RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Thu Apr 09, 2020 4:30 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:10 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328
Full disclosure. I've been one of those who have followed the board for several years. Like a daytime Soap. I'm an old fart but it occurs to me that I should become a participant. Please don't expect a lot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 5:13 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:24 pm
Posts: 24762
Hello, Doremus Jessup

_________________


Stop calling the cops on us.



Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 6:21 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:07 am
Posts: 18256
didnt we have a kernel jessup some time back?

are you not that human?
hi.

_________________
Who are these...flag-sucking halfwits fleeced fooled by stupid little rich kids They speak for all that is cruel stupid
They are racists hate mongers I piss down the throats of these Nazis Im too old to worry whether they like it Fuck them.
HST.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 8:34 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 13570
didnt we have a kernel jessup some time back?

are you not that human?
hi.


Welcome Doremus Jessup. :)


Rain, Doremus Jessup is the main character from a Sinclair Lewis book, "It Can't Happen Here," whereas Col. Jessup is a character from a movie, a completely different kind of character. Col. Jessup is a Republican kind of character, where as Doremus Jessup would be a more fitting suit for a Liberal.

Journalist Doremus Jessup was in opposition to the new regime. Some People say this Sinclair Lewis book foretold of Trump. It was a 1935 warning about people like Trump.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2019 1:56 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2011 12:07 am
Posts: 18256

Welcome Doremus Jessup. :)


Rain, Doremus Jessup is the main character from a Sinclair Lewis book, "It Can't Happen Here," whereas Col. Jessup is a character from a movie, a completely different kind of character. Col. Jessup is a Republican kind of character, where as Doremus Jessup would be a more fitting suit for a Liberal.

Journalist Doremus Jessup was in opposition to the new regime. Some People say this Sinclair Lewis book foretold of Trump. It was a 1935 warning about people like Trump.

dont know that sinclair book but thanks sam.

i was just asking about the name jessup, which is a fairly uncommon word.

_________________
Who are these...flag-sucking halfwits fleeced fooled by stupid little rich kids They speak for all that is cruel stupid
They are racists hate mongers I piss down the throats of these Nazis Im too old to worry whether they like it Fuck them.
HST.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Fri Dec 13, 2019 6:38 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328

Welcome Doremus Jessup. :)


Rain, Doremus Jessup is the main character from a Sinclair Lewis book, "It Can't Happen Here," whereas Col. Jessup is a character from a movie, a completely different kind of character. Col. Jessup is a Republican kind of character, where as Doremus Jessup would be a more fitting suit for a Liberal.

Journalist Doremus Jessup was in opposition to the new regime. Some People say this Sinclair Lewis book foretold of Trump. It was a 1935 warning about people like Trump.


I liken Doremus to the traditional civil libertarian.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 7:44 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2011 2:01 pm
Posts: 6562
Location: Maine U.S.A

Welcome Doremus Jessup. :)


Rain, Doremus Jessup is the main character from a Sinclair Lewis book, "It Can't Happen Here," whereas Col. Jessup is a character from a movie, a completely different kind of character. Col. Jessup is a Republican kind of character, where as Doremus Jessup would be a more fitting suit for a Liberal.

Journalist Doremus Jessup was in opposition to the new regime. Some People say this Sinclair Lewis book foretold of Trump. It was a 1935 warning about people like Trump.


Good novel. I knew that name was familiar. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:06 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 1:10 pm
Posts: 20396
Location: The blue parts of the map
The situation depicted in the book is amazingly like the current Republican leadership. This story needs to be put before the public again. Someone's missing out.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 4:33 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
So, I would like to ask our own RFL Doremus Jessup, since this thread is back up again.

1. Do you feel Donald Trump is like the "Buzz" Windrup of that novel? (Many have made that comparison.)
2. Is it fair to describe him, as some have, as at least "fascist lite" or "right-authoritarian populist"?
3. Would you then say you are as devoted as the journalist by that name in the novel to expose him and drive him from office?
4. If so, why have you never even said why you dislike him? :D
5. Do you feel as responsible as the character in the novel for the rise of Trump?

