THE WHITE HOUSE said Wednesday’s trip to El Paso and Dayton was not a photo op, and they completely shut out media. They said the media blackout was for good reason -- it would’ve disrupted people in the hospital who were trying to work, and heal. But they then claimed that people were going gaga for the president in the hospital, which would’ve been a great image for a leader who is often criticized for not being able to handle one of his most important roles: that of consoler in chief. The White House did release its own photos of the visit.

Also release their own video.

https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2019/08/08/trumps-his-own-worst-political-enemy-after-tragedy-466346



Misdirection because of what?

thephan wrote:But cheap 'fast fashion' versus quality goods is a discussion too. The over consumerism driven by Old Navy type look of the week flash sales and gimmicky hype cycles is a same/different problem. A great deal of waste is generated in this as well.

I certainly have a ton of stupid t-shirts that I don't need and will probably never wear. And it's almost always better from a value proposition to buy quality goods that last rather than cheap shit that breaks easily.

It's not universal of course--when I was a kid in the 70s, the odometer on a car didn't go over 99,999 miles. It's pretty common to see cars today with 150k miles, and with conscientious preventive maintenance, some cars might just well last practically forever.

It also seems that some items people used to replace regularly like computers and phones are seeing their life cycle extended. People sometimes talk about how there are no TV repairmen any more, but it seems to me that TVs rarely break anymore. People replace them not because they break, but because they want 8k or whatever. I guess this is the difference today between phones and TVs--people are willing to replace something that is still working if the replacement is cheap enough and offers enough new features. The latest cell phones though are too expensive, and don't offer enough of any upgrade over the phones people already have.

Of all the strange Trump headlines I think this one may be the strangest:

President Trump ‘Looking Very Seriously’ At Granting Leniency To Former Gov. Blagojevich; ‘He Was Treated Unbelievably Unfairly’

I mean, one criminal to another, but why on Earth would he even consider for one moment risking anything politically to help a Democrat who has nothing to do with him?

Probably a Putin agent, too.

Wolfgang622 wrote:Of all the strange Trump headlines I think this one may be the strangest:

President Trump ‘Looking Very Seriously’ At Granting Leniency To Former Gov. Blagojevich; ‘He Was Treated Unbelievably Unfairly’

I mean, one criminal to another, but why on Earth would he even consider for one moment risking anything politically to help a Democrat who has nothing to do with him?

He was on The Apprentice.

JUburton wrote:Isn't the 'they're taking good american jobs and they depress wages' sort of a myth? They are mostly taking jobs that people here do not want to do (low skill, low pay) and the real irony is that it likely disproportionately affects poor black people...not the people trump is trying to protect exactly. I'd think the standard republican policies (complete free trade, union busting) and now trump policies (tariffs) hurt american workers far more than the tide of illegal immigration.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/artic ... -americans

Agree completely, but sometimes perception is reality. People like two things in this world: (1) Easy answers and (2) Blaming other people for their problems. I work for a union, I think unions are fantastic and necessary, and I think it's pretty easy to explain why, but you know what's even easier for the out-of-work or underemployed tradesman? To look at vans driving around South Philly, which I used to see all the time, picking up people who are almost uniformly of some sort of Latin American extraction, obviously to be whisked off to some construction job some place, and think to himself, "Those jerks are underselling me and taking away my job." It's certainly not productive, I don't even think it's accurate, but I can't put my fingers in my ears and close my eyes and pretend it isn't happening and doesn't cause anger that, while I believe is misdirected, any of us will have a hard time re-directing to more appropriate targets just by talking, or especially by appearing to defend the practice.

One of the more insightful things I have ever heard someone say about the class war is that it is extremely difficult to get people to hate or be angry with people they simultaneously admire and want to be. The average working class white Joe off the street would love to be Donald Trump, thinks that if he were in charge he would be like Donald Trump. Talk big, act big, "tell it like it is," take no guff from nobody, put people in their place. Have hot and cold running money and women and power. It's a common fantasy, I think, for people who have relatively little power about how they would be if they only HAD power. Reward the hard workers and punish the bullshitters. Of course in their own minds they are always the hard workers and the usual suspects are the bullshitters.

Honestly it's the same reason why so many older sports fans lionize someone like Larry Bowa or Dallas Green in this town, and hate the Gabe Kaplers - they think, "If I had that job, that's what I'd be like. I wouldn't care about the precious feelings of millionaire athletes - I'd 'tell it like it is' and call them out and scream obscenities until they hit better and ran harder and caught more baseballs.'" Exact same phenomenon.

The point is: we can, and should, try to counteract this narrative and re-direct the anger by repeating as simple a version as we can of a complex truth: the uber-wealthy have too much control of the government, have manipulated the system to favor themselves as far as possible so they can make as much money as possible, by doing things like suppressing the influence of labor unions, keeping down minimum wage, keeping their own taxes as low as possible, etc.; and that, furthermore, no matter what system you design, money provides the power to do lots of things, include move much more easily than people, and so there are just some things that will always be a problem.

