U.S. Electile Dementia paralytica 2020

[garo]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

o Mike Bloomberg Exploited Prison Labor to Make 2020 Presidential Campaign Phone Calls | The Intercept

Yeah, that's a good look there, Mikey.

The vendor of a vendor of a vendor did this without poor Mikey’s knowledge.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by garo

The vendor of a vendor of a vendor did this without poor Mikey’s knowledge.

It's always good to have a few layers of insulation from whatever it is your minions are up to.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

o Mike Bloomberg Exploited Prison Labor to Make 2020 Presidential Campaign Phone Calls | The Intercept

Yeah, that's a good look there, Mikey.

I think "Mayor Stop and Frisk" should have stayed with it, and reassured people that prison inmates are a better class of people than those usually working for political campaign organizations.

A lot of well known companies use convicts, both as cheap labor, and in call centers. Just think -- your credit card information being handled by convicted felons...

[Dr Sardonicus]

Some may find This Chicago Tribune column amusing:

What CNN did to Bernie Sanders in the Iowa Democratic presidential debate — stabbing him with the gender card on behalf of a weakened Elizabeth Warren — was cheap and unfair.

And it was shameful.

I'm probably the last guy to defend Sanders. He is a man of the far left and I most certainly am not.

But even a conservative like me can see that Sanders was cheated out of the Democratic presidential nomination the last time, with the Democratic National Committee rigging the whole thing for Hillary Clinton. And now it's happening again.

[kladner]

Originally Posted by Dr Sardonicus

Some may find This Chicago Tribune column amusing:

Very interesting that author Kass states:

I disagree with Sanders’ policies, but at least he’s honest about what he wants to do. Establishment Democrats see Sanders’ base as full of energy and know they must stop him in Iowa and New Hampshire.

They feed Warren so Sanders doesn’t defeat Biden. And they’ll use friendly media to shape a stiletto and slip it between Bernie’s ribs.

Sanders’ voters have seen this one before.

I respect arguing for fairness, even for someone you disagree with.
However, Kass misused an apostrophe in his last sentence.
EDIT: Sheepish retraction of my last sentence. Sanders ends in an 's', so this is an acceptable usage. It just made me imagine that there is more than one Bernie.

[ewmayer]

Couple of links - which could equally go in the Establishment Media Watch thread - on the weekend Dem "debate" held by CNN:

o Matt Taibbi: Media Stupidity on Sanders, Trump Is Uniting Left, Right - Rolling Stone

o The Big Loser in the Iowa Debate? CNN’s Reputation | FAIR -- Ah yes, CNN's "so when did you stop beating your wife?" ambush attempt on Sanders. I prefer "credibility" in lieu of "reputation" here, because it better highlights the "you cannot lose that which you do not possess" aspect of the story. Abby Phillip asks Sanders loaded one-sided questions about his policy proposals and asks the other candidates loaded one-sided questions about Sanders' policy proposals, and former AIPAC shill Wolf Blitzer asks Sanders loaded one-sided questions about foreign policy of the "so your foreign policy is indistinguishable from that of Hitler, the Iranian Mullahs and Vladimir Putin?" ilk. The blatancy of the establishment attack-doggery here smacks of desperation.

[Till]

Originally Posted by ewmayer

o Matt Taibbi: Media Stupidity on Sanders, Trump Is Uniting Left, Right - Rolling Stone

Cite: "This made the occasional things that he [Trump] said that were true, like [...] NATO was a bloated and outdated organization, pack significantly more punch."


I heard about that stance, but I am baffled: Is this generally considered as a truth in the US? Or is Matt Taibbi a bit too quick?

[kladner]

Originally Posted by Till

Cite: "This made the occasional things that he [Trump] said that were true, like [...] NATO was a bloated and outdated organization, pack significantly more punch."

I heard about that stance, but I am baffled: Is this generally considered as a truth in the US? Or is Matt Taibbi a bit too quick?

Having written what is below the break, I realize that I should ask how you look at NATO. Obviously, I am am pretty set in my opinions, but hearing from another point of view is always good. However, I will point out that Trump says whatever is convenient and self-gratifying at any immediate moment. He can also flip in the next speech to a near-opposite, if it will increase his perception of adulation wafting his way.

-------------------------------------------

I am more inclined to call NATO a US lackey, or lapdog: a henchman in the endless adventures of the "Indispensable" nation. Sorry for the pejorative terms. I hold the US, and the arms and oil industries to primary responsibility. I wish there was more push-back against militarism, both domestically in the US, and on the international scene. I could wonder why a North Atlantic Organization's member forces are doing bombing runs in the Middle East. But that only begs the question of why US of America forces have been assaulting and battering the region for decades. Again, arms profits and oil profits go hand in hand to keep things destabilized, especially if people power starts to take over anywhere. Friendly-to-the-US brutal autocrats are much more desirable "agents of stability."

[Till]

I share parts of your point of view, but I'ld like to mention that e.g. Schröder did not follow G.W. Bush into the Iraq war, Merkel is resisting many invocations, and nations like the UK or France having their own nuclear forces can hardly be considered as lackeys. (in particular France IMHO)



Furthermore, here in Germany we are experiencing the longest lasting period of peace in history, and many people would say that the NATO was crucial to achieve that, in particularly during the cold war. I feel grateful for that, and I think many other Germans feel similar.

[kladner]

Thank you. You make some good points.

I'll have to do some reading and thinking on this.


EDIT: You are right about the nuclear powers having more choices. They have chosen to use conventional weaponry in support of dubious US objectives. I guess that is part of my criticism. Perhaps worse is those powers giving in too much to the US's views on Iran and the tattered nuclear agreement. It should be remembered who destroyed that arrangement and reimposed criminal economic warfare when Iran was in compliance.

[Dr Sardonicus]

Originally Posted by Till

I share parts of your point of view, but I'ld like to mention that e.g. Schröder did not follow G.W. Bush into the Iraq war, Merkel is resisting many invocations, and nations like the UK or France having their own nuclear forces can hardly be considered as lackeys. (in particular France IMHO)

Furthermore, here in Germany we are experiencing the longest lasting period of peace in history, and many people would say that the NATO was crucial to achieve that, in particularly during the cold war. I feel grateful for that, and I think many other Germans feel similar.

Many of us here in the good ol' USA may have difficulty grasping the notion of a foreign military conqueror, or of the ruination brought about by being in a "theater of operations." I daresay people living in states that were in existence, and whose armies wore non-blue uniforms during our Civil War, may claim to have a better idea than others.

Do Germans perhaps view the eastern part of their country as having been under foreign military occupation until around 1990?

And, if NATO is viewed by some as a US "lapdog," I wonder if any Europeans may have viewed the Warsaw Pact as being subservient to the Soviet Union.