OK. Sorry. Had to slip in 4 and 5. :D

https://www.paulstreet.org/it-cant-happ ... and-msnbc/

[snip]

It Can’t Happen Here’s main protagonist is a liberal social-democrat and upper middle-class journalist named Doremus Jessup. As Windrip implements his agenda, leading to the incarceration of Jessup and many others, it dawns on the journalist that he and his fellow liberal elites are largely responsible for the national nightmare. “It’s my sort, the Responsible Citizens who’ve felt superior because we’ve been well-to-do and what we thought was ‘educated,’” Jessup reflects, “who brought on the…Fascist Dictatorship… I can blame no Buzz Windrip, but only my own timid soul and drowsy mind…Forgive, O Lord. Is it too late?”

Jessup and his and his fellow comfortable New Deal liberals’ main mistake is their failure to respond with adequate seriousness and alar, to the threat posed by the outwardly clownish Windrip. Jessup “simply did not believe that this comic tyranny could endure.” Jessup and his ilk don’t fight back soon or hard enough because they are certain Windrip’s popularity will sputter. They underestimate the depth and the degree of popular anger and resentment Windrip exploits. By the time Jessup and other liberals and leftists catch up to the existential gravity of the American-fascist peril it’s too late.

[snip][end]

The Doremus of the novel is motivated in part out of guilt for failing to recognize how dangerous Windrip is.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 6:27 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 13570
So, I would like to ask our own RFL Doremus Jessup, since this thread is back up again.

1. Do you feel Donald Trump is like the "Buzz" Windrup of that novel? (Many have made that comparison.)
2. Is it fair to describe him, as some have, as at least "fascist lite" or "right-authoritarian populist"?
3. Would you then say you are as devoted as the journalist by that name in the novel to expose him and drive him from office?
4. If so, why have you never even said why you dislike him? :D
5. Do you feel as responsible as the character in the novel for the rise of Trump?

OK. Sorry. Had to slip in 4 and 5. :D

https://www.paulstreet.org/it-cant-happ ... and-msnbc/

[snip]

It Can’t Happen Here’s main protagonist is a liberal social-democrat and upper middle-class journalist named Doremus Jessup. As Windrip implements his agenda, leading to the incarceration of Jessup and many others, it dawns on the journalist that he and his fellow liberal elites are largely responsible for the national nightmare. “It’s my sort, the Responsible Citizens who’ve felt superior because we’ve been well-to-do and what we thought was ‘educated,’” Jessup reflects, “who brought on the…Fascist Dictatorship… I can blame no Buzz Windrip, but only my own timid soul and drowsy mind…Forgive, O Lord. Is it too late?”

Jessup and his and his fellow comfortable New Deal liberals’ main mistake is their failure to respond with adequate seriousness and alar, to the threat posed by the outwardly clownish Windrip. Jessup “simply did not believe that this comic tyranny could endure.” Jessup and his ilk don’t fight back soon or hard enough because they are certain Windrip’s popularity will sputter. They underestimate the depth and the degree of popular anger and resentment Windrip exploits. By the time Jessup and other liberals and leftists catch up to the existential gravity of the American-fascist peril it’s too late.

[snip][end]

The Doremus of the novel is motivated in part out of guilt for failing to recognize how dangerous Windrip is.


That's kind of how I remember it. I remember it from reading it 45 years ago. I don't want to read it again, it's like reading 1984, one doesn't tend to lose those kinds of reoccurring nightmares.

One wonders if reality reoccurs like nightmares do.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 01, 2020 11:16 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328
So, I would like to ask our own RFL Doremus Jessup, since this thread is back up again.

1. Do you feel Donald Trump is like the "Buzz" Windrup of that novel? (Many have made that comparison.)
2. Is it fair to describe him, as some have, as at least "fascist lite" or "right-authoritarian populist"?
3. Would you then say you are as devoted as the journalist by that name in the novel to expose him and drive him from office?
4. If so, why have you never even said why you dislike him? :D
5. Do you feel as responsible as the character in the novel for the rise of Trump?

OK. Sorry. Had to slip in 4 and 5. :D

https://www.paulstreet.org/it-cant-happ ... and-msnbc/

[snip]

It Can’t Happen Here’s main protagonist is a liberal social-democrat and upper middle-class journalist named Doremus Jessup. As Windrip implements his agenda, leading to the incarceration of Jessup and many others, it dawns on the journalist that he and his fellow liberal elites are largely responsible for the national nightmare. “It’s my sort, the Responsible Citizens who’ve felt superior because we’ve been well-to-do and what we thought was ‘educated,’” Jessup reflects, “who brought on the…Fascist Dictatorship… I can blame no Buzz Windrip, but only my own timid soul and drowsy mind…Forgive, O Lord. Is it too late?”