At the same time, we must recognize that this will not be enough, if only because "rich people indirectly responisble" is not as compelling a narrative, nor elemental and in tune with the anger an underemployed, struggling person often feels, as "that guy took my job." People are hard-wired to be clannish and insular, and to admire the powerful. We like to live in organized societies, and we like to organize by putting people in charge, and by excluding "them" from "us." It takes a a certain mindset to see and understand that these basic human drives are what cause one struggling person to be angry with another, instead of at the rich guy who profits from both, and expecting everyone to have that mindset and adopt it is unrealistic.

If we want more people to HEAR and LISTEN to our narrative, the correct narrative, then, among other things, we have to make it a societal priority to punish and demonize people with money who egregiously and obviously try to game the system to advantage themselves, AND try to minimize the types of things that happen in front of people's faces that agitate them against people they, in truth, have more in common with.

I have no sympathy for the white guy who complains about an immigrant taking his job - if that immigrant is here legally. I would lean towards a more lenient immigration policy, certainly to make citizens of those already well-established here and probably to allow more people to come in in naked light of day, no problem. The problem right now is: that angry white guy can imagine, because the odds aren't bad at all, that when he sees a brown-skinned guy speaking Spanish and working on a construction site, that he's not here legally, that he's undercutting him and his own labor, etc., and that validates his rage.

I'd like to take away his ability to rationalize that way as much as possible, and part of it has to be by addressing the issue. Punish, severely, employers who cheat, and they won't cheat; if they don't cheat, there are no jobs for people without proper documentation; provide that documentation to all the people who are here and more liberally to those who would like to come, and then you can turn around and tell the angry white people: we've addressed the issue, now let's move forward and talk about real issues: everybody can't be rich, and we've let rich people run shit for too long. Everyone needs healthcare before anyone - anyone - needs a billion dollars, for just one example.

Holy shirt. New cell phone video of Don in El Paso. He start with praising the medical staff, but very quickly moves on to how great his rally was over at the El Paso Coliseum (he asked the staff to remind him of where said rally was held), and then completes the pivot to talking about how great he is.

Least surprising thing ever I suppose.

narcissist in chief

Grotewold wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:Of all the strange Trump headlines I think this one may be the strangest:

President Trump ‘Looking Very Seriously’ At Granting Leniency To Former Gov. Blagojevich; ‘He Was Treated Unbelievably Unfairly’

I mean, one criminal to another, but why on Earth would he even consider for one moment risking anything politically to help a Democrat who has nothing to do with him?

He was on The Apprentice.

I mean, I guess. The article says Jared was pushing for Trump to pardon him.

I really want to see the base's reaction to this. Sticking out his neck to defend a corrupt DEMOCRAT? For what possible reason?

By the way JESSE JACKSON wants him to do it.

Really I may have to check out some right-wing sites.

I enjoyed Seth Myers reviewing the last day or two.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJgdxokVbTg

thephan wrote:Pat Toomey bringing back his expanded background check concept. He is leaving a significant hole in it where there is a "friends and family" transfer exception. You know those F&F gun shows will be all the rage ASAP.

That was from over in the Guns topic. Seems that he is more of a coward then I suspected since he was back on Fox yesterday saying that he is not going to support a ban on assault weapons because "they are extremely popular". Just a wow moment.

moz i dont want to quote the whole thing for space but good stuff.

Wolfgang622 wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

Wolfgang622 wrote:Of all the strange Trump headlines I think this one may be the strangest:

President Trump ‘Looking Very Seriously’ At Granting Leniency To Former Gov. Blagojevich; ‘He Was Treated Unbelievably Unfairly’

I mean, one criminal to another, but why on Earth would he even consider for one moment risking anything politically to help a Democrat who has nothing to do with him?

He was on The Apprentice.

I mean, I guess. The article says Jared was pushing for Trump to pardon him.

I really want to see the base's reaction to this. Sticking out his neck to defend a corrupt DEMOCRAT? For what possible reason?

By the way JESSE JACKSON wants him to do it.

Really I may have to check out some right-wing sites.

Maybe because it gets people to talk about a corrupt democrat so they can say the dems are just as bad.

It's not 4D chess

It is never 4D chess

Yang is the ninth person to qualify for the next debate. I wouldn’t mind them breaking it up to two nights again with half as many people on stage.

I am afraid that we are all going to qualify again.

JUburton wrote:moz i dont want to quote the whole thing for space but good stuff.

Yeh, I pretty much agree with everything he said. People on the left would do well to understand these perceptions.

