Trump era: Fascist dawn, or road to liberation?

[Timótheos]

I could pretty much understand where Judd was going with this... up until she said 'Hillary'. Right there, a feminist loses me. Clinton is not an 'ideal' - she's a warmongering, people-hating nutcase.

I think it would be more useful if we were to try to understand the perspective of those who feel as Judd does, rather than brush them aside as "mentally retarded freaks."

I think I understand what you're trying to say Niall, because it's important to understand those whose opinions are opposed to ours and see if there might be some legitimate grievances there. Still, if Hillary can be described as a "warmongering people-hating nutcase", couldn't those who blindly support her and her policies be described the same way? Sure calling a group of people "mentally retarded freaks" is a little over the top, but considering their obvious disconnect from reality, it doesn't seem too far off.

Anyway, I listened to Ashley Judd's entire speech again and I can't say I understand or empathize much with where she was coming from. So, I decided to download the transcript and analyze the words a little closer.

I learned that Ashley Judd did not write that speech herself. It was a spoken word piece by a 19 year old beat poet from Tennessee, named Nina Donovan.

http://kayuty.com/nina-mariah-donovan-nasty-woman-writer/nina-mariah-donovan/

Being that Ashley Judd is a multimillionaire Hollywood movie star, to claim that she is somehow being marginalized or oppressed by Donald Trump is quite a stretch, imo.

So, here goes...

I am a nasty woman.

Interesting way to begin a poem. But, if one is hoping to engage in a constructive dialogue with others who have opposing views, identifying oneself as a “nasty person” is probably not the best way to start. It could even be viewed as an implicit threat, as in if you don’t agree with the speaker she may act in some way that is harmful to you.

Review the definition of ‘nasty’:

behaving in an unpleasant or spiteful way.

synonyms: unkind, unpleasant, unfriendly, disagreeable, inconsiderate, uncharitable, rude, churlish, spiteful, malicious, mean, mean-spirited, ill-tempered, ill-natured, ill-humoured, bad-tempered, hostile, vicious, malevolent, evil-minded, surly, obnoxious, poisonous, venomous, vindictive, malign, malignant, cantankerous, hateful, hurtful, cruel, wounding, abusive.

I’m as nasty as a man who looks like he bathes in Cheetos dust.

This is what is called an ad hominem attack, where one’s argument is based on criticizing the way a person looks in order in invalidate what they say. Most telling that this particular attack targets Donald Trump’s skin colour. An example of “acceptable racism” by the tolerant and inclusive liberal left.

A man whose words are a distract to America.

Other than the improper use of English, this sentence is essentially meaningless.

Electoral college-sanctioned, hate-speech contaminating this national anthem.

The Electoral College was designed so that states with a lower population would have more equal representation when voting for the government. Interesting that these anti-Trump protestors only invoke the Electoral College issue when the results don’t go their way, despite the evidence that shows that Trump likely did indeed win the popular vote.

https://www.sott.net/article/334071-Trump-Probably-Won-The-Popular-Vote-Heres-Why

As for accusations of “hate speech” by Trump, she provides no examples or evidence of any kind to support this assertion. Probably because there isn’t any. Famous SJW Liberals tend to use all sorts inflammatory language to stir up the emotions of their fanbase. No reason, logic or proof required.

I’m not as nasty as Confederate flags being tattooed across my city. Maybe the South actually is going to rise again. Maybe for some it never really fell.

So, certain flags are inherently nasty? Maybe just the ones that offend the easily triggered. Does the display of the Confederate flag automatically imply that these people are racist? That they support slavery? Not at all.

Blacks are still in shackles and graves, just for being black. Slavery has been reinterpreted as the prison system in front of people who see melanin as animal skin.

No. A gross oversimplification of a complex and dynamic problem.

I am not as nasty as a swastika painted on a pride flag, and I didn’t know devils could be resurrected but I feel Hitler in these streets.

Here we go… more inflammatory language, emotionally-laden buzzwords and the inevitable (and yet so wearisome) comparison to Hitler. Didn’t take her long to get there. Quite the outrageous and unfounded comparison considering that Trump has only been in office for less than a week and hasn’t actually done anything yet.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/2/donald-trump-holds-high-flag-gay-equality/

A mustache traded for a toupee.

Another ad hominem attack, implying that Donald Trump's hair isn’t real. As if this inference has any effect whatsoever on his ability to act as Commander-in-Chief.

Nazis renamed the Cabinet Electoral Conversion Therapy, the new gas chambers shaming the gay out of America, turning rainbows into suicide.

More inflammatory language, emotionally-laden buzzwords and the inevitable (and yet so wearisome) comparison to Hitler.

I am not as nasty as racism, fraud, conflict of interest, homophobia, sexual assault, transphobia, white supremacy, misogyny, ignorance, white privilege.

More inflammatory language and emotionally-laden buzzwords, without a shred of evidence or proof to back them up, designed solely to pander to the basest of human experience, fear and resentment.

your daughter being your favorite sex symbol, like your wet dreams infused with your own genes.

