. Thing is they just cause people to dig heels in deeper so what would you suggest?

Annoyingly, Eric has stated the immediate goal correctly. You have to be sure the Republicans are voted out of power. The immediate goals should include the presidency and a filibuster proof congress. A different balance in the Supreme Court will in time follow.

While I have used the language of values and cyclical history to describe the problem, Hillary is saying many of the right things in a more general language aimed at the general population. On a cyclical history thread, I feel free to use our specialized vocabulary. She is speaking to everyman.

She is welcoming diversity, pushing how a diverse multi-cultural population should be viewed as a strength. She is condemning Trump's insults and abusive behavior. She is presenting programs echoing the GI's tradition of solving problems while remembering she hasn't got the ability to tax and spend that was the norm when America was Great. Clearly, she is on the side of 'all men are created equal' rather than the side of the superior being able to act as if they are superior.

It's all very easy to say? Getting it done?

In the second debate Trump chose to praise Hillary's persistence and willingness to work. That will be required.

[Bob Butler 54]

(10-11-2016, 01:59 AM)taramarie Wrote: Fascinating. Thank you for enlightening me on a quick history between the two major parties. So different compared to my country. Cultural superiority is totally shamed here. USA is split in more ways than one. I wonder if it will ever be sorted out....sigh.

Thanks.  Appreciated.  I've been trying to figure out the core of the Trump phenomena for quite some time.  You asked some good questions that solidified some ideas.

[understatement]  Mind you, I don't expect that all my countrymen will agree with all of the above. [/understatement]  Again, I'm floating a vile stereotype.  There are a lot of 'deplorable' folk that fit the stereotype to some degree.  Not every Republican is a perfect manifestation of the stereotype.  Far from it.

Will it ever be sorted out?  Well, am not a firm believer that the S&H cycles will continue to run as regularly as they did during the Industrial Age.  I anticipate that computers, recyclable energy and weapons of mass destruction will significantly transform how things work, as much as the printing press, steam engine and gunpowder.  Still, I don't anticipate an end of history.  The problem of equality won't be totally solved in the immediate future, nor will the problem of unequal distribution of wealth be resolved.  While the cycles might not run like clockwork, I believe more awakenings and crises lurk in our future.

[Odin]

(10-10-2016, 11:37 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Garry Kasparov Verified account
‏@Kasparov63

Trump's "President Day 1" checklist: 1 Jail opponent. 2 Media crackdown. 3 Support Assad. Coincidentally, that was also Putin's checklist.

One wonders how much money he's secretly getting from Russia.

[Eric the Green]

It's Seth's turn!

[pbrower2a]

(10-11-2016, 10:23 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(10-11-2016, 06:57 AM)Odin Wrote:

(10-10-2016, 11:37 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: Garry Kasparov Verified account
‏@Kasparov63

Trump's "President Day 1" checklist: 1 Jail opponent. 2 Media crackdown. 3 Support Assad. Coincidentally, that was also Putin's checklist.

One wonders how much money he's secretly getting from Russia.

The fact that Deutsche Bank is his principle mainstream bank indicates it's a lot. DB are a known launderer of off-the-books Russian money.

I mentioned Deutsche Bank in "Business Failures". Money laundering is one of the most desperate ways in which a bank can get funds.