Politics of the Free - It’s because Democrats, stupid.
  • LarryDavid wrote:
    American and British voters have never needed too much persuasion to shoot themselves in the foot. The idea that it's all a shady master plan orchestrated from the Kremlin seems a bit rich to me. The Mail and others have spent 20-odd years moaning and whining about Brussels bureaucrats and PC gone mad as an example, and America has Fox News to spread poison and misery...

    Russia may have played a part, but so did a myriad of others players. I'm sure lots of business groups resented EU regulations imposing on their right to be as exploitative and greedy as possible and were happy to fund a campaign to get that monkey off their backs. 'Mystical inner workings of politics'? It's the same as it always was, money talks and those with money attempt to use it to propagandise everyone else into voting in a way that suits them.

    If Russia spread online propaganda and influenced an election or two - which is entirely possible, that they tried I mean, not that those diabolical Russkies have the power to rig any election anywhere in the World anytime they want, then it's only fairgame really. Us and America have been fixing nominally Democratic elections in other countries for our own benefit on a regular basis for decades. How many tinpot banana republic's has the CIA meddled in, installing their own chosen dictator in order to maximise profits or contain the red menace? As the bodycount went up and the death squads rolled out, did we spare a thought for the sanctity of democracy and cry a tear for the concept of freedom? Did we fuck.

    Seems like both Brexit and Trump were a reaction against the mystical inner workings of Western Democracy, that wonderful concept that has left so many citizens of their own societies debt-ridden, depressed and despondent, and willing to vote for two obviously shady campaigns fronted by snake-oil salesmen that offered cheap, easy solutions to whatever was ailing the voters. If Britain and America were wonderful places where everyone basked in the sunshine of free market capitalism and loved every minute of it then I doubt Russia would have been able to so easily persuade people to vote for some change - any change no matter how obviously desperate and doomed...
    Well said.

    And outlets like RT wouldn't get so much traction if there wasn't a void of proper criticism left by our own MSM to begin with.
  • acemuzzy
    Show networks
    PSN
    Acemuzzy
    Steam
    Acemuzzy (aka murray200)
    Wii
    3DS - 4613-7291-1486

    Send message
    For a Liverpool fan, LD seems strangely wise at times
  • He's nothing without the know-how from the Kremlin.

  • acemuzzy
    Show networks
    PSN
    Acemuzzy
    Steam
    Acemuzzy (aka murray200)
    Wii
    3DS - 4613-7291-1486

    Send message
    Northern Italy now also doing "we're rich, fuck the poorer bits". Such generosity of spirit.
  • LD knows....

    And yes, it was quite easy for Putin to ally with Europe's nationalists and initiating contact with a willing Trump. It does take 2 to tango and the populists are easily persuaded.
    Steam: Ruffnekk
    Windows Live: mr of unlocking
    Fightcade2: mrofunlocking
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    acemuzzy wrote:
    Northern Italy now also doing "we're rich, fuck the poorer bits". Such generosity of spirit.

    And let's see how Russia takes advantage and tries to intensify that division, and amplify the story.

    I'm not saying these divisions are created by Russia, but it is undeniable that they are making a concerted effort to drive wedges into the cracks.
  • LD is also correct that there are western actors besides Russia (Mercer, Cambridge analytical, the sun and mail) who played a major part in the (online) propaganda strategy. How big was the Russian influence and how were the roles divided between east and west?

    Lord knows because except for Mueller's FBI investigation and a few daring journalists, noone is looking into it...


    Steam: Ruffnekk
    Windows Live: mr of unlocking
    Fightcade2: mrofunlocking
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    https://euvsdisinfo.eu/figure-of-the-week-103/
    A former Washington correspondent for Sputnik, Russia’s state-sponsored news agency, says he received a 103-page handbook instructing reporters to “stay true to the national interest of the Russian Federation.”
  • WorKid wrote:
    "rig western elections"?

    Does nobody else think the Russian thing is well well overplayed?

    Who orchestrated Brexit and convinced massive chunks of the computer-illiterate to vote Brexit? The Mail and The Sun were the opinion makers.

    Putin is smiling everytime he's meeting with Trump, Farage or any EU populist party leader one cares to remember in the Kremlin.
    Steam: Ruffnekk
    Windows Live: mr of unlocking
    Fightcade2: mrofunlocking
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    Interesting that the person who is running the California secession (yes, it's a thing apparently) registered the trademark using a Russian email address.

    i77b8p3t.jpg
  • We should phone him up and ask him about it...
    Come with g if you want to live...
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    "da? Comrade g, I have been expecting you".
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    The 'resignation' speech of Republican Senator Jeff Flake.
    Mr. President, I rise today to address a matter that has been much on my mind, at a moment when it seems that our democracy is more defined by our discord and our dysfunction than it is by our values and our principles. Let me begin by noting a somewhat obvious point that these offices that we hold are not ours to hold indefinitely. We are not here simply to mark time. Sustained incumbency is certainly not the point of seeking office. And there are times when we must risk our careers in favor of our principles.

