Underground Knowledge — A discussion group discussion
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS
>
How America Works... and Why it Doesn't
date
newest »
newest »
message 51:
by
Ian
(new)
Sep 22, 2024 07:03PM
If Kamala is unsuitable for the job, the problem arose when she was picked as VP. The VP always runs the risk of being President
reply
|
flag
Also not exactly true. Typically people are voting for the president, not the VP. Plus just because you are on a winning ticket doesn’t mean you are presumptive. Biden picked Kamala, but she was incredibly unpopular as a presidential candidate 4 years ago and is considered the most unpopular VP in history. She should have had to earn her spot. You clearly have a soft spot for her…that said it doesn’t make it right. She didn’t take over because Biden stepped down From the presidency now…he decided not run again. Different things.
I don't have a soft spot for her. I don't really know her, but as for "presumptive" I thought the US constitution stated that if the President for some reason, e.g. death, could not continue, the VP automatically became President.I Googled "Most unpopular VP, and came up with Agnew, but I don't think they went back far enough.
My point remains. When Biden decided not to run again, there was not time to run primaries. If they had run something at the Convention, it would have been visibly the outcome wanted by the top guys. Sorry, but I don't think they had much of a choice because of the time constraints. Primaries have to be in the open and in plenty of states or it gets accused of being rigged.
J. wrote: "Ian wrote: "...[H]ow could they have proven that Biden was demented?..."The cognitive function tests he kept refusing to take while we all watched his brain melt."
That's a good answer J.
But if he refused to take such tests, and exactly how do we know he did, surely that shows he was not demented because he recognized people were planning to get rid of him and he took Presidential action.
1.) You're assuming he was the power in the Oval Office. His debate performance calls that into question.2.) How is crying, "I don't wanna", Presidential?
Does anyone expect any big events before the election? Or are things pretty much set?
Short of some external crisis, I think everything is set. The candidates will be trying to cover as much area as possible while telling the same stuff.
Two things possibly change this thing here in October: 1) the abysmal federal response to Hurricane Helene(Biden said just today they are tapped on resources…so while they give 8 more billion dollars to Ukraine to fight a proxy war, Americans are literally under water and without power in GA and NC, both swing states)and 2) the looming port worker strike which will snarl supply chains and create a small economic crisis that Biden/Harris must own in this last month.
The Feds big rate cut during election season was interesting. Will it be impactful?
It appears that long shoremen will be going on strike. That will shut down several East Coast ports.
In my opinion, binaries (up/down yay/nay left/right) are ideological traps and limitations. I reject most teams and group think as it’s often cult-like. I don’t think whoever the next prom king/queen or mascot of our country will change much for the average American.
I have just returned from a visit to the US. The most disturbing thing about the election for me is that it appears that sides have been taken and no-one talks about politics unless they are conversing with their own side. Fox vs MSNBC - pick your poison. To be honest there is an underlying theme of mistrust and even hatred of the "other".
We limit our political conversations because politics and religion used to be considered impolite topics of conversation in public. Conservatives don't talk about politics at work because no matter how polite the exchange some eavesdropper will run to HR claiming to feel threatened. (My employer has sent multiple emails banning political speech and even red baseball caps.)
Encouraged by William’s message 26, I decided to give my two-cents worth. As a Canadian of Maltese origin, I’m only mildly interested in who the US President is. Barring nuclear war or a military invasion of Canada, I don’t really care. I’m not that keen on politics, either; so I consider myself relatively unbiased. However, it’s not rocket science to realize that Trump, as US president, is a ticking time-bomb: both regarding nuclear war on US soil and the cessation of US democracy. Following is my research on the subject.Nuclear War:
According to the ‘Washington Post,’ in 2017, President Trump almost got the US into a nuclear war with North Korea: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politi.... Naturally, a nuclear war would be very detrimental to us, Canadians, but more so to the Americans—presumably to the whole world, too. That’s the only bias I might have against Trump.