Jessup and his and his fellow comfortable New Deal liberals’ main mistake is their failure to respond with adequate seriousness and alar, to the threat posed by the outwardly clownish Windrip. Jessup “simply did not believe that this comic tyranny could endure.” Jessup and his ilk don’t fight back soon or hard enough because they are certain Windrip’s popularity will sputter. They underestimate the depth and the degree of popular anger and resentment Windrip exploits. By the time Jessup and other liberals and leftists catch up to the existential gravity of the American-fascist peril it’s too late.

[snip][end]

The Doremus of the novel is motivated in part out of guilt for failing to recognize how dangerous Windrip is.


1. No
2. No
3. He's already exposed. Just vote him out of office.
4. I don't feel a need to dwell on his voluminous issues. I'll leave that to the irrational and angst driven part of the party. At best he's a world champion boor and buffoon.
5. No.

Lee Sarason is the architect of Windrip's rise and the breakdown of democracy. Sarason is the true evil. Windrip is a tool.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:06 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
1. No
2. No
3. He's already exposed. Just vote him out of office.
4. I don't feel a need to dwell on his voluminous issues. I'll leave that to the irrational and angst driven part of the party. At best he's a world champion boor and buffoon.
5. No.

Lee Sarason is the architect of Windrip's rise and the breakdown of democracy. Sarason is the true evil. Windrip is a tool.


1. OK. Interesting. Lots of people can see this comparison, but you don't. Of course, there are ways in which Trump and Windrip are different. Of course the historical setting of the novel is the 1930s. This is a different era. But I happen to think there are a lot of similarities, notably that both are xenophobic and nativist, right-populist authoritarian demagogues.
2. OK. Again, you reject a widely made comparison. I find it fascinating fascism (lite) is coming to America just like this novel describes, but "Doremus Jessup" of 2020 is not as devoted to fighting it. BTW, we could also talk about Hungary, Poland, Russia, Italy, Britain, and France (among other countries) but ... I digress.

You're correct Sarason was the master propagandist who ghost-wrote Windrip's rise to power "Zero Hour", and worked as the shadow behind the scenes. Later in the novel, he replaces Windrip in a coup and takes power himself.

BTW: many people compared Steve Bannon to Lee Sarason, although unlike Lee, he didn't take an official position in the admin (well at least nothing as official as SoS), and didn't launch a coup against Trump, replacing Trump with himself, as Sarason did in the novel. I would agree like Sarason, Bannon was the puppet master, and is filled with ambition, but not enough to do that. At the moment he seems more interested in supporting right populism/fascism lite in Europe.

3. So just a question. We agree there will probably not be conviction in the Senate. The votes are not there. That issue aside though, I'm asking you, personally - do you really believe he has committed no impeachable offenses? 2nd question: are you not worried given his history, he won't play fair in the 2020 election and will cheat? "Just vote him out" ... but ...

4. I find it fascinating that someone who claims to be a civil libertarian thinks "only the irrational angsty part of the party" cares about his authoritarian threats to civil liberties, namely his attacks on freedom of the press, and his own threats against freedom of speech, movement/travel, and freedom of religion. Or you do care, "but don't want to dwell on it".

5. Then who DO you think is the Lee Sarason of this situation/narrative? You brought it up. Sarason in the novel is also a journalist. I will agree some propagandists helped him rise to power, and again Bannon probably most closely fits that role.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 1:22 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328

1. OK. Interesting. Lots of people can see this comparison, but you don't. Of course, there are ways in which Trump and Windrip are different. Of course the historical setting of the novel is the 1930s. This is a different era. But I happen to think there are a lot of similarities, notably that both are xenophobic and nativist, right-populist authoritarian demagogues.
2. OK. Again, you reject a widely made comparison. I find it fascinating fascism (lite) is coming to America just like this novel describes, but "Doremus Jessup" of 2020 is not as devoted to fighting it. BTW, we could also talk about Hungary, Poland, Russia, Italy, Britain, and France (among other countries) but ... I digress.

You're correct Sarason was the master propagandist who ghost-wrote Windrip's rise to power "Zero Hour", and worked as the shadow behind the scenes. Later in the novel, he replaces Windrip in a coup and takes power himself.

