Hurricane complacency is touted as a new form of stupidity. We will see how many lives it costs over the next few weeks.
The United States of Stupid. I mean, really, REALLY stupid ...
Thu, 2016-10-06 17:36
#152
montrealer58
Thu, 2016-10-06 18:19
#153
Hurricane complacency is touted as a new form of stupidity.
Is it also being touted as a new term? "Hurricane complacency"?
That's not intended as a biased question; I think we all should oppose hurricanes, and anyone who stands shoulder-to-shoulder with a hurricane needs to ask themself what side they're really on.
Thu, 2016-10-06 18:52
#154
I think naming a hurricane "Complacency" is pretty stupid.
Thu, 2016-10-06 19:05
#155
At least it's non-gendered.
And it finally assigns blame for coastal destruction where it belongs -- to those who are more interested in their reality television and their Facebook and their PlayStation than in the concerns of our Caribbean neighbours.
We could fight this tropical storm together, or we could worry about the Kardashians. The choice is up to us.
Thu, 2016-10-06 19:22
#156
montrealer58
The CNN reporters look a little disappointed to be taken off the presidential election beat to cover the storm. Still, days and days go by and no news about the outside world.
Fri, 2016-10-07 21:47
#157
ikosmos
Russians halt search for intelligent life in Washington
On both the North American and West European continents bodies spewing vast amounts highly toxic material are believed to be responsible for a huge decline in mental faculties. Parasitical in nature, the bodies manage to insinuate themselves into host communities by imitating human characteristics. Once established, instead of breathing life into the atmosphere, the alien bodies attach themselves to previously healthy organs that normally perform the function of transmitting current information vital for the proliferation of intelligence and the survival of the species. The attached parasites corrupt the integrity of the host organ by sucking out all the elements essential to the growth of rational thought. They then convert those elements into a highly toxic material before excreting it onto the host community. The resulting excrement swiftly leads to the asphyxiation of the myriad varieties of media required for the growth of knowledge and ideas on which intelligent life subsists and thrives.
Mon, 2016-10-31 14:14
#158
ikosmos
The United States of Oblivion - Chris Hedges on American Irrationalism
There are hundreds of millions of Americans who know that something is terribly wrong. A light has gone out. They see this in their own suffering and hopelessness and the suffering and hopelessness of their neighbors. But they lack, because of the contamination of our political, cultural and intellectual discourse, the words and ideas to make sense of what is happening around them. They are bereft of a vision. Austerity, globalization, unfettered capitalism, an expansion of the extraction of fossil fuels, and war are not the prices to be paid for progress and the advance of civilization. They are part of the savage and deadly exploitation by corporate capitalism and imperialism. They serve a neoliberal ideology. The elites dare not speak this truth. It is toxic. They peddle the seductive illusions that saturate the airwaves. We are left to strike out at shadows. We are led to succumb to the racism, allure of white supremacy and bigotry that always accompany a culture in dissolution.
We cannot, for this reason, discount the possibility that Trump will be elected president. The election outcome will be decided by whatever emotion Americans feel when they cast their ballots.
Sun, 2017-01-08 23:22
#159
ikosmos
Well, Hedges certainly called it. One way to look at the election is the confirmation of the United States of Stupid. Not that I look at it that way. I ain't no friggin' liberal, whining about all the deplorables that didn't do what they were supposed to do.
Anyway.
When I come across public figures in American life - on the left, natch, and preferably ones that I admire - whose remarks fit in this thread, I always try to put the relevant quote here.
Here's one more.
If fish rot from the head, the rotting of American society might have something to do with this elite that we have.
I like that. Rot from the top down. It makes me feel, down here at the bottom of the pile, that perhaps the stink I smell isn't, after all, my own doing. lol.
more here. Doug Henwood on Soundcloud
In this Upstream Conversation we spoke with author and journalist Doug Henwood. Doug wrote a book about Hillary Clinton called My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency, which is a strong critique of Hillary Clinton and her policies from the left of the political spectrum. We spoke with him about the response to his book, his thoughts on the Democratic Party and the election, the economic forecast of the Trump administration, the state of the economy, and much more.
Sun, 2017-01-08 23:33
#160
Yeah, really fucking stupid.
Watch the whole thing, or start at three minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2fqRrrIetM
Mon, 2017-01-09 12:20
#161
ikosmos
The Stupid! It burns!!
Hint: the Soviet Union came to an end in the early 1990's. It was in all the papers.
Mon, 2017-01-09 14:45
#162
Edzell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2fqRrrIet
Most or all of the comments about Streep's speech are intent only on alleging that she's unintelligent, uninformed, etc; mixed in with more personal & insulting slurs.