Tariffs:
In his 2024 pre-election rallies, Trump mentioned increasing tariffs on Canadian imports; but then we could slap a similar tariff on US imports. According to the ‘Office of the United States Trade Representative,’ https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/am..., “In 2022, the U.S. and Canada traded $908.9 billion in goods and services, with Canada importing $481.2 billion and exporting $427.7 billion. The U.S. goods and services trade deficit with Canada was $53.5 billion in 2022.” I’m no economist, but I guess that since we import more from the US than they import from us, applying the same tariff rate, the bottom line would be our gaining a net income. I don’t see Trump’s logic in our case.
Trump’s Character:
(1) In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_o..., ‘Wikipedia’ has, “The Washington Post’s fact-checkers documented 30,573 false or misleading claims during his [Trump’s] presidential term, an average of about 21 per day. The Toronto Star tallied 5,276 false claims from January 2017 to June 2019, an average of 6 per day.” Would it be fair to call him a ‘liar’? And how can one trust a compulsive liar?
(2) In, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictm..., ‘Wikipedia, has, “The 6-week-long New York trial began on April 15, 2024 with Trump convicted in all 34 charges and sentencing scheduled for November 26.” Would you allow a convicted felon into your house or run your business? How about one with 34 convictions?
(3) In https://www.washingtonpost.com/politi..., ‘The Washington Post’ has, “What the jury found Donald Trump did to E. Jean Carroll was in fact rape, as commonly understood, even if it didn’t fit New York law.”
In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_..., ‘Wikipedia’ has, “Since the 1970s, at least 26 women have publicly accused Donald Trump, the president of the United states from 2017 to 2021, of rape, kissing, and groping without consent; looking under women’s skirts; and walking in on naked teenage pageant contestants. Trump has denied all of the allegations.”
In https://theweek.com/donald-trump/6557..., ‘The Week’ has, “89 things Donald Trump has said about women.” Despite his denigration of women, women still voted for him—mindboggling!
(4) He brags he is white: https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-... ‘Mediaite’ has, “Trump boasts he has ‘beautiful white skin’ right after slamming Kamala Harris.” Yet, blacks still voted for him.
He denigrates blacks and Latinos: https://www.vox.com/2016/7/25/1227088... ‘Vox’ has, “On the campaign trail, Trump repeatedly made explicitly racist and otherwise bigoted remarks, from calling Mexican immigrants criminals and rapists.” And yet, strangely enough, Latinos still voted for him.
(5) In 2020, Trump was taped pressuring Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to ‘find’ 11.7 thousand more votes to overturn the election results. According to ‘The New York Times,’ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/03/us..., “President Trump pressured Georgia’s Republican secretary of state to ‘find’ him enough votes to overturn the presidential election and vaguely threatened him.” Trump knows no boundary to his dishonesty. Notice, also, that this is documented PROOF that he’s the one who tried to steal the 2020 election!
2020 Election:
For those who still believe the 2020 election was ‘stolen,’ in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-el..., ‘Wikipedia’ has,
“After the 2020 United States presidential election, the campaign for incumbent President Donald Trump and others filed 62 lawsuits contesting election processes, vote counting, and the vote certification process in 9 states (including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) and the District of Columbia. Nearly all the suits were dismissed or dropped for lack of evidence or lack of standing, including 30 lawsuits that were dismissed by the judge after a hearing on the merits. Among the judges who dismissed the lawsuits were some appointed by Trump himself. Judges, lawyers, and other observers described the suits as ‘frivolous’ and ‘without merit.’ … Only one ruling was initially in Trump’s favor: the timing within which first-time Pennsylvania voters must provide proper identification if they wanted to ‘cure’ their ballots. This ruling affected very few votes, and it was later overturned by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.” So much for those “Thou shalt not steal” posters!