BTW: many people compared Steve Bannon to Lee Sarason, although unlike Lee, he didn't take an official position in the admin (well at least nothing as official as SoS), and didn't launch a coup against Trump, replacing Trump with himself, as Sarason did in the novel. I would agree like Sarason, Bannon was the puppet master, and is filled with ambition, but not enough to do that. At the moment he seems more interested in supporting right populism/fascism lite in Europe.

3. So just a question. We agree there will probably not be conviction in the Senate. The votes are not there. That issue aside though, I'm asking you, personally - do you really believe he has committed no impeachable offenses? 2nd question: are you not worried given his history, he won't play fair in the 2020 election and will cheat? "Just vote him out" ... but ...

4. I find it fascinating that someone who claims to be a civil libertarian thinks "only the irrational angsty part of the party" cares about his authoritarian threats to civil liberties, namely his attacks on freedom of the press, and his own threats against freedom of speech, movement/travel, and freedom of religion. Or you do care, "but don't want to dwell on it".

5. Then who DO you think is the Lee Sarason of this situation/narrative? You brought it up. Sarason in the novel is also a journalist. I will agree some propagandists helped him rise to power, and again Bannon probably most closely fits that role.


His bluster at the press has done nothing except encourage a greater response - way to go free press. I get to read reams of free press attacking the President every morning. I don't watch the Cable TV talking heads but I'm told they're all amped up and aren't holding back on criticism. He's not a civil libertarian threat because he hasn't the power to be one. And a ban on seven countries, five predominantly Muslim but with unstable or openly hostile government's, isn't an assault on freedom of religion. There are 50 predominantly Muslim nations and 45 are not banned.

And Bannon is gone. Along with a whole host of offensive people.

Impeachable offenses? No. Obstruction of Congress isn't a thing. Abuse of Power is at some level SOP of nearly every President. All impeachment can do is create a larger anti Democratic Party base. The biggest threat to the Democratic party candidate isn't people wanting to vote for Trump it's creating more people wanting to vote against the Democrat because of an unending assault. People tire of the constant harangue of the Boycott and Cancel Culture Crazies. Its not a good look for us.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 1:41 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
His bluster at the press has done nothing except encourage a greater response - way to go free press.


Some organizations think it's more than "bluster". The U.S. has actually objectively declined in ratings of press freedom under Trump.

The U.S. Now Ranks As A 'Problematic' Place For Journalists
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/18/71462590 ... ournalists

The United States has become a less safe place for journalists, and the threats they face are becoming the standard, according to a new report by an international press freedom organization.

Reporters Sans Frontières, or Reporters Without Borders, dropped the U.S. to No. 48 out of 180 on its annual World Press Freedom Index, three notches lower than its place last year. The move downgrades the country from a "satisfactory" place to work freely to a "problematic" one for journalists.

"Never before have US journalists been subjected to so many death threats or turned so often to private security firms for protection," the report stated.

[snip]

The report also pointed a finger at President Trump who, it said, "exacerbates" press freedom problems with his repeated declarations that journalists are an "enemy of the American people," his accusations of "fake news," his calls to revoke broadcasting licenses and his efforts to block specific outlets from access to the White House.

"The president's relentless attacks against the press has created an environment where verbal, physical and online threats and assault against journalists are becoming normalized," RSF Interim Executive Director Sabine Dolan tells NPR.

[snip][end]

Could also look at what ACLU says about the matter.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/f ... disgusting

I agree that a POTUS who praises and urges violence against journalists is a dangerous demagogue, and he's done it repeatedly.

Quote:
And a ban on seven countries, five predominantly Muslim but with unstable or openly hostile government's, isn't an assault on freedom of religion. There are 50 predominantly Muslim nations and 45 are not banned.


Sounds like an interesting rationalization. Say, would you say any of those other 45 have "unstable" or "hostile" governments also? You know, if Donald Trump didn't want people to think his goal was keeping Muslims out of the country, he shouldn't have said "I'm trying to keep Muslims out of our country".

Quote:
Impeachable offenses? No. Obstruction of Congress isn't a thing.


Perhaps on your planet.

On mine, it was Article III of the impeachment articles against Nixon. Yes, I know he resigned before the Senate process began.

BTW, Article Ii was abuse of power of office. Article I was general obstruction of justice
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachme ... _the_House

Quote:
Abuse of Power is at some level SOP of nearly every President.


Disagree, of course. Although I will admit lots of them have skirted lines, that Trump decided to stomp across. BTW, Nixon stomped on the same, but I'm starting to agree with John Dean Trump has had an even heavier footprint.