None of them makes any attempt to critique the actual content of her speech.
Too unintelligent, uninformed?
Mon, 2017-01-09 14:46
#163
Edzell
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2fqRrrIet
Who is the stony-faced woman just left of Streep's shoulder at about 4.53 to .58?
Ikosmos? 
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:04
#164
Timebandit
If you mean the lovely woman in the yellow gown, that was Viola Davis, who shared some thoughts of her own on the state of politics in the US last night, as did Hugh Laurie.
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:17
#165
Edzell
If you mean the lovely woman in the yellow gown, that was Viola Davis, who shared some thoughts of her own on the state of politics in the US last night, as did Hugh Laurie.
Nope. The one in the front row of the audience with a face like Tam o' Shanter's wife "Nursin' her wrath t' keep it warm," maintaining an unlovely face and conspicuously refusing to applaud
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:19
#166
Timebandit
I didn't see her. Your links aren't working, or I'd have another boo.
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:25
#167
ikosmos
As Doug Henwood noted ...
Yeah, Trump sucks, but someone worth $45 million speaking before an audience of rich celebs might not be the right spokesperson to make that point.
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:30
#168
Edzell
I didn't see her. Your links aren't working, or I'd have another boo.Not working for me either, now. It seems the video has been removed - a pity, I thought it was an intersting speech. I'll see if I can find it elsewhere.
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:42
#169
Edzell
I see no particular reason why a recognisable public figure shouldn't publicly express his/her personal views & feelings (and i don't think Meryl Streep has claimed to be anyone's "spokesman.") If the content is controversial it can be critiqued. Arguably Ms Streep is at least as intelligent, educated and qualified to speak as are we who spout endlessly on this public platform.
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:46
#170
Edzell
Not working for me either, now. It seems the video has been removed - a pity, I thought it was an intersting speech. I'll see if I can find it elsewhere.
Try this one:
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:48
#171
alan smithee
I thought her speech was fair,well thought and extremely restrained. On the right wing planet that's an incoherent rant.
Mon, 2017-01-09 15:51
#172
ikosmos
What did Streep say about "foreigners" in her industry? Something about too many of them?
Mon, 2017-01-09 16:01
#173
alan smithee
I didn't hear that...at what point does she say they're too many of them?
Mon, 2017-01-09 16:10
#174
Timebandit
Quite the opposite - she said that they are part of the filmmaking community in Hollywood and that they are quite welcome.
Mon, 2017-01-09 16:26
#175
Not happy she dissed football and mixed martial arts, though. Mixed martial arts is an art form, it's right in the name!
Mon, 2017-01-09 17:22
#176
Edzell
Edit: I think this post got into thw wrong thread. Not sure how that happened - if it did - or, now, where the referenced comment by Smith_W is located. Sigh.
I think those of us who do accept it, but continue doing the same things would by that measure be even more stupid.But see my new topic on this very subject. (I don't accept the notion that I'm stupid :))
Mon, 2017-01-09 18:49
#177
Meryl Streep for Hillary
Mon, 2017-01-09 18:59
#178
Timebandit
So?
Mon, 2017-01-09 19:09
#179
ikosmos
Henwood has Streep's interview regarding her role as Thatcher. It's quite revealing ... and explains, I think, why Thatcher's war against the working classes disappeared in the film and turned into her war against the "boy's" network.
I think it's fair to say that she's, at best, a liberal. As Henwood remarked, "Yeah, Trump sucks, but someone worth $45 million speaking before an audience of rich celebs might not be the right spokesperson to make that point."
She doesn't get to appropriate my voice, or, I think, the voice of the left, whatever some people here are trying to do.
Liberal diversion city.
Mon, 2017-01-09 19:16
#180
Misfit
I don't know who that lady is but would also like to know.
Mon, 2017-01-09 19:33
#181
Nah. It isn't in the wrong thread.
Mon, 2017-01-09 19:38
#182
And Streep called out violence and ridicule, specifically against a disabled person, by people in public posiitons. And she called out anti immigrant discrimination, and called for reponsible media to do their jobs. It is completely relevant to the work she and others there are in.
She's not appropriating your voice or anyone else's ikosmos. Give me a break. Though I can see why you might be ticked at people disproving your stereotypes.
Mon, 2017-01-09 19:52
#183
Edzell
So?Is it better to campaign for your "least undesirable" candidate - whether or not you're misrepresenting your admiratiion - than to say nothing? This is a bit like the issues discussed in the Machiavelli thread: When do you feel you can be dishonest but still "ethical" in pursuit of what you believe to be a benign ending (or in this case the one judged the better of two alternatives) ?