    Now is such a time.

    It must also be said that I rise today with no small measure of regret. Regret, because of the state of our disunion, regret because of the disrepair and destructiveness of our politics, regret because of the indecency of our discourse, regret because of the coarseness of our leadership, regret for the compromise of our moral authority, and by our – all of our – complicity in this alarming and dangerous state of affairs. It is time for our complicity and our accommodation of the unacceptable to end.

    In this century, a new phrase has entered the language to describe the accommodation of a new and undesirable order – that phrase being “the new normal.” But we must never adjust to the present coarseness of our national dialogue – with the tone set at the top.

    We must never regard as “normal” the regular and casual undermining of our democratic norms and ideals. We must never meekly accept the daily sundering of our country – the personal attacks, the threats against principles, freedoms, and institutions, the flagrant disregard for truth or decency, the reckless provocations, most often for the pettiest and most personal reasons, reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with the fortunes of the people that we have all been elected to serve.

    None of these appalling features of our current politics should ever be regarded as normal. We must never allow ourselves to lapse into thinking that this is just the way things are now. If we simply become inured to this condition, thinking that this is just politics as usual, then heaven help us. Without fear of the consequences, and without consideration of the rules of what is politically safe or palatable, we must stop pretending that the degradation of our politics and the conduct of some in our executive branch are normal. They are not normal.

    Reckless, outrageous, and undignified behavior has become excused and countenanced as “telling it like it is,” when it is actually just reckless, outrageous, and undignified.

    And when such behavior emanates from the top of our government, it is something else: It is dangerous to a democracy. Such behavior does not project strength – because our strength comes from our values. It instead projects a corruption of the spirit, and weakness.

    It is often said that children are watching. Well, they are. And what are we going to do about that? When the next generation asks us, Why didn’t you do something? Why didn’t you speak up? — what are we going to say?

    Mr. President, I rise today to say: Enough. We must dedicate ourselves to making sure that the anomalous never becomes normal. With respect and humility, I must say that we have fooled ourselves for long enough that a pivot to governing is right around the corner, a return to civility and stability right behind it. We know better than that. By now, we all know better than that.
    Here, today, I stand to say that we would better serve the country and better fulfill our obligations under the constitution by adhering to our Article 1 “old normal” – Mr. Madison’s doctrine of the separation of powers. This genius innovation which affirms Madison’s status as a true visionary and for which Madison argued in Federalist 51 – held that the equal branches of our government would balance and counteract each other when necessary. “Ambition counteracts ambition,” he wrote.

    But what happens if ambition fails to counteract ambition? What happens if stability fails to assert itself in the face of chaos and instability? If decency fails to call out indecency? Were the shoe on the other foot, would we Republicans meekly accept such behavior on display from dominant Democrats? Of course not, and we would be wrong if we did.

    When we remain silent and fail to act when we know that that silence and inaction is the wrong thing to do – because of political considerations, because we might make enemies, because we might alienate the base, because we might provoke a primary challenge, because ad infinitum, ad nauseam – when we succumb to those considerations in spite of what should be greater considerations and imperatives in defense of the institutions of our liberty, then we dishonor our principles and forsake our obligations. Those things are far more important than politics.
    Now, I am aware that more politically savvy people than I caution against such talk. I am aware that a segment of my party believes that anything short of complete and unquestioning loyalty to a president who belongs to my party is unacceptable and suspect.

    If I have been critical, it not because I relish criticizing the behavior of the president of the United States. If I have been critical, it is because I believe that it is my obligation to do so, as a matter of duty and conscience. The notion that one should stay silent as the norms and values that keep America strong are undermined and as the alliances and agreements that ensure the stability of the entire world are routinely threatened by the level of thought that goes into 140 characters – the notion that one should say and do nothing in the face of such mercurial behavior is ahistoric and, I believe, profoundly misguided.

    A Republican president named Roosevelt had this to say about the president and a citizen’s relationship to the office:

    “The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the nation as a whole. Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly as necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile.” President Roosevelt continued. “To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
    Acting on conscience and principle is the manner in which we express our moral selves, and as such, loyalty to conscience and principle should supersede loyalty to any man or party. We can all be forgiven for failing in that measure from time to time. I certainly put myself at the top of the list of those who fall short in that regard. I am holier-than-none. But too often, we rush not to salvage principle but to forgive and excuse our failures so that we might accommodate them and go right on failing—until the accommodation itself becomes our principle.