I mean, how many lawsuits must one lose to be convinced that one might have been wrong? I thought one, two, or three losses should be enough. Still, Trump and his followers, to this day, won’t admit they lost the 2020 election. To me, Trump looks like such a clown in this respect.
Incidentally, This is the way communist countries operate: they come up with a blatant lie and they keep repeating it until people start believing it. It’s termed the ‘Party Line’; and that’s how Trump dupes his followers. So, we now have communist tactics in America, of all places.
Indeed, according to ‘CNN,’ just prior to the 2024 election, his followers still refused to accept the vote counting. MAGA (Make America Great Again) declared they would cause trouble if they lost again: in https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/31/politi..., ‘CNN’ has, “How MAGA activists are preparing to undermine the election if Trump Loses.”
In https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/a..., ‘The Guardian’ has, “Trump and allies plant seeds for ‘chaos and discord’ if he loses.”
How come Trump’s supporters don’t scream “election fraud” now that they’ve won? This isn’t democracy. How can you reason with such people? In 1826, polymath and statesman Johann Wolfgang von Goethe said, “There is nothing more frightful than ignorance in action.”
The Press:
In https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_o..., ‘Wikipedia’ has, “Trump campaign CEO and presidency chief strategist Steve Bannon said that the press, rather than Democrats, was Trump’s primary adversary and ‘the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with shit.’” So much for freedom of the press, according to Bannon!
During his speech in Lititz, Pennsylvania, https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trum..., Trump said, “To get me, somebody would have to shoot through the fake news. And I don’t mind that so much. I don’t mind.” And the audience started to laugh.
Democracy:
In https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trum..., ‘Reuters’ has, “Donald Trump said … if he does not win November’s presidential election it will mean the likely end of American democracy.” It seems to me, the president-elect is there for his ego, not for the American people.
In his January 6, 1967, gubernatorial speech, https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archive..., former US President Ronald Reagan said, “Perhaps you and I have lived too long with this miracle to properly be appreciative. Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance [genes]; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people.”
I don’t think Americans will be voting again—ever; Trump’s going to stay there.
Like the ‘proverbial boiling frog,’ he’s not going to throw Americans in boiling water right away; he’s going to apply heat slowly.
When Hitler attempted to exterminate the Jews in World War II, the first thing he did was make them wear the Star of David on their arms. They didn’t object much because they were Jews, anyway. But then things got worse and worse until they were killed in gas chambers or starved and overworked to death in concentration camps.
Lutheran pastor in Germany Martin Niemӧller, after World War II, wrote: “First they [Nazis] came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.” Wake up America, before it’s too late.
According to ‘The Atlantic’ magazine, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/..., “As his [Trump’s] presidency drew to a close, and in the years since, he has become more and more interested in the advantages of dictatorship, and the absolute control over the military that he believes it would deliver. ‘I need the kind of generals that Hitler had,’ Trump said in a private conversation in the White House according to two people who heard him say this. ‘People who were totally loyal to him, that follow orders.’”
‘CNN’ reports, https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/03/politi..., “Donald Trump … said … that he regrets leaving the White House in 2021.” His exact words, “I shouldn’t have left. I mean, honestly, because we did so … well.”
Trump calls his opponents, (~48% of fellow Americans), “the enemy from within.” According to ‘The Washington Post,’ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politi..., “For the third time in a week, former president Donald Trump repeated his charge that Democrats allied against him are ‘the enemy from within’ in an interview with Fox News during which he called the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol ‘a beautiful thing.’”
The first thing Trump will do is eliminate any opposing press, claiming they disseminate false news, and somehow block free discussions like this one on Goodreads. He already singled out ‘CNN’ in his victory speech.
He will then use threats or force to intimidate whoever speaks the truth against him, as he threatened former first lady Micelle Obama, who only spoke the truth about him: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/28/us..., or else ‘eliminate’ them one by one. What will happen next is something similar to what Niemöller describes above.
