That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons bring us some web forums whereupon we can gather
http://garbi.online/forum/
Donald Trump's new running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, wrote in a 1999 op-ed that the Disney film "Mulan" was liberal propaganda used to foster debate about women serving in the military.
“Despite her delicate features and voice, Disney expects us to believe that Mulan’s ingenuity and courage were enough to carry her to military success on an equal basis with her cloddish cohorts,” Pence wrote in the op-ed, which was first reported by Buzzfeed.
“Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military," wrote Pence, who was a talk show host in Indiana at the time.
Pence wrote that "some mischievous liberal" at Disney created the movie to change the next generation's attitude about women in combat.
...
“It is instructive that even in the Disney film, young Ms. Mulan falls in love with her superior officer! Me thinks the politically correct Disney types completely missed the irony of this part of the story,” writes Pence.
“They likely added it because it added realism with which the viewer could identify with the characters. You see, now stay with me on this, many young men find many young women to be attractive sexually. Many young women find many young men to be attractive sexually. Put them together, in close quarters, for long periods of time, and things will get interesting. Just like they eventually did for young Mulan. Moral of story: women in military, bad idea.”
Looks like he was right and it worked!“Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military," wrote Pence, who was a talk show host in Indiana at the time.
Pence wrote that "some mischievous liberal" at Disney created the movie to change the next generation's attitude about women in combat.
I guess they should have made a Joan of Arc movie instead.Isgrimnur wrote:Pence, 1999
Donald Trump's new running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, wrote in a 1999 op-ed that the Disney film "Mulan" was liberal propaganda used to foster debate about women serving in the military.
“Despite her delicate features and voice, Disney expects us to believe that Mulan’s ingenuity and courage were enough to carry her to military success on an equal basis with her cloddish cohorts,” Pence wrote in the op-ed, which was first reported by Buzzfeed.
“Obviously, this is Walt Disney’s attempt to add childhood expectation to the cultural debate over the role of women in the military," wrote Pence, who was a talk show host in Indiana at the time.
Pence wrote that "some mischievous liberal" at Disney created the movie to change the next generation's attitude about women in combat.
...
“It is instructive that even in the Disney film, young Ms. Mulan falls in love with her superior officer! Me thinks the politically correct Disney types completely missed the irony of this part of the story,” writes Pence.
“They likely added it because it added realism with which the viewer could identify with the characters. You see, now stay with me on this, many young men find many young women to be attractive sexually. Many young women find many young men to be attractive sexually. Put them together, in close quarters, for long periods of time, and things will get interesting. Just like they eventually did for young Mulan. Moral of story: women in military, bad idea.”
If he were still doing the Colbert Show persona, Trump probably would have invited him to speak...LordMortis wrote:Stephen Colbert has as much of a liberal bias as does Stewart and Maher to name a few of the most popular political satirists but for reasons I can't explain, he usually gets a pass from me.
http://www.theverge.com/2016/7/18/12213 ... nger-games
Oh dear lord, what is the world coming to?A Donald Trump supporter with a primetime speaking slot at the Republican national convention, who is billed as a small business owner employing more than 100,000 people, is actually a “multi-level marketer” who does not employ anyone.
Michelle Van Etten was personally invited by the Trump campaign to address the Republican party gathering in Cleveland, Ohio, during a pro-business session on Wednesday evening titled Make America First Again.
The official schedule for the convention states: “Michelle employs over 100,000 people and is a strong supporter of Donald Trump, knowing his policies will support businesses all across America.”
In an interview on Monday, however, Van Etten said the billing was incorrect. “I don’t employ,” she said, adding that she did not know who wrote the text.
Live Republican convention live: RNC chair opens four-day event in Cleveland
Follow all the latest from Cleveland as the Republican national convention opens on the theme of ‘Make America Safe Again’
Read more
Van Etten, 42, works on her own as an independent retailer of products supplied by Youngevity, a “multi-level marketing” corporation based in California.