    In that way and over time, we can justify almost any behavior and sacrifice almost any principle. I’m afraid that is where we now find ourselves.
    When a leader correctly identifies real hurt and insecurity in our country and instead of addressing it goes looking for somebody to blame, there is perhaps nothing more devastating to a pluralistic society. Leadership knows that most often a good place to start in assigning blame is to first look somewhat closer to home. Leadership knows where the buck stops. Humility helps. Character counts. Leadership does not knowingly encourage or feed ugly and debased appetites in us.

    Leadership lives by the American creed: E Pluribus Unum. From many, one. American leadership looks to the world, and just as Lincoln did, sees the family of man. Humanity is not a zero-sum game. When we have been at our most prosperous, we have also been at our most principled. And when we do well, the rest of the world also does well.

    These articles of civic faith have been central to the American identity for as long as we have all been alive. They are our birthright and our obligation. We must guard them jealously, and pass them on for as long as the calendar has days. To betray them, or to be unserious in their defense is a betrayal of the fundamental obligations of American leadership. And to behave as if they don’t matter is simply not who we are.
    Now, the efficacy of American leadership around the globe has come into question. When the United States emerged from World War II we contributed about half of the world’s economic activity. It would have been easy to secure our dominance, keeping the countries that had been defeated or greatly weakened during the war in their place. We didn’t do that. It would have been easy to focus inward. We resisted those impulses. Instead, we financed reconstruction of shattered countries and created international organizations and institutions that have helped provide security and foster prosperity around the world for more than 70 years.

    Now, it seems that we, the architects of this visionary rules-based world order that has brought so much freedom and prosperity, are the ones most eager to abandon it.

    The implications of this abandonment are profound. And the beneficiaries of this rather radical departure in the American approach to the world are the ideological enemies of our values. Despotism loves a vacuum. And our allies are now looking elsewhere for leadership. Why are they doing this? None of this is normal. And what do we as United States Senators have to say about it?
    The principles that underlie our politics, the values of our founding, are too vital to our identity and to our survival to allow them to be compromised by the requirements of politics. Because politics can make us silent when we should speak, and silence can equal complicity.

    I have children and grandchildren to answer to, and so, Mr. President, I will not be complicit.
    I have decided that I will be better able to represent the people of Arizona and to better serve my country and my conscience by freeing myself from the political considerations that consume far too much bandwidth and would cause me to compromise far too many principles.
    To that end, I am announcing today that my service in the Senate will conclude at the end of my term in early January 2019.

    It is clear at this moment that a traditional conservative who believes in limited government and free markets, who is devoted to free trade, and who is pro-immigration, has a narrower and narrower path to nomination in the Republican party – the party that for so long has defined itself by belief in those things. It is also clear to me for the moment we have given in or given up on those core principles in favor of the more viscerally satisfying anger and resentment. To be clear, the anger and resentment that the people feel at the royal mess we have created are justified. But anger and resentment are not a governing philosophy.

    There is an undeniable potency to a populist appeal – but mischaracterizing or misunderstanding our problems and giving in to the impulse to scapegoat and belittle threatens to turn us into a fearful, backward-looking people. In the case of the Republican party, those things also threaten to turn us into a fearful, backward-looking minority party.

    We were not made great as a country by indulging or even exalting our worst impulses, turning against ourselves, glorying in the things which divide us, and calling fake things true and true things fake. And we did not become the beacon of freedom in the darkest corners of the world by flouting our institutions and failing to understand just how hard-won and vulnerable they are.
    This spell will eventually break. That is my belief. We will return to ourselves once more, and I say the sooner the better. Because to have a healthy government we must have healthy and functioning parties. We must respect each other again in an atmosphere of shared facts and shared values, comity and good faith. We must argue our positions fervently, and never be afraid to compromise. We must assume the best of our fellow man, and always look for the good. Until that day comes, we must be unafraid to stand up and speak out as if our country depends on it. Because it does.

    I plan to spend the remaining fourteen months of my senate term doing just that.
    Mr. President, the graveyard is full of indispensable men and women — none of us here is indispensable. Nor were even the great figures from history who toiled at these very desks in this very chamber to shape this country that we have inherited. What is indispensable are the values that they consecrated in Philadelphia and in this place, values which have endured and will endure for so long as men and women wish to remain free. What is indispensable is what we do here in defense of those values. A political career doesn’t mean much if we are complicit in undermining those values.