Quote:
All impeachment can do is create a larger anti Democratic Party base.


Amy Klobuchar supports impeachment. You do know who you're supporting, right? Your opinion is in line with Tulsi Gabbard's though.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar calls impeachment hearings 'global Watergate'
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sen-amy ... d=67406845

I don't see what this has to do with "boycott and cancel culture," either.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:46 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328

Some organizations think it's more than "bluster". The U.S. has actually objectively declined in ratings of press freedom under Trump.

The U.S. Now Ranks As A 'Problematic' Place For Journalists
https://www.npr.org/2019/04/18/71462590 ... ournalists

The United States has become a less safe place for journalists, and the threats they face are becoming the standard, according to a new report by an international press freedom organization.

Reporters Sans Frontières, or Reporters Without Borders, dropped the U.S. to No. 48 out of 180 on its annual World Press Freedom Index, three notches lower than its place last year. The move downgrades the country from a "satisfactory" place to work freely to a "problematic" one for journalists.

"Never before have US journalists been subjected to so many death threats or turned so often to private security firms for protection," the report stated.

[snip]

The report also pointed a finger at President Trump who, it said, "exacerbates" press freedom problems with his repeated declarations that journalists are an "enemy of the American people," his accusations of "fake news," his calls to revoke broadcasting licenses and his efforts to block specific outlets from access to the White House.

"The president's relentless attacks against the press has created an environment where verbal, physical and online threats and assault against journalists are becoming normalized," RSF Interim Executive Director Sabine Dolan tells NPR.

[snip][end]

Could also look at what ACLU says about the matter.
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-speech/f ... disgusting

I agree that a POTUS who praises and urges violence against journalists is a dangerous demagogue, and he's done it repeatedly.



Sounds like an interesting rationalization. Say, would you say any of those other 45 have "unstable" or "hostile" governments also? You know, if Donald Trump didn't want people to think his goal was keeping Muslims out of the country, he shouldn't have said "I'm trying to keep Muslims out of our country".



Perhaps on your planet.

On mine, it was Article III of the impeachment articles against Nixon. Yes, I know he resigned before the Senate process began.

BTW, Article Ii was abuse of power of office. Article I was general obstruction of justice
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachme ... _the_House



Disagree, of course. Although I will admit lots of them have skirted lines, that Trump decided to stomp across. BTW, Nixon stomped on the same, but I'm starting to agree with John Dean Trump has had an even heavier footprint.



Amy Klobuchar supports impeachment. You do know who you're supporting, right? Your opinion is in line with Tulsi Gabbard's though.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar calls impeachment hearings 'global Watergate'
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sen-amy ... d=67406845

I don't see what this has to do with "boycott and cancel culture," either.


Let's see - not in any particular order.

On my planet Nixon's Article III charge was "Contempt of Congress". Also not a thing. Contempt of Court, however, is a thing.

I'm sure Amy and I might disagree on a few other things as well. It's ok.

I've pretty much lost faith in the ACLU.

The strength of our free press and refusal to back off further illustrates the power of our democracy.

I guess that's all that was worthy of a response.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 10:59 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
On my planet Nixon's Article III charge was "Contempt of Congress". Also not a thing.


Wikipedia thinks it's a thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
Ok. User submitted encyclopedia. I get the inevitable objection.

Perhaps you prefer the Legal Information Institute.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contempt_of_congress

Or FindLaw
https://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-sy ... lties.html

Are LII and FindLaw incorrect that it is, in fact, "a thing"?

Quote:
I've pretty much lost faith in the ACLU.


Why? I've gained. They've been very impressive in the Trump era.

Quote:
The strength of our free press and refusal to back off further illustrates the power of our democracy.


Yes, I'm glad most of them have not backed down, but it does not mean Trump's revocations of press credentials are legal, nor are his threats against journalists not the acts of a dangerous demagogue.

You know, in the novel, Doremus Jessup also largely dismissed Buzz WIndrip at first as a buffoon and thought he was not a danger to democracy either. He only realizes this later, after he gets imprisoned under his regime, and then has to flee to Canada. I guess you are just determined to live up to the nature of the character in the early parts of the story,

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Thu Jan 02, 2020 11:42 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328

Wikipedia thinks it's a thing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress
Ok. User submitted encyclopedia. I get the inevitable objection.