Uhh.billed as a small business owner employing more than 100,000 people
What a teaser title to that article! I was hoping for some optimism about his chances, or even desire.Zaxxon wrote:Trump/Pence 60 Minutes Interview Absurdity
All true. Trump doesn't answer questions so much as bat them away. Make the questioner look naive or disloyal. And the fans go wild.Carpet_pissr wrote:What a teaser title to that article! I was hoping for some optimism about his chances, or even desire.Zaxxon wrote:Trump/Pence 60 Minutes Interview Absurdity
No such luck. Just further drives home the point that his popularity is completely based on how people feel like (ironically) he "sticks it to the man". Article writer seems to be shocked that Trump doesn't care that his answers are silly, contradictory and illogical. DOESN'T MATTER. Not to him, or his supporters. He can give bs answers like that because it won't affect his base support AT ALL. Hell, they probably love the way Stahl was stammering and shocked at his dumb ass replies and contradictions.
Trying to apply logic, or even sense to this buffoon is...nonsensical. He's just bluster and BS, and people apparently love that. I guess anything beyond "we're going to kick ass and take names later!" wrt to ISIS makes his supporters' eyes glaze over.
Actual facts, what's been done to date, what has or hasn't worked, is too messy and requires thinking. It's too cerebral, and then we get into the whole "elitism" territory.
Ha! I missed that. Good eye. That is hilarious.Kraken wrote:"We're going to have unbelievable intelligence" made me laugh. Unbelievable intelligence got us into Iraq.
In Trumptopia, all the small businesses will be just as yuge.Zaxxon wrote:Uhh.billed as a small business owner employing more than 100,000 people
Still, Republican delegates at last week’s national security committee platform meeting in Cleveland were surprised when the Trump campaign orchestrated a set of events to make sure that the GOP would not pledge to give Ukraine the weapons it has been asking for from the United States.
tl;dr version: He's a manipulative egotist.Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
When challenged about the facts, Schwartz says, Trump would often double down, repeat himself, and grow belligerent.
How the fuck could this be news to anyone at this point, I have no idea. Who's next for the right wing masses? Martin Shkreli? I'm afraid that Trump will be elected president not because he's presumably GOP, I'm afraid because he's a monster and shouldn't be anywhere near this much power.Kraken wrote:Insights from Trump's ghostwriter on how his thought process works.
tl;dr version: He's a manipulative egotist.Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
When challenged about the facts, Schwartz says, Trump would often double down, repeat himself, and grow belligerent.
Schwartz on Good Morning America. Schwartz's tldr: Trump is a sociopath.Kraken wrote:Insights from Trump's ghostwriter on how his thought process works.
tl;dr version: He's a manipulative egotist.Schwartz says of Trump, “He lied strategically. He had a complete lack of conscience about it.” Since most people are “constrained by the truth,” Trump’s indifference to it “gave him a strange advantage.”
When challenged about the facts, Schwartz says, Trump would often double down, repeat himself, and grow belligerent.
Colbert made a comment last night about how strange if that happened 'several more times this week.' I think it's a lock.Chaz wrote:I hope Stewart starts chiming in a bit more later on in the week. I think that's the plan.
Definitely. I guess what I really want is for him to be more directly involved. The skit last night was cute, but was kind of a time filler.Zaxxon wrote:Colbert made a comment last night about how strange if that happened 'several more times this week.' I think it's a lock.Chaz wrote:I hope Stewart starts chiming in a bit more later on in the week. I think that's the plan.
Yeah, when I read the news about Jon Stewart, I set the DVR to get all of this week's Late Show with Stephen Colbert's. I was not disappointed last night.msteelers wrote:Those Colbert bits were fantastic.
Personally - I always loved Jon's vaudevillian tendencies so the obvious spit take set up was gold to me. More so than the actual spit take.Pyperkub wrote:Jon Stewart was meh, save for bringing back Colbert.