This line likely refers to something Trump said 10 years ago on a program called The View…

'If Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps I'd be dating her'

While this comment could be considered questionable and even a little creepy, it could also be taken as an sincere compliment in the form of humour, considering the context of the situation.

It is also a long way from the real transgressions of former President and serial sexual predator Bill Clinton, whose wife is a prime example of a “nasty woman” who maniacally cackled over the public execution of respected world leader and who has the admiration and unequivocal support of all these marching protestors.

Yeah, I’m a nasty woman — a loud, vulgar, proud woman.

Thanks for the reminder to always carry a 10 foot pole whenever in your company, lest be subject to some sort of righteous violence.

I am not nasty like the combo of Trump and Pence being served up to me in my voting booths.

Trump only appeared in your voting booth because a vast majority of sensible people finally got tired of being manipulated by the dishonest mainstream media and used as pawns, wage slaves and cannon fodder by the ruling elite. It’s called democracy. He won fair and square. Get over it!

I’m nasty like the battles my grandmothers fought to get me into that voting booth.

What you call nasty might better be described as strong, hard-working, intelligent and having the will and patience to perservere. But this is poetry after all, so you can have that one.

I’m nasty like the fight for wage equality.

The gender pay gap is a feminist myth that has been debunked many times by professional male and female economists the world over.

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/nov/08/dispelling-the-myths-why-the-gender-pay-gap-does-not-reflect-the-choices-women-make

http://www.dailywire.com/news/4858/7-facts-you-need-know-debunk-equalpayday-lie-ben-shapiro

Scarlett Johansson, why were the female actors paid less than half of what the male actors earned last year.

All Hollywood actors and actresses are enormously over-hyped and over-paid, considering their “job” consisted of merely sitting around and pretending to someone else for a few days.

See, even when we do go into higher paying jobs our wages are still cut with blades sharpened by testosterone.

No. Misandry and resentment.

Why is the work of a black woman and a hispanic woman worth only 63 and 54 cents of a white man’s privileged daughter? This is not a feminist myth. This is inequality.

No, it is not. See above.

So we are not here to be debunked. We are here to be respected. We are here to be nasty.

You have every right to be nasty, but don’t be surprised when people choose not to be associated with you. And no, you are not entitled to any kind of respect. Respect given automatically is foolish, it must be earned in order to be genuine. In fact, you may find that by being a nasty person you’ll get less respect overall.

I am nasty like my bloodstains on my bed sheets. We don’t actually choose if and when to have our periods. Believe me if we could some of us would. We do not like throwing away our favorite pairs of underpants.

Here it comes - more post-modern virtue signalling intended for shock value. Kind of like the performance artist who knits out of her menstruating vagina. Poetry, like other forms of modern art, can be just as senseless and vulgar.

Tell me, why are pads and tampons still taxed when Viagra and Rogaine are not?

Uh, because the latter two are classified as prescription medicines and therefore are subject to different taxation rates than food and sundries.

Is your erection really more than protecting the sacred messy part of my womanhood? Is the bloodstain on my jeans more embarrassing than the thinning of your hair?

Really, this is your big complaint? If we tax both products the same, will you be happy then and please go away?

I know it is hard to look at your own entitlement and privilege.

More SJW buzzwords coming from a hypocritical white college educated American female who has absolutely no idea of the real oppression, pain or suffering experienced by people in other parts of the world.

You may be afraid of the truth. I am unafraid to be honest. It may sound petty bringing up a few extra cents. It adds up to the pile of change I have yet to see in my country.

This is actually a pretty good line. The way she goes from cents to change is quite creative. Give her that one too.

I can’t see. My eyes are too busy praying to my feet hoping you don’t mistake eye contact for wanting physical contact. Half my life I have been zipping up my smile hoping you don’t think I want to unzip your jeans.

Okay, you don’t like being cat-called. Fair enough.

I am unafraid to be nasty because I am nasty like Susan, Elizabeth, Eleanor, Amelia, Rosa, Gloria, Condoleezza, Sonia, Malala, Michelle, Hillary!

And here is where this poet’s ridiculous rant shows its appalling ignorance and implodes upon itself. To include psychopathic warmongers like Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton in a group with true women’s rights activists like Susan B. Anthony and Rosa Parks shows how completely clueless this author is about history and psychology.

“And our pussies ain’t for grabbing. There for reminding you that our walls are stronger than America’s ever will be. Our pussies are for our pleasure. They are for birthing new generations of filthy, vulgar, nasty, proud, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh, you name it, for new generations of nasty women.

This, coming at the end of the poem, is supposed to be the powerful climax, the big finale that brings the message home. The one unforgivable thing that Trump said, that has enraged and motivated all these feminists to march on Washington.

The line, of course, refers to some highly inappropriate comments towards women he made off camera 12 years ago, to which he has publicly apologized for. Not being a defence of Trump or his comments, by any means - I don’t actually even like him that much - but still, seems somewhat mild in comparison to endless wars, death and suffering perpetrated by the elite pedophile network that has been running the country for so long.