CONTINUED IN MESSAGE 66
CONTINUED FROM MESSAGE 65Absolute Power:
In, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_v..., ‘Wikipedia’ has, “Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. 593, is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court determined that presidential immunity from criminal prosecution presumptively extends to all of a president’s ‘official acts’—with absolute immunity for official acts within an exclusive presidential authority that Congress cannot regulate such as the pardon, command of the military, execution of laws, or control of the executive branch. The case extends from an ongoing federal case to determine whether Donald Trump, president at the time, and others engaged in election interference during the 2020 election, including events during the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol.”
Notice that he now has total control of the military. Practically, Trump now has total immunity to do whatever he likes. In 1887, Catholic historian and politician Lord Acton wrote, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
I’d like to add, here, that that those who collaborated with Trump on January 6, 2021, have been prosecuted, found guilty, and jailed (like Jacob Chansley the ‘QAnon Shaman,’) or disbarred (like former Associate Attorney General of the United States and mayor of New York City Rudy Giuliani).
Overseas Wars:
This is a can of worms, so I’ll just give my opinion. In general, I think nations should stay out of wars unless they themselves are attacked unprovoked. Ideally, nations should try to negotiate peace with their neighbors, rather than settle disputes through wars. They shouldn’t try to get involved in others’ wars. The involvement of superpowers or NATO can only escalate wars.
(1) North Korea:
Despite the fact that , technically, there were no wars during Trump’s presidency, I don’t think he would shy away from war: we must not forget the close call the US had of a nuclear war with North Korea. Indeed, according to ‘NBC News,’ https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/dona..., “Trump discussed using a nuclear weapon on North Korea in 2017 and blaming it on someone else.”
(2) Israel:
According to ‘Wikipedia,’ Israel constitutes a strategic foothold in the Middle East: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%... it has,
“Israel provides a strategic American foothold in the region as well as intelligence and advanced technological partnerships in both the civilian and military worlds. During the Cold War Israel was a vital counterweight to Soviet influence in the region.” Moreover, there’s lots of oil and natural gas in the Middle East; because of its strategic position, Trump will remain involved there: apparently he intends to negotiate peace. I get the impression the US always WANTS to be involved in countries where there’s oil.
(3) Ukraine:
According to ‘Wikipedia,’ Russia helped electing Trump in the 2016 election:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian... it has, “The Russian government conducted foreign electoral interference in the 2016 United States elections with the goals of sabotaging the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton, boosting the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, and increasing political and social discord in the United States. According to the U.S. intelligence community, the operation—code named Project Lakhta—was ordered directly by Russian president Vladimir Putin.” This probably triggered a kind of friendship between Trump and Putin; consequently, I think Trump will make some excuse to stop helping Ukraine. I can’t say I disagree with him totally because war-support drains nations—and that includes Canada—but it’s more complicated than that.
However:
Although I believe freedom and democracy to be of paramount importance in politics, in the interest of fairness, I must confess that I do agree with Trump on several topics.
Global Warming:
Like him, I believe global warming is a hoax—a useless money-drainer—there’s nothing we can do about the sun’s effect on earth. If you’re interested in seeing why, you may want to read my article on “Global Warming” at https://faith-or-reason.com/2022/12/2... free. Or you may read the article “‘Human Induced Climate Change’—Fraud of the 21st Century,” https://www.nzcpr.com/human-induced-c..., by paleo-climatologist Dick Reaney.
Abortion:
I also happen to agree mostly with Trump regarding abortion: it’s never justified—in my opinion—not even in the case of rape because the unborn zygote, embryo, or fetus is totally innocent, and one cannot reproduce the same ‘person’ again. There’s one exception, I think: that’s when the mother’s life is seriously threatened—a choice of a life for a life.