If he wins the presidency, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would seek to purge the federal government of officials appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama and could ask Congress to pass legislation making it easier to fire public workers, Trump ally, Chris Christie, said on Tuesday. Christie, who is governor of New Jersey and leads Trump's White House transition team, said the campaign was drawing up a list of federal government employees to fire if Trump defeats Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 presidential election. “As you know from his other career, Donald likes to fire people,” Christie told a closed-door meeting with dozens of donors at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, according to an audio recording obtained by Reuters and two participants in the meeting. Christie was referring to Trump's starring role in the long-running television show "The Apprentice," where his catch-phrase was "You're fired!" The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
The employees targeted are political appointees and I can understand why an incoming administration would want to put their own people in and sweep out anyone who's not on the same page as the new president.Max Peck wrote:Purging -- if it's good for Turkey, then...If he wins the presidency, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would seek to purge the federal government of officials appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama and could ask Congress to pass legislation making it easier to fire public workers, Trump ally, Chris Christie, said on Tuesday. Christie, who is governor of New Jersey and leads Trump's White House transition team, said the campaign was drawing up a list of federal government employees to fire if Trump defeats Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 presidential election. “As you know from his other career, Donald likes to fire people,” Christie told a closed-door meeting with dozens of donors at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, according to an audio recording obtained by Reuters and two participants in the meeting. Christie was referring to Trump's starring role in the long-running television show "The Apprentice," where his catch-phrase was "You're fired!" The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
Christie added that the Trump team wants to let businesspeople serve in government part time without having to give up their jobs in the private sector. Trump frequently says he is better equipped to be president because of his business experience.
Except that they are explicitly planning to use the excuse of appointees to make it easier to fire employees (who are not inherently appointees). Career civil servants are generally apolitical, and the Trumpistas aren't planning business as usual for a new administration if they need to pass new laws to do enact their agenda.$iljanus wrote:The employees targeted are political appointees and I can understand why an incoming administration would want to put their own people in and sweep out anyone who's not on the same page as the new president.Max Peck wrote:Purging -- if it's good for Turkey, then...If he wins the presidency, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would seek to purge the federal government of officials appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama and could ask Congress to pass legislation making it easier to fire public workers, Trump ally, Chris Christie, said on Tuesday. Christie, who is governor of New Jersey and leads Trump's White House transition team, said the campaign was drawing up a list of federal government employees to fire if Trump defeats Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 presidential election. “As you know from his other career, Donald likes to fire people,” Christie told a closed-door meeting with dozens of donors at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, according to an audio recording obtained by Reuters and two participants in the meeting. Christie was referring to Trump's starring role in the long-running television show "The Apprentice," where his catch-phrase was "You're fired!" The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
I was trying to see if Christie was saying that and I got the sense that it was more targeted towards appointees that have burrowed in. However, I won't deny that the ability to more easily fire your run of the mill career civil servant isn't something that the Trump administration would mind having.Max Peck wrote:Except that they are explicitly planning to use the excuse of appointees to make it easier to fire employees (who are not inherently appointees). Career civil servants are generally apolitical, and the Trumpistas aren't planning business as usual for a new administration if they need to pass new laws to do enact their agenda.$iljanus wrote:The employees targeted are political appointees and I can understand why an incoming administration would want to put their own people in and sweep out anyone who's not on the same page as the new president.Max Peck wrote:Purging -- if it's good for Turkey, then...If he wins the presidency, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump would seek to purge the federal government of officials appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama and could ask Congress to pass legislation making it easier to fire public workers, Trump ally, Chris Christie, said on Tuesday. Christie, who is governor of New Jersey and leads Trump's White House transition team, said the campaign was drawing up a list of federal government employees to fire if Trump defeats Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Nov. 8 presidential election. “As you know from his other career, Donald likes to fire people,” Christie told a closed-door meeting with dozens of donors at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, according to an audio recording obtained by Reuters and two participants in the meeting. Christie was referring to Trump's starring role in the long-running television show "The Apprentice," where his catch-phrase was "You're fired!" The Trump campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
One day this past May, Donald Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., reached out to a senior adviser to Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, who left the presidential race just a few weeks before. As a candidate, Kasich declared in March that Trump was “really not prepared to be president of the United States,” and the following month he took the highly unusual step of coordinating with his rival Senator Ted Cruz in an effort to deny Trump the nomination. But according to the Kasich adviser (who spoke only under the condition that he not be named), Donald Jr. wanted to make him an offer nonetheless: Did he have any interest in being the most powerful vice president in history?
When Kasich’s adviser asked how this would be the case, Donald Jr. explained that his father’s vice president would be in charge of domestic and foreign policy.
Then what, the adviser asked, would Trump be in charge of?
“Making America great again” was the casual reply.