And consider the timing of this shocking revelation. The comments were made by Trump in 2005, yet were only released in Oct, 2017, just one month before the election. I speculate that the Hillary and the DNC had full knowledge and possession of this recording since the beginning of the race and deliberately intended to leak it just prior to November in order to ensure that they would win. Looks like their plan backfired after all because even some very insensitive comments by Trump were not enough to erase the stain of Killary’s relentless mendacity.

That’s why I find it hard to have any sympathy for these protestors. If only they could stop whinging for a few days and let DT get on with the business of running the country, America might have a chance to sort itself out.

To quote something Laura posted on Facebook…

This whole pro-Hillary/love Obama crowd is freaking delusional. Can we take that as a given? Where were these women marching to defend Palestinians? Pre-emptive invasions of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and the creation of a global, intractible, refugee problem? Did these libtards march against Saudi Arabia with its horrific treatment of women? Have they marched against global starvation? The fact that no one but Russia seems to really want to end the terrorism? Have they marched against any single issue of global importance anywhere at any time? All they care about is the freedom of their vaginas? That's it?

The scary thing is that, if the marches and the violence and the vandalism continue, the president may be put in a position where he has to use military and police force in order to reestablish law and order. So, the agitators could very well be creating the thing they fear the most.

So if you a nasty woman, or you love one who is, let me hear you say, hell yeah.

As hundreds of thousands of brainwashed and programmed sheeple raise their self-righteous fists in the air…

 

[bjorb]

[quote author= Timótheos]

Blacks are still in shackles and graves, just for being black. Slavery has been reinterpreted as the prison system in front of people who see melanin as animal skin.

No. A gross oversimplification of a complex and dynamic problem.
[/quote]

Yes, and it's also race baiting.

So before people though that I am against women rights, and I also only eat endangered species or whatever. It wasn't about that. What she does is mainly inciting violence. Directing anger for a misplaced cause.

But I have said enough negative things about her. Besides, overanalysing a rant is not that useful. OSIT. And no I don't want to start , US vs Them paradigm.

I don't know what her official diagnoses would be called. But I doubt it's something positive.

 

[mrtn]

that 'poem' really has something of channeling a nasty source. a lot of body related things and words that interrupt thinking.

 

[Niall]

I think I understand what you're trying to say Niall, because it's important to understand those whose opinions are opposed to ours and see if there might be some legitimate grievances there. Still, if Hillary can be described as a "warmongering people-hating nutcase", couldn't those who blindly support her and her policies be described the same way?

Yes, they could. It's not Clinton supporters I have in mind though. I think they make up only a portion of these protesters, and maybe a small one at that. Among those who've bought into the official consensus that Trump = Hitler are people who are aware of what 'the establishment' is, and that it's thoroughly corrupt. This places them among 'the informed'. They protested against the Bush regime, they detested the wars, they saw through the 'bailouts', they might even see through 9/11 and other deep state stuff. You know, people who got behind Sanders and were then shafted by the Clintons rigging the Democratic nomination.

I suppose the question is; why are they unable to make the transition we did from considering that Trump was - more or less - as the establishment told everyone he was (misogynist, racist, potentially fascist, etc) to considering that the establishment sees him as a threat because he actually wants to change things for the better?

Have a listen to two of them here, see if you can see where they 'get it', and where they don't:

https://youtu.be/n2-F0QFoifY

 

[WIN 52]

I could pretty much understand where Judd was going with this... up until she said 'Hillary'. Right there, a feminist loses me. Clinton is not an 'ideal' - she's a warmongering, people-hating nutcase.

I think it would be more useful if we were to try to understand the perspective of those who feel as Judd does, rather than brush them aside as "mentally retarded freaks."

I agree, I was just in Northern California and want to relate my experience there that was down right disturbing. I was staying with some good friends of mine that I've known for 30yrs, I would describe them as decent normal people we basically agree on the same things, a more caring just-world.

Normally we can discuss most everything including politics, we might not agree on everything but it's civil. Of course politics came up, I knew they were down on Trump so I was careful with what I said staying neutral. It didn't take much to set them off the edge and they got very angry at me, it caught me off guard and I wasn't expecting such a reaction very out of character for them. It freaked me out so much I almost left.

This same reaction happened with practically everyone I meet on my trip, I wouldn't call these people libtards in the sense of the crazies like we see on the internet, basically caring people. Something very strange is taking place I think it's a type of ponerization. People's critically thinking is gone and they're running purely on fear and emotion.

I think we should be careful just lumping everyone as "mentally retarded freaks."

Soul smashing?

 

[goyacobol]

I think I understand what you're trying to say Niall, because it's important to understand those whose opinions are opposed to ours and see if there might be some legitimate grievances there. Still, if Hillary can be described as a "warmongering people-hating nutcase", couldn't those who blindly support her and her policies be described the same way?

Yes, they could. It's not Clinton supporters I have in mind though. I think they make up only a portion of these protesters, and maybe a small one at that. Among those who've bought into the official consensus that Trump = Hitler are people who are aware of what 'the establishment' is, and that it's thoroughly corrupt. This places them among 'the informed'. They protested against the Bush regime, they detested the wars, they saw through the 'bailouts', they might even see through 9/11 and other deep state stuff. You know, people who got behind Sanders and were then shafted by the Clintons rigging the Democratic nomination.