Perhaps you prefer the Legal Information Institute.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/contempt_of_congress

Or FindLaw
https://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-sy ... lties.html

Are LII and FindLaw incorrect that it is, in fact, "a thing"?



Why? I've gained. They've been very impressive in the Trump era.



Yes, I'm glad most of them have not backed down, but it does not mean Trump's revocations of press credentials are legal, nor are his threats against journalists not the acts of a dangerous demagogue.

You know, in the novel, Doremus Jessup also largely dismissed Buzz WIndrip at first as a buffoon and thought he was not a danger to democracy either. He only realizes this later, after he gets imprisoned under his regime, and then has to flee to Canada. I guess you are just determined to live up to the nature of the character in the early parts of the story,


It's not a thing worthy of impeachment.

I'm a big fan of Sinclair Lewis. I was going to use that name but decided too pretentious. Then I thought Babbitt. About a year ago I reread "it Can't Happen Here". And decided on Doremus Jessup.

I don't believe I'm Doremus Jessup any more than you believe your Professor X. Oh wait, maybe that's the problem.

And I would have very quickly been in the "New Underground"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2020 9:19 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
It's not a thing worthy of impeachment.


Owwwwww. Those whizzing goalposts, they clipped me. :)

Quote:
I'm a big fan of Sinclair Lewis. I was going to use that name but decided too pretentious. Then I thought Babbitt. About a year ago I reread "it Can't Happen Here". And decided on Doremus Jessup.


Yeah, I like the novel, too. It's funny. He comes up with really funny names for many of the characters. Of course, the subject is also serious. He wrote it as a warning. It's dark satire or comedy. It's generally thought he based "Buzz" mostly on Huey Long or Father Coughlin ... I agree.

Quote:
I don't believe I'm Doremus Jessup any more than you believe your Professor X. Oh wait, maybe that's the problem.


'Sokay man. You disappointed me. Named after a fighter against fascism, and yet you seem to shrug at the closest this country's come to it in a while. But, so it goes.

I wish I were psychic. Then I could tell why people are often being strangely evasive. On the other hand, being stuck in a wheelchair ... although some versions can fly! Now, if only I was better at that British accent. But I digress.

Hmmm, but which version am I? I'm using James McAvoy as my avatar, but there's also Patrick Stewart. Hell, they even BOTH get to appear in Days of Future Past. Then there's Harry Lloyd, who portrayed him in Legion, a series I really liked, because like Watchmen, it subverts a lot of comic/superhero tropes. Did you know Jim Ward even voiced him in one animated series, of Stephanie Miller fame?

I have to confess, I'm very partial to the Pete Holmes version. That one makes me laugh my ass off.

www.youtube.com Video from : www.youtube.com

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2020 12:43 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328
The fascist thing is nothing more than an opinion. It’s not one I share. I have a number of old democrat friends who feel the same.

I first read the book when I was 18. I very quickly envisioned Windrip as Broderick Crawford.

And no whizzing goalposts. Any reference to obstruction or contempt of Congress made by has is exclusively in relation to Executive vs Legislature. And in my opinion it simply is not a thing, especially to hang an impeachment. I want “do an investigation or you don’t get the money” and he does an investigation and gets the money or doesn’t do the investigation and doesn’t get the money.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Fri Jan 03, 2020 1:18 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
... just to be clear, my position is Trump is an authoritarian right-populist, like Orban, Erdogan, Putin, Bolsonaro, or Duterte.

I would call that "fascist lite" as opposed to fascist.

Anyway, of course it's an opinion, in the universe of atoms and space ... some experts on history of fascism agree.

Let me put it this way ... I think Jason Stanley is correct here.

https://www.vox.com/2018/9/19/17847110/ ... on-stanley

This is probably a good time to pivot to the glittering elephant in the room: Donald Trump. Is he a fascist?

Jason Stanley
I make the case in my book that he practices fascist politics. Now, that doesn’t mean his government is a fascist government. For one thing, I think it’s very difficult to say what a fascist government is.

For another thing, I think the current movement of leaders who use these techniques (Vladimir Putin in Russia, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Turkey, Viktor Orbán in Hungary, to name a few) all seek to keep the trappings of democratic institutions, but their goal is to reorient them around their own cult of personality.

Again, I wouldn’t claim — not yet, at least — that Trump is presiding over a fascist government, but he is very clearly using fascist techniques to excite his base and erode liberal democratic institutions, and that’s very troubling.