Of course I don't know what Meryl Streep really believed, or what she thought she was up to. Ha! In politics is that even relevant? But it's noticable (to me) that she based most of her support on straight feminism, rather than any Clinton policy, ideology or history.
Mon, 2017-01-09 20:19
#184
Timebandit
Edzell, I think it's clear that feminism was important in Streep's support of Clinton, but there were many other reasons - immigration reform, not discriminating against religious groups, antiracism among others. Contrary to a lot of the opinions on the board, Clinton did have better policies and represented a better version of the USA than Trump did. And apparently 3 million more Americans agreed with Streep than with Trump supporters.
Mon, 2017-01-09 20:40
#185
Edzell
Edzell, I think it's clear that feminism was important in Streep's support of Clinton, but there were many other reasons - immigration reform, not discriminating against religious groups, antiracism among others.I don't think I saw any of that in the speech that was linked, but maybe I missed it. My post was strictly with reference to that speech; I honestly don't know enough about Hillary Clinton to comment further (although I actively disliked her "persona" when I saw her speaking (shouting) on TV.) That may not be relevant I know but she seemed too much of a self-obsessed triumphalist for my liking.
Mon, 2017-01-09 20:42
#186
Edzell
Edzell, I think it's clear that feminism was important in Streep's support of Clinton, but there were many other reasons - immigration reform, not discriminating against religious groups, antiracism among others.I don't think I saw any of that in the speech that was linked, but maybe I missed it. My post was strictly with reference to that speech; I honestly don't know enough about Hillary Clinton to comment further (although I actively disliked her "persona" when I saw her speaking (shouting) on TV.) That may not be relevant I know but she seemed too much of a self-obsessed triumphalist for my liking.- Don't even mention Trump !
Mon, 2017-01-09 21:24
#187
Timebandit
I'm referencing what I know of Streep's involvement in the Clinton campaign, as was pointed out by NDPP, although he still hasn't told us what point he was trying to make. That aside, I don't think there's any such thing as an flawless candidate (no, not even Bernie Sanders). There are things I like about Hillary Clinton. A woman of her generation doesn't survive in politics without having a lot of grit and smarts. She was breaking ground for women and had she gained the presidency, it would have massively changed things for the better for American women of all classes and races. And I'm sad she won't get the chance to, even sadder that things stand to go very badly for women and people of colour under her opponent.
Mon, 2017-01-09 21:57
#188
There are things I like about Hillary Clinton. A woman of her generation doesn't survive in politics without having a lot of grit and smarts. She was breaking ground for women and had she gained the presidency, it would have massively changed things for the better for American women of all classes and races. And I'm sad she won't get the chance to, even sadder that things stand to go very badly for women and people of colour under her opponent.
Oh my God, TB, I'm sorry to have to disagree with you. Good riddance to Hillary Clinton. Ever since she changed her name from Rodham, I figured she was the same shit as all U.S. politicians. And her policies and actions didn't convince me otherwise. Sorry you feel some positive vibes about her.
Mon, 2017-01-09 22:05
#189
Timebandit
I'm sorry you disagree with me, too. I actually understand why she changed her name, for one thing. She's a few years younger than my mother, so keeping her birth name was pretty radical in the first place. Hell, I changed my name the first time I got married (regrettably) because of pressure, can imagine it was much worse for her. And it might be that I've got a different lens to look through when it comes to that kind of thing. She took some unimaginable shit and kept rolling. She deserves some respect for that at least.
Mon, 2017-01-09 22:14
#190
With respect, TB - and you know well that I respect you - I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about Hillary Clinton of the 1%.
Here's her story. And here's what happened:
Bill Clinton lost reelection in 1980, but decided to run to reclaim his seat two years later. That’s when Hillary Rodham decided it was time to take on Bill’s name, to assist the effort. Here’s how Bill Clinton explained it to Bruck:
When she came to me and said she wanted to change, I could see in her eyes that she had made the decision to do it. And I said, “I do not want you resenting me. I would a lot rather lose the election than lose you.” She said, “I’m not going anywhere.” I said, “I know, but I don’t want you to resent this for the rest of your life. You made this decision when you were a child. I like it. I approve of the decision. I don’t care about it.” And she said, “Look, Bill, we cannot—this is stupid! We shouldn’t lose the election over this issue. We shouldn’t run this risk. What if it’s one per cent of the vote? What if it’s two per cent? You might win or lose the election by two per cent.”