    I thank my colleagues for indulging me here today, and will close by borrowing the words of President Lincoln, who knew more about healing enmity and preserving our founding values than any other American who has ever lived. His words from his first inaugural were a prayer in his time, and are no less so in ours:

    “We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory will swell when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.”

    Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor.
  • Good speech, good points, but the central argument of We should oppose you is rather undermined by And I quit so you can appoint one more complicit puppet.
  • Bollockoff
    Show networks
    PSN
    Bollockoff
    Steam
    Bollockoff

    Send message
    I'mma not be complicit in yo shit so I quit so you can keep doin it.
  • He should have fought the primary on an anti-Trump ticket. Then run as an independent if he'd lost. For all his bluster he's running from the fight. I think it's a shame.
  • Skerret
    Show networks
    Facebook
    die
    Twitter
    @CustomCosy
    Xbox
    Skerret
    PSN
    Skerret
    Steam
    Skerret
    Wii
    get tae

    Send message
    what a flake
    Skerret's posting is ok to trip balls to and read just to experience the ambience but don't expect any content.
    "I'm jealous of sucking major dick!"~ Kernowgaz
  • Bollockoff
    Show networks
    PSN
    Bollockoff
    Steam
    Bollockoff

    Send message
    Crumbles easily.
  • Yeh. I'd rather they stuck around and fought against him rather than pack it in and open the door for a possibly even more right wing nut job to take their places.
    Live= sgt pantyfire    PSN= pantyfire
  • WorKid wrote:
    Good speech, good points, but the central argument of We should oppose you is rather undermined by And I quit so you can appoint one more complicit puppet.

    Yes and no. He's also making a point that what he feels the values are of the Republican Party are being lost by the current administration and party leadership, so by not running next time, it is far easier for him to publicly argue against what they say and do. He's now beholden to no one, the party utterly unable to put any pressure on him whatsoever.

    Given how tight things are, with him and Corker not seeking re-election, and John MCain seemingly no longer caring what the party hierarchy thinks since his cancer diagnosis by freeing himself of the party machinery, he might be more able to influence the direction of the party in his remaining time than he would by staying within it for another term.
  • But why not fight to be part of the solution, and if you lose the primary then keep going as an independent.

    If all the anti-Trump voices are too scared to stand up to him then it's pretty clear what will happen to the party.

    Words are useless. Actions are needed. Change comes at the ballot box.
  • Getting re-elected in the primaries while opposing Trump doesn't seem to them like a fight they can win. And (probably) the price Trump will want them to pay for his support is full subservience. I don't blame them for going out on their terms and causing as much of a stink as possible in the mean time. 

    If they're trying to get more Republican's on board with them, losing in the primaries for their own seats might not be the best look. I assume most of these guys have a cynical agenda though. Maybe theirs is to take Trump out as quickly as possible, and then 'change their minds' and stand again with Pence in charge.
  • It’s also worth pointing out that Flake voted with Trump on 91% of issues - including installing Sessions, gutting Medicaid and allowing Banks to stop people from suing them. So he’s not exactly a hero, he’s still a massive cunt.
    Gamertag: gremill
  • Leave now with a brave speech that doesn't do much and go home to a few sweet boardroom jobs. Stay meekly in the job and piss off a lot of constituents when Trump does something disastrous. Stay and fight and get the blame when the party fractures.
  • Kow
    Show networks
    Twitter
    Kowdown
    Xbox
    Kowdown
    PSN
    Kowdown
    Steam
    Kowdown

    Send message
    Gremill wrote:
    It’s also worth pointing out that Flake voted with Trump on 91% of issues - including installing Sessions, gutting Medicaid and allowing Banks to stop people from suing them. So he’s not exactly a hero, he’s still a massive cunt.

    Being a cunt and a good Republican are not mutually exclusive.
  • Escape
    Show networks
    Twitter
    Futurscapes
    Xbox
    Futurscape
    PSN
    Futurscape
    Steam
    Futurscape

    Send message
    Republicunts.
  • GooberTheHat
    Show networks
    Twitter
    GooberTheHat
    Xbox
    GooberTheHat
    Steam
    GooberTheHat

    Send message
    Flake, corker and mcain are now free to oppose Trump (if they want to). Flake's seat isn't up for election until 2019. With the 4 seat majority the republicans have, and the crazy freedom caucus, the 3 of them could make things extremely difficult for the republican party if they don't look to get rid of trump (if they want to).
  • But do they have those seats because they are the Republican representative or because of the person?
    If it's the former then the Republicans field a new candidate and if the people vote party rather than person it's all for nought.
    Live= sgt pantyfire    PSN= pantyfire

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!