In his book Heresy: Ten Lies They Spread about Christianity, columnist, author, and former radio and television talk-show host Michael Coren is of the opinion that there’s no such thing as a ‘choice’ if something is basically wrong or evil; he writes, “The choice to kill, rape, hurt and harm, steal, and libel are not considered choices but crimes. … So the choice to kill an unborn baby simply because you have the power to do so, for whatever reason, is not really a choice in any meaningful sense, but an action currently supported by law and custom, not in any way connected with what we would otherwise define as choice.” (p.195)
I’m a man, and naturally, I don’t really know how a woman feels. Indeed, I must confess most women I know disagree with me on this matter. At the same time, I think it’s best not to be emotionally involved in a problem to make the right decision.
Illegal Immigrants:
I agree with Trump also on border control; however, separating children from parents, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_a..., sounds somewhat inhumane to me.
Although most people would be willing to help others in need, no one likes to be obliged to adopt someone in his own house permanently. Besides, any time you invite someone into your house as a permanent renter, guest, or resident, there’s a real danger that one will try to take over and make one’s own rules, as the parable of “the camel and the tent” shows clearly: https://karve.wordpress.com/2017/09/1.... Many immigrants won’t even adapt and “do as the Romans do” in the host country: not even outwardly in their dress and the way they look. America (and Canada) are becoming guests in their own home.
Assassination Attempts:
Needless to mention, assassination attempts of any political figure are despicable acts. I say it once, twice, nay three times. The only way to get through to other people is by conviction, not by coercion of any sort—especially violence.
Conclusion:
I hope Americans wake up soon and read the ‘writing on the wall’: they have been given ample evidence, as I hope I showed convincingly above. Historically, there were a hundred-and-fifty-odd empires world-wide, throughout the ages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of.... Formidable empires like the Egyptian Empire (1550-1077BCE), the Roman Empire (27BCE-395CE), and the British Empire (1583-1997CE), have ALL perished. I think this is the beginning of the end for the US ‘Empire,’ too. The best way for this to happen is to be divided internally (Matthew 12:25), as I believe is the case presently. The only way back is to follow the TRUTH—not lies; it will set you free (John 8:32). I sincerely hope, for Americans’ sake, I am wrong.
Best regards to all contributors of this thread,
Carmel.
That is quite a list, and I can believe a lot of it. However, I disagree on the climate change. It is no hoax. There was an article in Nature (Lyman, J. M. and 7 others, 2010. Nature 465: 334-337.) that measured a net average power input into the oceans of a little over 0.6W/m^2 over the first decade of this century, and during this time the output of the star was basically constant. If the power input is constant, this result can only arise from something lowering the net power output from the surface. If you have a net power input, conservation of energy means we have to be getting warmer.It is not a huge increase and it might seem difficult to notice it until you integrate it over all the ocean area. Then the net energy input is huge.
My big problem with Trump is he does not think very deeply. He makes these wild statements, but what happens when other don't comply? For example, he says he will settle the Ukraine war essentially instantly. How? What happens when one side doesn't comply with Trump's dream? Is the US going to send in its army to settle the matter? What happens then? For me, it is a nightmare, except, I suppose, living in NZ gives perhaps the best chance of minimizing the damage.
Ian, I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Trump. Like many you have fallen into the media trap. One does not become a billionaire and president of the United States twice without thinking deeply. With respect to war, he actually does not want more life lost unlike most leaders who use their countryman as cannon fodder. Both Zelensky and Putin have already signaled for an end to war because they know Trump is back in charge…it’s the European end of the NATO coalition that doesn’t want the war to end. The 4 years previous under Trump were the most peaceful in my lifetime and I expect even better this coming 4 years. You don’t have to like his personality, but he gets things done.
B. wrote: "Ian, I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Trump. Like many you have fallen into the media trap. One does not become a billionaire and president of the United States twice without thinkin..."B, I totally agree. I can overlook any president's failings if he refuses to fee the war machine.