That was, Bruck wrote in 1994, an essential moment in Hillary Rodham Clinton’s transformation into a politician—the moment when “she surrendered the notion that she could do things in her unvarnished way; and she set about repackaging herself—changing her name, her appearance, and her public demeanor.”
My respect for Hillary ex-Rodham is nil. She is an example for no one. She is a warmonger, imperialist, friend of billionaires, with no redeeming features - except that she is not Donald Trump. IMHO, that's not good enough. Good riddance to her.
Tue, 2017-01-10 01:45
#191
Edzell
As I said before I don't know enough about HIllary Clinton to weigh in on this debate. But I am a bit surprised to see Bill Clinton's version of a private & controversial conversation, quoted as reliable evidence.
Tue, 2017-01-10 09:09
#192
Timebandit
I strongly disagree that she is without redemption. None of us are, and none of us make the right decisions all the time, or even most of the time.
You know that I respect you, too, Unionist, and like you a lot. But I'm going to call out a tiny sliver of male privilege here.
You have no idea what it's like to face a choice where you expressing your individuality is going to cost somebody you love something huge. I only know what it's like in a small, banal way like millions of other women my age and older, but I get it. That story? She was smarter than Bill about this because she already knew what it was to have to negotiate her successes and he didn't. You know what? I might have made that decision myself. It's just as easy to read caring about her spouse's ambitions as it is to read her own political ambition into it. Hell, she wasn't even running and I don't think she especially liked being a presidential consort.
There's this thing with Hillary. It's that we look for the worst before we consider anything else. If a man had made that kind of magnanimous gesture - because I'm certain it wasn't without pain - it would have been lauded. Or so I expect. We'll never know because nobody ever expects a man to alter his identity for his spouse. And it *was* expected of her by the American public.
I get that you don't like her positions on foreign policy. I'm not especially keen on it myself. But - and it's a biggie - strides would have been made for the equality of women, for LGBTQ people and for undocumented immigrants. Again, there is no such thing as a perfect candidate. Even Bernie would have been faced with some tough decisions on foreign policy and you have no way of knowing how that would have gone, either. (He admitted at one point that "Drones have done some good things". As a senator he voted for war in Afghanistan. He's not a pacifist.) Does the US need a fundamental change in their foreign policy? No duh. But what's happened is they tossed out the baby with the bath water. The new president will bomb just as many people as she would have, and he'll oppress women, people of colour and LGBTQ people while he's at it.
Tue, 2017-01-10 09:12
#193
Diana Johnstone: 'Clinton is Truly Dangerous'
http://www.investigaction.net/en/diana-johnstone-clinton-is-truly-danger...
"In my book, Queen of Chaos, I point to the perverse alliance between the military industrial complex and certain ambitious women who want to show that they can do everything men can do, notably war. A mutual interest brought together neocons who want war and women who want to break glass ceilings.
If neocons need women to make war look good, highly ambitious women need war to advance their careers. The most visibly aggressive figures in the Obama administration are women: Hillary, Susan Rice, Samantha Power, Victoria Nuland...This is a signal to the world: don't look for any tender-heartedness from our side."
Since the political opinions of rich American movie-stars seem to hold so much water here's another
Susan Sarandon
Hillary Clinton is Evil!
Tue, 2017-01-10 10:47
#194
alan smithee
Yes,we all know Clinton is a Satan worshipping pedophile and Trump was summonsed by Jesus that will make America great again. pff.
Tue, 2017-01-10 12:27
#195
Edzell
.... I point to the perverse alliance between the military industrial complex and certain ambitious women who want to show that they can do everything men can do, notably warIs this an argument against having ambitious women in positions of power - that you think they'd be be just like men? Really? What's your favored gender for president or PM then, that wouldn't be ambitious and have either male or female attributes?
(Noting that I'm no fan of either recent US contestant.)
Tue, 2017-01-10 12:30
#196
Edzell
.... I point to the perverse alliance between the military industrial complex and certain ambitious women who want to show that they can do everything men can do, notably warIs this an argument against having ambitious women - or even just "certain" ones - in positions of power; that you think they'd be be just like men? Really? What's your favored gender for president or PM then, that wouldn't be ambitious and would have neither male nor female attributes?(Noting that I'm no fan of either recent US contestant.)
Wed, 2017-01-18 16:56
#197
ikosmos
While Trump, to a large degree, fits well into the tradition of the United States of Stupid - though he did confound his many, many critics and won the US Presidential election - these trends are bigger than any one, er, candidate.
Forgive me if I've posted this already. You know the drill, An embarrassment of "riches" , etc.
The Age of Ignorance. (from 2012 please note!)