I suppose the question is; why are they unable to make the transition we did from considering that Trump was - more or less - as the establishment told everyone he was (misogynist, racist, potentially fascist, etc) to considering that the establishment sees him as a threat because he actually wants to change things for the better?

Have a listen to two of them here, see if you can see where they 'get it', and where they don't:

https://youtu.be/n2-F0QFoifY

I think they are praiseworthy enough personally since they are getting a heck of lot right OSIT. They don't have the Cs clue that Trump "will try" or this network to see some of the more subtle aspects but I think they are doing the best they can.

 

[goyacobol]

Quite a good talk by Stefan Molyneux on recent events.

[[...]_https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z1Y7V2fQKTU[...]

Two highlights - he says [more or less]:

"See the Left? So much into diversity, a wide variety of perspectives and opinions... They want diversity, but anyone who disagrees with them is Hitler. Pick one, Leftists, you can't have both."

"Leftists tend toward violence. Political ideology is a strong predictor of criminality potential."

The latter is pretty much in line with what Roger Scruton says about the Left and hatred. It still feels kind of odd for me to like and recommend a conservative philosopher, declared monarchist and so on. But the last few months was a time of a quite radical re-evaluation of my life-long sympathies and leanings. Thank you progressives, liberals, SJW's etc! It seems, there may be more to it than just psychopaths ponerizing this or that group or corrupting an ideology although I don't know yet how much of the 'baby' should be thrown out with the bathwater. Anyway, here is Sir Roger Scruton (most of his talks are worth watching and you may find some points very close to what Jordan Peterson talks about, too).

[...]_https://www.youtube.com/embed/dJOawompuJQ[...]

Thank you PoB for bringing these videos to attention. That is quite interesting and like you I have also had to re-evaluate my sympathies. It also appears as if many things stand on its head, which ponerology can account for at least to some degree. In discussing the EU I find many who are staunchly for it and who are conservatives by conviction. The same people then appear perplexed when it is pointed out how EU has eroded many conservative values and how the EU appears more like a 'socialist' tyranny which enforces its views and dictates things, thus crushing the indidual in the process and stifling creativity and freedoms.

I think that the traditional workers union and workers in general can be classified as being conservatives. They are not for revolution, but for the continuation of a stable society with defined rules and where they are respected and appreciated for the work that they do. They are not tradtionally for an upheaval of the existing order and the spread of chaos. Thus Putin has a broad support by workers and Trump too appear to have a large support from workers as he stands for conservative values. Both have a strong work ethic. and the creation of real values. They are not advocates for a free lunch.

I too thank you PoB. These two videos were a very interesting view of what seems to be happening. One strange thought I have had recently is the symbolism of "beheading". With the ISIS beheadings going on around the world I had the thought that this is the ultimate statement to tell someone they are not thinking correctly. These two videos seem to be saying something very similar and that is if you do not agree with us there is violence to be had. It is the child throwing a tantrum, the reptilian brain or the wishful thinking in a person. From an STS/STO view it makes sense for an STS entity to hide that most primitive instinct to obtain food for itself otherwise the prey will escape leaving it no choice but to throw a tantrum.

 

[luc]

I think I understand what you're trying to say Niall, because it's important to understand those whose opinions are opposed to ours and see if there might be some legitimate grievances there. Still, if Hillary can be described as a "warmongering people-hating nutcase", couldn't those who blindly support her and her policies be described the same way?

Yes, they could. It's not Clinton supporters I have in mind though. I think they make up only a portion of these protesters, and maybe a small one at that. Among those who've bought into the official consensus that Trump = Hitler are people who are aware of what 'the establishment' is, and that it's thoroughly corrupt. This places them among 'the informed'. They protested against the Bush regime, they detested the wars, they saw through the 'bailouts', they might even see through 9/11 and other deep state stuff. You know, people who got behind Sanders and were then shafted by the Clintons rigging the Democratic nomination.

I suppose the question is; why are they unable to make the transition we did from considering that Trump was - more or less - as the establishment told everyone he was (misogynist, racist, potentially fascist, etc) to considering that the establishment sees him as a threat because he actually wants to change things for the better?

Good point Niall. Me, too, I think it's not that black and white - and I can only speculate that those who see quite a bit of what's going on, yet go out demonstrating against Trump, are still struggling with the deep-seated right/left paradigm and the identity that they formed in their milieu (in this case: liberal left).

Another aspect (which I experienced myself during the refugee crisis) might be that some of them feel relief that parts of their worldview are now in line with the mainstream narrative, i.e. that Trump is evil. It can be a good feeling if you have spent years going totally against the mainstream with topics such as illegal wars, 9/11 etc. and now you can openly discuss your political viewpoints (regarding Trump) with everyone, family etc.

Something else migth play a role - peer pressure from all those lefties and leftie groups (I don't mean libtards, but more the anti-war, anti-wall street kind of left). It's kind of hard to go against your peers and people may choose to believe the consensus that Trump is the new Hitler because it's more comfortable. Just speculation of course.