I see some of the same issues with affirmative action. There are employers who are racist and need to be severely punished for their racism, but having quotas or favoring minorities over an equally qualified white person leads to further racism from the general population. It treats the symptom and not the disease. In fact, it may make the disease worse. Most people want no discrimination in hiring processes (and in the case of immigration, they want a path to citizenship and a way for people to get here and find work), but they don't want to be pushed aside or passed over for a job because they happen to be white (or illegal immigrants taking their jobs), especially if said person happens to not be a racist. In both cases, you are giving people a place to hang their hat if they are predisposed to believe (or are being taught growing up) that minorities or illegals are taking their jobs unfairly.

I took some counseling classes at PSU years go and one of the classes was about multicultural issues. I was treated like crap by some of the students and the TA because I had the nerve to say that I personally don't think I, as a white person, should have to feel guilty about slavery. I pointed out that I'm not racist and my family didn't arrive in america until the early 1900's and I have always been taught by family that racism is wrong. Why should I feel guilty about slavery just because I'm white? In fact, isn't it a bit racist to say that I'm somehow responsible for slavery and should feel guilty about it just because I'm white? Slavery is a horrible practice that should forever be abolished globally and we should do everything in our power to help make that happen, but I don't think I should feel personally guilty about it. I'm embarrassed that my race was responsible for it, but feeling guilty implies guilt. Nobody wants to be held responsible for the actions of others.

This second paragraph is tangentially related to the first in that I think the left will sometimes lose people who would otherwise support them because the policy (or the thoughts behind the policy) will feel like a punishment to those who are out there trying to make ends meet. Someone who might support giving illegals a solid pathway to citizenship may not like the idea of illegals being allowed to work. It makes sense. If they are breaking the law and I'm not breaking the law, why should they be allowed to work when I can't? The fact that it's a job that I might not want is really irrelevant. On principle, why should someone breaking the law be allowed to do so? If I break the law, I am arrested or fined, why shouldn't a non-citizen be treated the same way? If anything, shouldn't a citizen be treated better than an illegal by their own country?

Personally, I would like to see the laws changed to allow a pathway for those who are already here while also allowing a way for greater numbers to come seasonally or for low entry positions. I'm not sure what this would look like exactly, but I know Trump hired these people at his modeling agencies and there are beach towns filled with eastern european workers 3 months out of the year. It can be done. It just means creating a program or modifying an existing one to allow for greater movement. This also might help with people staying illegally. If they know the can go back and forth without hiding in the back of a truck, maybe they won't stay all year round and use the emergency room or other services that might cost taxpayers money.

jerseyhoya wrote:It's not 4D chess

It is never 4D chess

It's hardly 4D. This is more like 3D chess.

I know you would like to pass this off as one idiot in the WH rather than an entire party, but not everyone in the WH is an idiot. In fact, when it comes to this kind of thing, Trump is quite savvy. His execution is almost always incompetent, but he has a very good feel for how to market his ideas and cover his ass. He's been doing it in NYC for decades and has somehow managed to elude prosecution.

A good hypothesis allows you to make predictions, so I will make one. As this thing with Blago plays out, I predict you will start to hear connections being made between Trump's current situation of being "unfairly" under attack and investigation with poor Blago's past situation of being "unfairly" under attack. And about how it's not just republicans who get attacked by these outrageous investigations, but it's dems, too. And how Trump should undo this horrible wrong that was done to Blago just like americans should demand that the House investigations into Trump should end.

Monkeyboy wrote:I see some of the same issues with affirmative action...

I understand your analogy but do not agree.

I was a “Republican” as a kid (I thought of myself as a 10 year old supporter of Ronald Reagan, as a 14 year old organizer for President Bush (really, we had a classroom vote and Bush won by one vote and I watched my group mate, who had been a Clinton guy all song, think about it and vote Bush - I won the election for him!), and I voted for - god help me - Dole and Bush II - but I never registered as a Republican), but one of the first times I remember changing my mind on something was affirmative action.

Of course I took the whole “that was then, this is now” “we’ve grown so much” tack up until my senior year of high school, so late 96 early 97. That year the Texaco scandal some of you may remember broke. Some genius had figured a way to secretly record board meetings of that company, and boy oh boy did they get the goods - n-word, the works.

I know, I know, it’s an oil company actually CALLED “TEXAco” and it was 20+ years ago. But I realized that day what a friend of mine put quite succinctly years later: it is amazing what white people will say when they think they are alone. Experience has born this out.

For all our progress, white men still control the vast majority of things, and, people being what they are, they’re going to tend to promote their friends, who are very likely to look, talk, act, and think like then. Without getting into it, I have noticed this even locally in my own school district.

Bottom line: with Affirmative Action, we are talking about making sure those with power share their power with other citizens, citizens who may not be mirror images of themselves. That’s a far cry from deciding where the line should be drawn on how many new people we can or should let in, and what to do about wealthy people who try to avoid paying fair and reasonable wages and pay their taxes fully by circumventing the system that regulates who can be legally employed.

On the latter, there is room for debate and improvement. On the former, keep cryin’, racists.