|
Post by impulse on Jan 17, 2019 12:31:54 GMT -5
So, first the truth isn't the truth and now Giuliani says he never said there wasn't any collusion with the Russians by the President's staff. I'm pretty sure it's time for Grandpa to retire to The Home. I'm pretty sure he is trying to hedge because he knows something really damning is about to come out.
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 17, 2019 12:50:22 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure it's time for Grandpa to retire to The Home. I'm pretty sure he is trying to hedge because he knows something really damning is about to come out. This is probably true also. But looking at how Giuliani has handled this whole thing I see clear signs of dementia and diminished capacity to practice law. While I have seen a number of older attorneys who stay sharp to a very advanced age, I've also seen a large number who continue to practice way past their expiration date. Rudy has done a lot of stuff that just makes you shake your head and wonder how someone with his reputation could be so damn dumb.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Jan 17, 2019 14:05:10 GMT -5
Giuliani's rep before becoming the supposed hero 9/11 was terrible, I knew so many people in NYC who would rant on about the guy and how he was destroying the place, then again, maybe I knew some shadey people?
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Jan 17, 2019 14:27:20 GMT -5
Giuliani's rep before becoming the supposed hero 9/11 was terrible, I knew so many people in NYC who would rant on about the guy and how he was destroying the place, then again, maybe I knew some shadey people? Giuliani did a lot of skeevy stuff when he was U.S. Attorney for the SDNY. He consistently pushed up to the ethical boundaries and frequently stepped over but didn't get called on it as he should have. He's long been a sleaze.
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Jan 17, 2019 15:02:26 GMT -5
There was a time early in the 2008 presidential campaign when Giuliani was the leading Republican candidate in national polls. After a few months of campaigning, it became increasingly clear that the more time he spent in any one state, the lower his poll numbers went in that state. He was still #1 in states that he never visited, but once voters got a good look at him, they looked elsewhere.
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Jan 18, 2019 13:52:09 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure he is trying to hedge because he knows something really damning is about to come out. This is probably true also. But looking at how Giuliani has handled this whole thing I see clear signs of dementia and diminished capacity to practice law. While I have seen a number of older attorneys who stay sharp to a very advanced age, I've also seen a large number who continue to practice way past their expiration date. Rudy has done a lot of stuff that just makes you shake your head and wonder how someone with his reputation could be so damn dumb. What you say makes sense, and I agree with you. Also. BuzzFeed’s Michael Cohen story, if true, looks to be the most damning to date for TrumpThere it is.
|
|
|
Post by impulse on Jan 18, 2019 17:40:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Jan 19, 2019 0:47:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jan 19, 2019 8:55:25 GMT -5
Not sure what you mean by this. No true Christian would ever advocate this type of cruelty to be administered upon anyone, especially not migrants to the US. The Bible specifically speaks about treating migrants (aliens or sojourners, in Biblical language) as one would treat anyone else, including: Leviticus 19:34 - "The alien who resides with you shall be to you as the citizen among you; you shall love the alien as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God." Leviticus 27:19 - "‘Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.’ Then all the people shall say, ‘Amen!’" Ezekiel 27:42 - "You shall allot it as an inheritance for yourselves and for the aliens who reside among you and have begotten children among you. They shall be to you as citizens of Israel; with you they shall be allotted an inheritance among the tribes of Israel." Again, following up on the conversation from a few days back, the people who are wrapping themselves in the flag while clutching their Bible and supporting this administration are religious extremists. They aren't putting God or His Word first, they're putting petty bigotry and racism and their political desires above what they have been commanded in the Scriptures. They are not following Christian values, plain and simple.
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 19, 2019 9:44:08 GMT -5
Much as I am waiting for a smoking gun with baited breath, this wouldn't be the first time Buzzfeed produced a story it hadn't properly vetted in order to make headlines. It's amazing anyone is still taking them seriously as a news source.
|
|
|
Post by Cei-U! on Jan 19, 2019 9:56:14 GMT -5
And yet a Buzzfeed reporter just won a Pulitzer.