 

[bjorb]

This guy addressed some good points in a decent way against an army of Anti-Trump protesters. Takes a while before he get's full steam, but he is trying to calm the tide of hatred. Difficult job to do because those people are completely hysterical. But if you don't raise your voice, get loudly and persist, you never get the chance to tell them differently.

Trump Supporter Surrounded at Women's LA March

https://youtu.be/Q3vYXD2wzP0

I especially liked the last part:

There are so many people who supported Trump, but they where afraid to openly support him. But you know when they supported him, in the voting booth. That's what all you people don't understand. A lot of people supported Trump but they where, even your friends, where afraid to tell you they supported him. And you know what, when they went to the voting booth, the voted for him. And that's why all you people are now shocked, because you couldn't believe he could be elected. You need to unite behind him, because you know what, if you continue to do what you are doing. You are going to divide this country, you are going to bring about martial law. You are going to lose your rights and lose your freedom. And then comes about your biggest fear, he will be a dictator than. You better be smart people, you don't understand what is ready to happen. Wake up and be smart.

One of the comments below said:

Proverbs 12:15: Fools think their own way is right, but the wise listen to others.

That's one of the problem biggest problems I think. They are so self-righteous in their ideology, nothing can come through them. They never saw Trump coming because they never where open to listen to the other side, shaming everyone even their friends who thought differently.

I guess we can only hope that after Trump's first 100 day in office, they start to realize that the world didn't end and perhaps become less hysterical.

 

[Timótheos]

I think I understand what you're trying to say Niall, because it's important to understand those whose opinions are opposed to ours and see if there might be some legitimate grievances there. Still, if Hillary can be described as a "warmongering people-hating nutcase", couldn't those who blindly support her and her policies be described the same way?

Yes, they could. It's not Clinton supporters I have in mind though. I think they make up only a portion of these protesters, and maybe a small one at that. Among those who've bought into the official consensus that Trump = Hitler are people who are aware of what 'the establishment' is, and that it's thoroughly corrupt. This places them among 'the informed'. They protested against the Bush regime, they detested the wars, they saw through the 'bailouts', they might even see through 9/11 and other deep state stuff. You know, people who got behind Sanders and were then shafted by the Clintons rigging the Democratic nomination.

I suppose the question is; why are they unable to make the transition we did from considering that Trump was - more or less - as the establishment told everyone he was (misogynist, racist, potentially fascist, etc) to considering that the establishment sees him as a threat because he actually wants to change things for the better?

Have a listen to two of them here, see if you can see where they 'get it', and where they don't:

https://youtu.be/n2-F0QFoifY

Thanks for posting the video Niall, it was very interesting! Listening to the whole conversation, all in all I found more they seem to be getting wrong than getting right, and there were a few things I'm unsure about...

Is it true that Breitbart is a Zionist website and staunch supporter of Likud? I've read that certain people claim that their website is "anti-semitic" in some way, but I'm not sure if that refers to the content itself or the founders.

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/14/steve-bannon-runs-an-anti-semitic-website-is-a-misogynist-and-will-be-one-of-donald-trumps-senior-advisors/

How does Abbey Martin reconcile these two claims? I read stories on there from time to time and so far it seems pretty reasonable to me.

And is it true that Infowars have the ear of Donald Trump and are influencing his tweets and/or policy? She sure has a hate on for Alex Jones. I know we've had many reservations about him and there is a thread about it on the forum. But Paul Joseph Watson sure keeps saying a lot of sensible things these days, so I guess some discernment is needed there.

I also didn't know that the "paid protestors" claim has been debunked. I thought there may have some truth to that.

Anyway, what I think they got right was the contention that the MSM indirectly helped get Trump elected, because no-one believes corporate media anymore and that most threw their biased support behind Killary throughout the campaign.

Seeing that this interview was recorded at the end of November, there appeared to be a lot of speculation as to what Trump's policy will be based on things he said during the presidential race. Putting Pence in charge domestic and foreign policy, getting tough with Iran, no-fly zone in Syria, implementing racist anti-muslim policies, are just a few examples. Only time will tell exactly what Trump plans to do overall, but they seem to be forgetting that some of the promises he made during the election may have just been pandering to his base at the time and may not be an accurate reflection of actual policy.

They also showed no love for any of his cabinet picks, and perhaps rightly so, but my sense is that Trump has some kind of overall plan or vision as to what he intends to accomplish and has surrounded himself with people that he is confident will help him implement it. So, no matter what their previous views or statements might be, I think he himself will be the main driver of policy. That he didn't make any attempt to "appease" the left by appointing any of their players shows that he's not really interested in "playing politics" in the usual way. But. I'm speculating here as well, so time will tell.

One thing that Paul Jay said that was really off the mark was his comment regarding climate change, and by that he clearly means man-made global warming, so no cigar for him there.

