Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Alohameansgoodbye

Usa Thread

Recommended Posts

The decline of print news has changed things. Big cities used to have several competing papers, one pro-Dem and another pro-Republican. Now most newspapers nationwide are owned by one big syndicate.

I used to make extra money by freelancing for newspapers and magazines. All that ended years ago. Several magazines I wrote for have now gone out of business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chocolat steve said:

Was asked by a non American last night to name something good about Trump's election and I said that the biggest take away I have is that that a non career politician is now seen as a legitimate candidate. The only other times I can recall historically off the top of my head is Ike and Grant, and they were war heroes. Generals from the military which I wouldn't want to make a habit. 

Of the non politicians who I think could possibly make good presidents are:

Warren Buffet. But he's a bit up there in age.  I actually don't think Oprah would make a good president. I think she would make a decent head of a department. Possibly Mark Cuban, billionaire owner of the Dallas Mavericks. But not sure about his temperment.  What about from the right? Peter Schiff possibly. Colin Powell, even though he's establishment. Ron Paul has some great things about him but I also think deep down he is a bit of a "nationalist" and not in the good way. By default a President is a nationalist. Obama is a nationalist. Logically, any President of America is for what is best for America. You can want what is best for America by helping other countries. That isn't a mutually exclusive issue. 

 

I would add that the exposure of all the corruption in the USA government is a good thing that was brought about by the Trump presidency. Also the exposure of the biased, lying media. People living outside the USA, non USA citizens are being brainwashed by the main stream media.
I would suggest Rand Paul may be presidential material.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Many politicians spoke of corruption in the government. What specific person/departments, etc? I fully agree there is corruption, that's a given. An example, a trillion dollars (and that is the low amount) disappeared out of the Pentagon/defense budget over a generation. No one knows where it is, the GAO (General Accounting Office) can't find it. That's one example. It's not what Trump exposed but it's one example. But I am not sure exactly what corruption Trump has exposed?

2. The mainstream media. I fully agree what is accepted as 'mainstream media' can be misleading. It's been that way to both sides. I recall progressives saying CNN were unfair. The mainstream media is owned by big corporations so that is a given to some extent. That being said, what media should non Americans be listening to? 

3. Rand Paul is good. I like him to some extent. I have personal reasons I wouldn't vote for him but I do like how he and his dad do put the government's feet to the fire on a great many things. 

4. I can appreciate the 'good' that people who support Trump says about him. Primarily, he's a 'straight shooter' at times and says what's on his mind. However, what about the documented list of lies, his prior business practices (some say current), its hard to argue he hasn't had a fair share of corruption in his business life. There is a laundry list of people/businesses he's documented to have cheated as well as documented bias in the renting of his properties. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Flashermac said:

The decline of print news has changed things. Big cities used to have several competing papers, one pro-Dem and another pro-Republican. Now most newspapers nationwide are owned by one big syndicate.

I used to make extra money by freelancing for newspapers and magazines. All that ended years ago. Several magazines I wrote for have now gone out of business.

 

Because of 'yellow journalism' in the past, Hearst, Pulitzer and other major owners of newspaper chains over a 100 years ago and the fact they actually created a war (Spanish American War), and other acts of malfeasance, there was a law that no person or company can own more than one major media in any one market. Such as all the newspapers or TV station, paper and radio station. This ended under the Clinton administration, with the blessing and prodding of the Republicans. In the form of the Telecommunications Act of 1996

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecommunications_Act_of_1996

This resulted in 6 companies controlling 90 percent of all forms of communication.

https://www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, cavanami said:

Bubi,

Pull a meeting with Merkel and act out the same as Acosta did....welcome to a severe beat down!

For sure. But she would keep on smiling and just need maybe 10 words to knock me out. But I don´t think you understand what I mean. No way she would ever stop me coming next time again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to keep the hair at attention, maybe he could try water proof Hairspray, or Polyurethane floor varnish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another shooting and some poor guy who survived the Las Vegas shooting got killed in the Thousand Oaks, California shooting. Amazing. What is wrong with a certian segment of the American male population that we now see that slightly over 70% of all domestic terrorism and lets not play with words, it is domestic terrorism, what is the root cause. 

This is a fairly new phenomom. We didn't have mass shootings 30 years ago, even 20 years ago. What is going on? What are your theories. It's a uniquely American issue. Yes, people are killing each other in Africa, Asia, etc, but these can be traced to politics, religion, etc. Not that its okay but we can at least see the root causes. But this? We keep hearing, "lone gunman" as if its to exonerate the obvious similarities betweeen these killers. 

We already lead the world in serial killers, that was old. And now this? 

Thoughts as to why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many shooters were medicated with strong physco drugs? SOme have said that all the shooters were on physco drugs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×