Cei-U! Just sayin'!
|
|
shaxper
CCF Site Custodian
Posts: 22,871
|
Post by shaxper on Jan 19, 2019 9:58:47 GMT -5
And yet a Buzzfeed reporter just won a Pulitzer. Cei-U! Just sayin'! If you are always risking everything to get to the big story first, sometimes you will win a pulitzer, and sometimes you will be spreading more fake news than Breitbart.
|
|
|
Post by beccabear67 on Jan 19, 2019 12:25:55 GMT -5
I'll make a prediction on the shutdown/border covfefe. The Democrats will cave, but in a way that will make Trump look even worse. I think they really should for the sake of the people and the economy. Yes, there was a deal, and then the Pres changed his mind after being swayed by some of those blowhard pundits (mostly all blow, no hard... did I just type this??? Eep!), and yes, McConnell refuses to allow anything without the Pres' blessing, so to me they come before Democrats for being held accountable, but what win is there in staying true to facts like that? You can still repeat the facts afterward anyway. Unless Trump is going to try this dubious emergency powers power grab. But if so the Dems may've just missed an opportunity to look more like the adults in the room. Especially after the outing of that Pelosi visit to Afghanistan and taking a plane away, then right after saying there will be another meeting with N. Korea's big child 'just cause'. After that expect more re-election in 2020 rallies (the kind which started not long after he was sworn in in 2017, talk about eye roll of the century). A carnival like atmosphere for some, infotainment for all, and the crappy end of the stick as always for a lot of others.
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Jan 19, 2019 13:10:49 GMT -5
I'll make a prediction on the shutdown/border covfefe. The Democrats will cave, but in a way that will make Trump look even worse. I think they really should for the sake of the people and the economy. Yes, there was a deal, and then the Pres changed his mind after being swayed by some of those blowhard pundits (mostly all blow, no hard... did I just type this??? Eep!), and yes, McConnell refuses to allow anything without the Pres' blessing, so to me they come before Democrats for being held accountable, but what win is there in staying true to facts like that? You can still repeat the facts afterward anyway. Unless Trump is going to try this dubious emergency powers power grab. But if so the Dems may've just missed an opportunity to look more like the adults in the room. Especially after the outing of that Pelosi visit to Afghanistan and taking a plane away, then right after saying there will be another meeting with N. Korea's big child 'just cause'. After that expect more re-election in 2020 rallies (the kind which started not long after he was sworn in in 2017, talk about eye roll of the century). A carnival like atmosphere for some, infotainment for all, and the crappy end of the stick as always for a lot of others. They really shouldn't crave, and I don't think they will either as sentiment for the wall continues to fall as the shutdown continues.
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Jan 20, 2019 15:55:52 GMT -5
Interesting discussion re: religion and it's political implications.
I think the issue of religion in politics in the USA, and Christianity in particular, is way more complex than the media tends to portray it. If you look at actual statistics, the Democratic party actually has a large percentage of religious people, many with theological and social views (e.g., abortion, marriage, family) that are not too far off from white evangelical Christians in the Republican party. But most of those religious folks are people of color, whereas as white Democrats are usually secular. African-Americans, who vote overwhelmingly for Democrats, have a long and deep tradition of Christianity in the US, and the civil rights movement was heavily influenced by Christianity.
As far as the evangelical support of Trump, while it is true that something like 80% of white evangelical Christians voted for Trump, there have been studies that correlated voting patterns to actual church attendance with some interesting twists. Turns out that self-identifying as evangelical on a survey does not necessarily correlate to actual religious practice. In fact, the people who are most loyal in supporting Trump tended to be the least observant, i.e., they attended church infrequently. I've also seen some statistics that indicated that Bible literacy also had a big influence on political leanings. Pastors and others who are more formally educated in the Bible did not strongly go for Trump, whereas support was stronger for folks in the pews.
From what I've observed, one's actual religious belief seems to have less of a role on which party one supports compared to race, class, and one's position within culture. To put it bluntly -- white people who are Christian in the US overwhelmingly support Republicans, whereas African/Hispanic/Latino/Asian Americans who are Christian tend to support the Democratic party (esp. African-Americans), or at the very least are more mixed and not so predictably Republican (Hispanic and Asian). If you look at the issues that white Christians care about compared to Christians of color, the issues almost always diverge with respect to power dynamics and cultural dominance.
Exhibit A is abortion. It turns out that white Christians and Christians of color pretty much have similar opinions on the morality of abortion. Where they diverge is on policy, which reflects power dynamics. White Christianity has been culturally dominant in the US for a long time, and so they approach abortion from the perspective of someone who has historically had access to the levers of power -- i.e., legislation. Christians of color have operated on the margins and are used to operating on the margins, so their first instinct is to address abortion from a grassroots approach rather than a legislative one -- i.e., reduce the need for abortions rather than trying to make it illegal. So you don't find abortion as an issue that affects voting patterns among people of color because for those who care about it, they see the solution as existing outside of the political system, or addressed indirectly through other issues (e.g., health care, paternal leave policies).
|
|