It's a shame really and rather distressing, because many many times I've really liked what Abbey Martin has to say. But I know what you mean though, even some of the people who have up until now, shown that they can see the bigger picture, still buy into the Trump as Hitler scenario. It's strange and perhaps points to certain rigidity of thinking brought on by years of genuine and legitimate mistrust of all things government.

 

[angelburst29]

Kellyanne Conway speaks about womens march, Madonna, CIA, crowd size, Obamacare etc. Repeatedly asked/badgered about Sean Spicer giving false information about the crowd size. Whoa, these msm people are very hard to listen to.. Kellyann held her own very well, she is a excellent spokes person. Well done. The remark by CIA, Brennan is horrible!

https://youtu.be/WO_RrvPWseU

Thanks for Posting this video with Kellyanne Conway, SummerLite. I took notice of her during Trump's Campaign and have to say, I'm impressed with the way she conducts herself during interviews. Intelligent, direct to the point, yet not forceful or dominating. I'm also wondering, considering the few interviews Kellyanne has given since Trump's Inauguration, if she might be using a format similar to Russia's Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, Maria Zakharova? Either way, Kellyanne seems to be an added plus, where media and getting direct dialog on what developing around Trump's tenure is concerned (by passing CNN, NBC, etc. fake news outlets)?

Obama's lost his marbles - Russia's 2016 wrap up [Video]
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/01/obamas-lost-his-marbles-russias-2016.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFTdBvYIwP8 (5:28 min.) English subtitles.

President Donald Trump’s aide Kellyanne Conway dismissed the Women’s March on Washington on Sunday, saying she didn’t understand why so many people across the globe took to the streets after Trump’s “uplifting and unifying” inauguration speech.

White House Counselor: 'I Don’t See the Point' of Women’s March on Washington
https://sputniknews.com/us/201701231049895491-conway-dismissed-womens-march/

Conway told ABC "This Week" host George Stephanopoulos that she "didn't see the point" of participating in the major demonstrations on the day after Trump officially took office. The country made the crucial decision in November, and now is the time to unite behind a new president, she said.

We certainly respect people's First Amendment rights," she noted in the interview. "But I frankly didn't see the point. I mean, you have a day after he's uplifting and unifying, and you have folks here being on a diatribe where I think they could have requested a dialogue. Nobody called me and said, ‘Hey, could we have a dialogue?'"

The counselor also condemned celebrities for commenting on the event using explicit language and making inflammatory statements. For instance, Madonna said during a speech at the march that she "thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House."

You have a very prominent singer who's worth hundreds of millions of dollars not going over to a woman's shelter here in DC to write a check, but instead saying that she thought of, quote, ‘Burning down the White House,'" Conway said.

The singer, who supported Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential election in the US, said that she was "outraged" in the wake of Trump's swearing-in and that the march represented the beginning of a revolution.

"I just thought they missed an opportunity to be about solutions and to really fight for those millions of women whose kids are trapped in failing schools, who don't have access to health care, who don't have access to an economic affordable life," Conway explained.

She added that, ironically, it was President Trump who won the majority of the white female vote during the election, and that those voices should be respected. "Twenty-nine to 30 million women voted for Donald Trump," she stressed.

About 2 million people in dozens of countries across the globe flooded the streets to march for human rights on January 21. While some protesters said they were alarmed by the rhetoric of the past election cycle in the US and wanted to send a message to the government, others insisted that the marches shouldn't be regarded as anti-Trump but rather as an attempt to highlight various human rights issues.

Lawmaker of the council of the Swedish city of Kalmar Roland Pettersson, from the biggest Swedish Social Democratic Party, resigned Monday after calls for shooting US President Donald Trump, saying that his statement was "idiotic," local media reported.

Swedish Lawmaker Resigns After Calls to Shoot Trump - Reports
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201701231049922123-sweden-lawmaker-shoot-trump/

On Sunday, Pettersson said via his Facebook page that Trump exceeded his worst expectations, asking if someone could shoot the US president.

I’m leaving my post immediately. I do not want to be a burden to the party. I took this decision myself and addressed a letter to the party," Pettersson told the SVT broadcaster.

The position of the US president on climate change and environment prompted the call for shooting of Trump, the former lawmaker stressed, saying that his action was "an idiotic thing to do."

According to the White House, Trump is committed to eliminating former President Barack Obama's Climate Action Plan, as well as the Waters of the US rule transferring certain rivers and lakes under the protection of the Environmental Protection Agency.

During his election campaign, Trump repeatedly criticized warnings about global warming, saying it was a "hoax," and speculated about ending US participation in the Paris climate deal on carbon emissions.

Policymakers in the European Union have been concerned with US President Donald Trump's comments on European affairs, particularly with regard to NATO, but they should instead focus on building a "more solid foundation" for the bloc, journalist Max Hofmann wrote for Deutsche Welle, saying that otherwise the union is "doomed."

Europe 'Needs to Put Its Own House in Order' Instead of Worrying About Trump
https://sputniknews.com/europe/201701231049910231-eu-defense-economy-trump/

Hofmann maintained that some of Trump's remarks made during the election campaign and after he was elected US president "have sent shock waves across Europe" regardless of whether they reflect actual policies or were made on the spur of the moment.