But the blame there is as much on the Republican Party as it is on Trump, because none of this would matter if they were willing to check Trump. So far, they’ve chosen loyalty to Trump over loyalty to rule of law.

[snip][end]

I believe everything he said there was correct. As always, of course, his opinion, as is mine in sharing it with him.

If you ever get around to getting those last sentences into a more logical construction, I might respond to them, too.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2020 2:38 pm 
Offline
Member

Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2019 2:51 pm
Posts: 328
He's definitely into the personality thing. I'm pretty Trump doesn't have the remotest idea what fascism is or how to implement it. So, we simply need to vote him out of office. All these extraneous efforts do is strengthen and expand the base. The biggest threat is driving the independents away with overzealous actions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2020 3:41 pm 
Online
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:53 am
Posts: 18455
Rump is a fascist.

Rump is a liar.

Rump is an accomplice to murder.

Rump has committed hundreds of felonies. He doesnt know the meaning of the word "felony" but he commits them...he doesnt know the meaning of almost anything, but he sees a leader take rights away from citizens and he admires it and wants to emulate it...sigh.

_________________
We have rapidly advanced past the "yes, it is 1000 times worse than if ANY democrat had been prez" but now is the time to work together for survival...can argue later, if we survive.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:01 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
I'm pretty Trump doesn't have the remotest idea what fascism is or how to implement it.


And yet.

Trump explains tweeting Mussolini quote
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/ ... ote-219932

Donald Trump said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” that he retweeted a quote from Benito Mussolini, the Italian fascist dictator, because he wants to “be associated with interesting quotes.”

[snip][end]

We live in interesting times.

BTW, he's also confused over whether he owned Mein Kampf, or another collection of Hitler's speeches (New Order). Seems likely it was the latter, according to Snopes.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump ... ein-kampf/

His ex-wife Ivana says he read from it regularly and kept it by his bedside. He denies it.

Guess who I believe.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:17 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 13570
He's definitely into the personality thing. I'm pretty Trump doesn't have the remotest idea what fascism is or how to implement it. So, we simply need to vote him out of office. All these extraneous efforts do is strengthen and expand the base. The biggest threat is driving the independents away with overzealous actions.


That's basically what I've been saying to no avail for months. I describe what I'm seeing all too much of in house as blatant exaggeration, misapplication of correlating association, ad hominem attacks, and bias.

I've been saying it sets the goals of the party back. Engaging in it has the effect of assisting the other side.


I think Trump has blatantly abused his power and ought to be removed asap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: New Blood
PostPosted: Sat Jan 04, 2020 4:23 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 6:57 pm
Posts: 17100
Location: Sunny South Florida
I think Trump has blatantly abused his power and ought to be removed asap.


So then, Sam, you see impeachment as neither an "overzealous" action, nor an "extraneous effort," comparable to "cancel culture" (?)

My personal position is as some commentators have said, there is a historical duty to act, regardless of the political consequences. The actions he's done merit it. This is regardless of how I feel about his policies, or his behavior. It's not my dislike of either that make me say he should be impeached.

You could call that zealotry. I see it differently. It's possible it could harm us politically in the next elections, but I want it done, nevertheless, even if it is likely to fail in the Senate, for those reasons. The consequences of not doing it is basically providing future POTUSes, who could even be worse (shudder), an enabling message for continuing the same kind of abusive actions.

BTW, before anybody asks, I personally would have been fine if the Senate had censured Clinton. I think he should have been censured for using WH staff to cover up his affair. Not worthy of impeachment and removal, but yes I felt it was worthy of censure.

Note how Republicans aren't even willing to CONSIDER censuring Trump ... as that would require them still admitting he did something wrong.

On another point, I feel leveling arguments and accusations against the other side, we should be careful about accuracy for its own sake. Accuracy is good for its own reasons. I have to say, though, I just don't go through life wondering "but what will the independents think". If the definition of an independent is someone who doesn't lean to one side or the other i.e. what 538 et al. sometimes called "leaners" ... there are a very extreme few of them. MOST are leaners.

There are also people who don't easily fit into liberal and conservative boxes, like Libertarians, so they go off and do their own things, form their own parties, rarely register or call themselves independents, but there also aren't many of them to worry about. That said, there ARE enough to act as spoilers in close elections, but different subject.

_________________
-- Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Malaclypse the Younger


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 28 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group