Widespread ignorance bordering on idiocy is our new national goal. It’s no use pretending otherwise and telling us, as Thomas Friedman did in the Times a few days ago, that educated people are the nation’s most valuable resources. Sure, they are, but do we still want them? It doesn’t look to me as if we do. The ideal citizen of a politically corrupt state, such as the one we now have, is a gullible dolt unable to tell truth from bullshit.
The historical amnesia. The lack of knowledge about class struggle in their own towns, their own history, including massacres and guilty parties getting off scott free. A majority who still believe that Saadam Hussein was responsible for 9-11.
What we have in this country is the rebellion of dull minds against the intellect. That’s why they love politicians who rail against teachers indoctrinating children against their parents’ values and resent the ones who show ability to think seriously and independently. Despite their bravado, these fools can always be counted on to vote against their self-interest. And that, as far as I’m concerned, is why millions are being spent to keep my fellow citizens ignorant.
But, let's be honest. We have plenty of towering stupidity right here in the Peaceable Kingdom. Towering. So let's not be too smug about our ignorant neighbours.
Wed, 2017-01-18 17:39
#198
I ain't no friggin' liberal, whining about all the deplorables that didn't do what they were supposed to do.
Well at least you are wearing your colours.
I listened to the Henwood interview. I found one thing I disagreed with stuck out.
He expressed this idea that politicians ask already compromised positions and only radicals ask what they want and get change. And he spoke of the Democrats.
Some of this is true, sure but the idea that the Democrats were asking for less than they wanted is not something I entirely accpet. Maybe what they asked for was in fact as far as they wanted to go. Maybe Henwood is more optimistic about what the desired objectives were. I do not think the Democrats really compromise on their asks -- I thin they are just not as progressive as they would like us to believe. And this is a common problem.
People assume that left of centre people look for compromise to get somethign done. That is one theory. The other is that they are not that ambitious but to retain the support of people left of them they pretend to want the same things but just can't get them This keeps the support of those left of the person who really is not that left at all.
I think in many cases Democrats were in fact pushed by supporters further than they wanted to go rather than being held back by a lack of support for more radical positions. In the US this party is an establishment party. It does not really support the changes it says it can't bring but would like to in an "ideal" world.
So maybe I am less optimistic than he is about intentions of most Democrats.
Wed, 2017-01-18 23:03
#199
ikosmos
The way you're posting these questions just seems wrong-headed to me. I'm more inclined, especially seeing the bi-partisan unity on so many issues between Dems and Republicans, to call the Dems the fake liberals and the Repubs the fake conservatives.
They seem to have more in common that differences. And I would add that for those, like myself, who see the urgency and necessity of fundamental change in the USA, this other way of looking at them is more productive because it leads people, or should, to put their energies into more long-term activities that challenge the "corporate party" with its two wings (dems and repubs), and less in propping up candidate from either party.
When a patient is gravely ill, extreme measures are sometimes called for. And the US is a very sick country, governed by a plutocracy of the 1%, an Empire whose collapse would really benefit the whole planet and not just Americans.
You may be surprised by this, but I really wish for Americans to succeed. Just not at the expense of the rest of humanity. The country that produced Ben Franklin, Tom Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Emily Dickenson, Walt Whitman, Ernest Hemingway, William Faulkner, Malcolm X, James Baldwin, Paul Morphy, Bobby Fischer, Martin Luther King, etc., etc., should not come to such an ignimonious end as it seems to be currently headed.
Wed, 2017-01-25 21:28
#200
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/arti...
After a video was posted on Facebook Friday showing a group of people following McCrory during a trip to Washington, D.C., for inaugural weekend, chanting “Shame!” and calling him a bigot, Sen. Dan Bishop of Charlotte says he’ll introduce legislation to protect public officials.
The proposed legislation would “make it a crime to threaten, intimidate, or retaliate against a present or former North Carolina official in the course of, or on account of, the performance of his or her duties,” Bishop said.
“Because lines are being crossed,” Bishop, a Republican who represents the 39th District in the North Carolina Senate, wrote in an email from his Senate campaign account.
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1/25/1625007/-Blue-lives-matter-so-...
In a move that supports increased policing and the ever-expanding militarization of the police, Louisiana became the first state in the country to pass a law that now makes it a hate crime to resist arrest.
Under the new “Blue Lives Matter” law, resisting arrest can now be considered a serious felony which comes with harsh consequences and potential jail time.
Wed, 2017-01-25 21:34
#201
Somehow I think this thread is in for a renaissance after the past couple of days of executive orders.
On the other hand, I am noticing how many of his ideas Trump lifted directly from Stephen Harper who, evil as he is, was in no way stupid.