Trump has been critical of NATO, calling the bloc "obsolete" since it has been unable to provide an efficient response to terrorist attacks. The US president has also urged European nations to invest in their defense capabilities instead of relying on Washington. The majority of NATO members have failed to allocate 2 percent of national GDP on defense, something they have pledged to do.

In addition, Trump has said that his administration views boosting the US economy as a priority and will as a result be less engaged in overseas campaigns.

This has prompted Hofmann to say that Europe "can no longer rely on Washington."

"What do you do when your closest partner just disappears on you? You do what the EU should have done long ago: you fix up your home, regardless of what 'The Donald' is doing in the [United States]. There is enough work that needs to be done in Europe with regard to 'putting your own house in order' – Brexit, migration and refugee policies, the euro," he explained. (Article continues.)

 

[Hesper]

It's a shame really and rather distressing, because many many times I've really liked what Abbey Martin has to say. But I know what you mean though, even some of the people who have up until now, shown that they can see the bigger picture, still buy into the Trump as Hitler scenario. It's strange and perhaps points to certain rigidity of thinking brought on by years of genuine and legitimate mistrust of all things government.

Great conversation. I'm in the same boat, but since Abbey Martin fell into the whole 'Russia invaded Ukraine' shtick a while back and ranted against 'Russian interventionism' I could see she was missing some sort of 'truth sniffing' faculty'. She made a big stir then too.

As to Niall's question about why others couldn't seem to come to the similar conclusions about Trump that we did I think perspicacity is important. Laura wrote about it here and it seems especially relevant now:

And this brings us to what the Shaykh calls “perspicacity.” This is the special development of the “eye of insight,” or “seeing the unseen” that is crucial to the Seeker. Just as the physical eye, with the refraction of light from the Sun, can discern between the large and the small, the beautiful and the ugly, colors, the moving from the still, high and low, the ability to see the unseen is a property of an “inner light.” This light reveals to the seeker things about external objects that are NOT apparent to the five senses. It reveals to its possessor when a choice that may appear to be benevolent, is a step on the path of Evil. It reveals when a choice that may appear to human estimation as negative is actually a difficult step to felicity for all involved. The Sufis tell us that some individuals have achieved such a level of “seeing” that – upon seeing a person’s footprint on the ground, even if the person is not present – they are able to say whether he is following a life of felicity or wretchedness.

I think that a lot of the 'left' fall into a rut of seeing conspiracies everywhere, of seeing the world as 'black and white' and thinking that, because their 'black and white' is the opposite of the rest of the world's 'black and white,' that it must be the truth. Whereas here we have a critical feedback mechanism and SOTT so we constantly feed new information and competing views into our 'system' and, with a scientific bent, are open to completely changing our view of reality. And now the bait and switch has occurred and it's just stunning to see so many people absolutely lose the plot.

That said, I've listened to a lot of pro-Trump youtubers lately and I've found that what he represents to them is backlash against this liberal 'unlimited tolerance for everything' trend. I'm reading a book now that cites Karl Popper's thesis on this phenomenon in 'Open Society and Its Enemies'. He writes that unlimited tolerance ultimately leads to its opposite. I think that we see that phenomenon in the American people, and the West at large. However, I don't think the Trump 'figurehead' they project this urge on really shares their same sentiments - after all he is rich, he is powerful, so he isn't functioning under the same abnormal pressures they are. Instead he seems to have an agenda that is more in line with establishing balance than anything else.

There's a good article up on SOTT right now considering Trump's initial round of executive actions. I can't claim to be a mind reader so I'll just judge the man by his actions. Judging him by how the rest of the ponerized elite judge him is also another measure, but I think the buck stops with how he acts. I'm interested in seeing how this plays out.

The article's here: A Preview of Trump's Executive Actions

Having already signed a (mostly symbolic) executive order on Obamacare on Friday night, urging US agencies to "waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation" of provisions deemed to impose fiscal burdens on states, companies or individuals, Trump is preparing to unload a volley of many more executive orders. Courtesy of Axios, which quotes "one of the best-wired Republican lobbyists in town", here is a preview of the initial round of Trump executive actions, some of which may hit as soon as Sunday afternoon:

• Look for a possible hiring freeze at executive branch
• 5-year lobbying ban on transition and administration officials
• Mexico City policy, which prevents foreign NGOs from getting U.S. family planning money if they provide abortions with non-U.S. funds. (It's already illegal to use U.S dollars on abortions.)
• Task the Defense Secretary and joint chiefs to come up with plan to eviscerate ISIS
• Report on readiness, and something cyber security related
• Border/immigration: Something on sanctuary cities, expand E-Verify, an extreme vetting proposal
• Trade: Withdraw from TPP and a thorough review of NAFTA

 

[Timótheos]

It's a shame really and rather distressing, because many many times I've really liked what Abbey Martin has to say. But I know what you mean though, even some of the people who have up until now, shown that they can see the bigger picture, still buy into the Trump as Hitler scenario. It's strange and perhaps points to certain rigidity of thinking brought on by years of genuine and legitimate mistrust of all things government.