Ian wrote: "That is quite a list, and I can believe a lot of it. However, I disagree on the climate change. It is no hoax. There was an article in Nature (Lyman, J. M. and 7 others, 2010. Nature 465: 334-337.)..."Ian, regarding climate change, you can throw around all the fancy scientific calculations you like, but it's my understanding there was a long period in the Middle Ages when Planet Earth was hotter than it is now. I recall when that inconvenient truth was revealed, the mainstream scientific community quickly relegated the term "Global Warming" to the rubbish bin and opted to use the term "Climate Change" instead. Which is very confusing because the climate is always changing and has always changed and always will...regardless.
Lance wrote: "Ian wrote: "That is quite a list, and I can believe a lot of it. However, I disagree on the climate change. It is no hoax. There was an article in Nature (Lyman, J. M. and 7 others, 2010. Nature 46..."Lance, The Medieval warm period was not a global effect. Temperatures in Europe were hotter, seemingly because of the Gulf Stream had local effects. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieva....
The paper by Lyman et al was not a calculation; it involved measurements across significant areas of different ocean. That there has been significant warming since 1980 is shown by
https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/...
Yes, the climate always changes, but we have never seen such a value of dT/dt, and worse, d^2T.dt^2 is positive. This can't be good. As for me, I suppose I shouldn't care because I shall be dead before anything serious happens, but I do think of my granddaughters.
The other point most ignore is the CO2 levels in the ocean are now reaching a point where the precipitation of aragonite won't occur. Do you really want to wipe out much of the basic sea life?
B. wrote: "Ian, I respectfully disagree with your assessment of Trump. Like many you have fallen into the media trap. One does not become a billionaire and president of the United States twice without thinkin..."B, I hope you are right. I could forgive a lot of his failings if he can bring this war in Ukraine to a halt, and get the middle east settled down. In both these areas, Biden has at least been asleep at the wheel, but I believe he has been responsible for quite a bit of what has happened.
Ian wrote: "Lance wrote: "Ian wrote: "That is quite a list, and I can believe a lot of it. However, I disagree on the climate change. It is no hoax. There was an article in Nature (Lyman, J. M. and 7 others, 2..."Ian
The C02 Coalition states that claims that “97 percent of scientists” agree that a climate catastrophe is looming because of the emission of CO2 should be greeted with skepticism."
Coalition members remind us that "Green plants grow faster with more CO2. Many also become more drought- resistant because higher CO2 levels allow plants to use water more efficiently. More abundant vegetation from increased CO2 is already apparent."
Source:
https://www.commerce.senate.gov/servi....
Plants may grow faster with higher levels of CO2, but what happens when they die or are eaten? The carbon is digested and is emitted as CH4 or CO2, and there has been no net transfer. It is true forests could lock it away for longer, but the planet is burning down forests, and in places like the Amazon they are not regenerating as they should.We emit about 40 billion t of CO2 from fossil fuels each year. Where do you think that goes?
Ian wrote: "Plants may grow faster with higher levels of CO2, but what happens when they die or are eaten? The carbon is digested and is emitted as CH4 or CO2, and there has been no net transfer. It is true fo..."Ummm... I know there's a good answer. Am waiting for inspiration...
May I ponder that one for a while, Ian?
Of course, Lance. Unravelling the truth is worth doing, no matter how long it takes.
Ian wrote: "Of course, Lance. Unravelling the truth is worth doing, no matter how long it takes."I'm back!
I can't debate the scientific data you presented Ian, but I can directly quote the aforementioned CO2 Coalition organisation which states, "Available scientific facts have persuaded Coalition members that additional CO2 will be a net benefit."
And I know they're not alone in that assertion.
I'm encouraged that the Coalition is an independent, non-profit organization...unlike those parties (scientific, corporate and political) who have strong financial interests in climate change.
If in doubt, follow the money trail...
Indeed, follow the money trail. Why do they think extra CO2 will be a net benefit? In my opinion, because big oil has persuaded them. The question is, who receives most of the net benefit? In my opinion, big oil.Scientists are supposed to be independent, and I am, but unfortunately many of them have fell by the wayside.