Replying to myself here, I learned something new today. I was wondering about the difference between the words 'mistrust' and 'distrust' and just discovered that 'distrust' was technically the more proper term to use in the sentence above...

The Grammarist has a discussion on these words: Distrust and Mistrust are roughly the same. Both mean (1) lack of trust or (2) to regard without trust. But distrust is often based on experience or reliable information, while mistrust is often a general sense of unease toward someone or something.

For all you word nerds out there! :)

 

[bjorb]

Was this already posted? Almost every Western household possesses at least one product made in foxconn factories. I think that Trump as a business man knows very well how to attract manufacture jobs back in the US. This is a promise he should be able to deliver to?

Made in America: Asian Tech Giants Say They Will Expand U.S. Operations Under Trump
https://www.sott.net/article/340448-Scrapped-Trump-signs-executive-order-withdrawing-US-from-Trans-Pacific-Partnership

Softbank and Foxconn both plan to broaden their American operations, and the president-elect is happy to take credit.

by Jamie Condliffe December 7, 2016

Japanese telecom company Softbank and Taiwanese electronics manufacturer Foxconn have announced that they plan to invest heavily in U.S. operations.

Softbank’s CEO announced that the company will invest $50 billion in America, with plans to create 50,000 new jobs. His news was delivered in the lobby of Trump Tower in Manhattan, following a meeting with the president-elect. The money will come from a $100 billion investment fund that Softbank has established with Saudi Arabia’s sovereign-wealth fund.

That announcement was swiftly followed by news from Foxconn—the company that manufactures devices for companies like Apple—explaining that it, too, plans to expand U.S. operations. In a statement, the company explained that “the scope of the potential investment has not been determined,” adding that final decisions will be made “following the completion of direct discussions between our leadership and the relevant U.S. officials.”

Donald Trump has already claimed credit for Softbank’s pledge. And it may be justified: its CEO mentioned increasing deregulation under Trump during his announcement.

If that is the case, the news could be a significant victory for Trump. The president-elect previously stated that he wanted to invigorate the manufacturing industry in the U.S., promising to “get Apple to start making their computers and their iPhones on our land, not in China.”

Apple is unlikely to shift production wholesale to the U.S., as China offers it cheap labor, a skilled workforce, and flexible factory facilities that domestic setups can’t currently match. But if Foxconn does expand operations in America, Apple may tempted to manufacture more of its goods on American soil.

Indeed, its hand may be forced in the coming weeks. Trump is said to be inviting the Silicon Valley elite to a roundtable discussion next week. It’s not clear what will be on the agenda, or who exactly will attend—though chief executives of Oracle and Cisco Systems are confirmed.

Whoever shows up, Trump will certainly try to convince attendees that they should be building their products in the U.S. It will be a meeting that could potentially shape the next four years of technological change—and where it’s made.

 

[Aeneas]

Have a listen to two of them here, see if you can see where they 'get it', and where they don't:

https://youtu.be/n2-F0QFoifY

As Timótheos has already mentioned, then Paul Jay certainly got Climate Change wrong. He claimed that ALL scientist recognised AGW and called Trump a denier.

AGW has been a hot topic for close to 20 years and it has been associated with end of the world apocalypse. There has been endless scaremongering stories and public people have called people who question the established convention as being deniers, who should be tried at a Nurnberg trial for crimes against humanity.

As Win52 suggested Soul-smashing. This is also what I thought, as in a clever way people are indirectly worshipping the beast. This is what Laura mentioned a couple of months before the election in connection with Trump being secretly the establishment candidate, but as it has played out (until now), it almost appears to be the opposite. The left and the anti-Trump movement has become unwittingly or not, supporters of the establishment, Wall Street, regime change enablers (proven ones), the intelligence communities, Soros, CIA and the lies upon lies. One could say in short the BEAST. Thus they have made themselves vulnerable to soul disintegration/smashing by supporting the entropic principle.

And as Dave mentioned from his visit in California, many of these are good people and not Libtards, but it looks as if they have let themselves become fodder. I have seen the same with friends and family and it is as if the mainstream media really did create the conditions of 'mush for brains' as Putin put it a year ago.

Perhaps Trump and his cabinet will lead us to the same end result in the end, but at this stage it is an unknown as he has just entered the presidency. Some of his cabinet posts are scary, but how much choice did he have knowing that they also have to be confirmed? But scary as some may be, it is still Trump who is the president. How much wiggle room he has, remains to be seen.

Abby Martin says that she does not see a need to wait and see. As far as she is concerned, her mind is made up (before he was sworn in), which for an investigative journalist is strange. She says that Trump has no experience whatsoever and the long of the short is that she would have preferred Hillary. But 30 years experience of cronyism, narcissism, instigating wars and invading Muslim countries, silencing critics of her and her husband including silencing female women raped by her husband, feathering her nest etc. is really a hard-to-beat record. Then the badmouthing of Bernie Sanders supporters (living in the cellars) and of Trump supporters (deplorables) to top it off and one is left speechless that anyone would have preferred Hillary.