US Politics, January 2020. Because we hate ourselves.

This one was really O_O to me:

Nonsupporter: Do you think the right-wing media would have been applauding if Obama or Hillary had done this?

Some few pundits might have cynically and reflexively opposed it out of rank partisanship, but they would have eaten a lot of shit from their own audiences had they done so. Any right-wing talking head who criticized Obama for taking out an infamously bloody-handed, state-sponsored terrorist like Suleimani would have been roundly denounced as a media-planted RINO cuck.

I imagine most would have taken the 'Even a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day' angle. We didn't think of Obama as Hitler 2.0, so giving him a well-deserved high-five when he did something right (like assassinating Bin Laden) wasn't seen as unforgivable heresy, unlike the Left and Trump these days...

What kind of right-wing media was he paying attention to from 08-16?

When it comes to tribe loyalty, this is a classic post from two years ago:

https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/7bts5x/roy_moore_is_refusing_to_debate_his_democratic/dpkyfco/

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7rFIZUUwAEbmPE.jpg

lmao right wing media absolutely did not applaud Obama for getting Bin Laden

in fact a number of them not so subtly suggested that the body was fake and that the real Bin Laden had been dead for years

So this is pretty fucking disgusting and any “news network” that carries this shit should be destroyed

TRUMP: "These people hate Israel -- they hate Jewish people. I won't name them. I won't bring up the name of Omar, Tlaib, AOC -- I won't bring that name up. Won't bring it up." pic.twitter.com/jCrySCb1Ag

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 3, 2020

ugh

in fact a number of them not so subtly suggested that the body was fake and that the real Bin Laden had been dead for years

A guy I worked with at the time claimed Obama nothing at all to do with the mission, and it was Panetta all the way.

I imagine this guy now thinks that Trump himself is taking on secret missions to the Middle East and taking out terrorists himself, with his own bare not-small-at-all hands.

Graham threatens to 'take matters in our own hands' if Pelosi doesn't send articles of impeachment to Senate. "My goal is to start this trial in the next coming days, not let [House Speaker] Nancy Pelosi take over the Senate," Graham said....

Currently, no trial can begin until the articles come through. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said he wants the Senate to follow the parameters of then-President Bill Clinton's impeachment trial: an initial agreement to first hear the case and then a later vote on whether to call witnesses....

Graham's idea isn't the only GOP proposal aimed at breaking the impasse. On Thursday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., tweeted that he will introduce a resolution Monday to change impeachment rules so that the Senate can dismiss the articles of impeachment Trump faces

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-impeachment-inquiry/graham-threatens-take-matters-our-own-hands-if-pelosi-doesn-n1110651

graham going full totalitarian. he's so ecstatic that his iran war might finally happen that he's willing to do anything to please trump

thread

1) The United States is an empire. This shouldn't be controversial, but let's get it out of the way; empires don't all look alike, they do different things with different goals and approaches and technologies, and nobody who studies empires thinks the US isn't one.

— Patrick Wyman (@Patrick_Wyman) January 5, 2020

It's really weird. Denmark isn't an elite, and yet we have a fucked up ruling elite as well. So so weird. Almost like that thread is complete nonsense.

Denmark is not an empire

You’ve still got Greenland.

... and the Faroe Isles?

That's 100.000 people. That's no empire. We're a colonial power, sure.

u r really dumber than your reputation, amazing

wow sounds bad pic.twitter.com/Hrr8neNnWj

— jordan (@JordanUhl) January 3, 2020

Just, if people don't know, the US isn't in the top 15 when it comes to Military spending / Total government spending. It's 9% according to the World Bank. Which is a lot, it's 2,3% in Denmark. But it's not why you don't have M4A. In Israel it's 11,1%, and afaik, Israel has better social services. Anti-imperialism is just the completely wrong way to look at this.

interesting. the CBO thinks it's about 14.8%

Link?

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

The U.S. Department of Defense budget accounted in fiscal year 2017 for about 14.8% of the United States federal budgeted expenditures. According to the Congressional Budget Office, defense spending grew 9% annually on average from fiscal year 2000–2009.[43]

Hm, the note there leads to a completely different report, and the first sentence doesn't actually seem to be according to the CBO. I can't see where that claim comes from?

I mean, Fred's right, even if we cut military spending in half there is zero chance that money wouldn't somehow end up in the pockets of the rich

good morning!

Lincoln Chafee's running for President as a Libertarian.

lol wait isn't John McAfee too

also Sam Seder

I'm just hyped for Chafee/McAfee 2020: Rhyme & Reason

more like Crime and Reason, am I right folks??

John McEnroe also running

we've def been obsessing over the wrong primary

A guy I worked with at the time claimed Obama nothing at all to do with the mission, and it was Panetta all the way.

I imagine this guy now thinks that Trump himself is taking on secret missions to the Middle East and taking out terrorists himself, with his own bare not-small-at-all hands.

No need to anecdatalyze - Trump himself tweeted "Stop congratulating Obama for killing Bin Laden. The Navy Seals killed Bin Laden." (Oct 22 2012)

And then he OF COURSE proceeded to whine about how little credit he got for killing Baghdadi.

Can the dude even hold a weapon at this point

he's right, he should get more credit for murdering those two children alongside baghdadi

i see that trump is threatening sanctions on IRAQ now, threatening to make them larger than those on Iran now. while also saying stuff like

“They’re allowed to kill our people. They’re allowed to torture and maim our people. They’re allowed to use roadside bombs and blow up our people,” he said. “And we’re not allowed to touch their cultural site? It doesn’t work that way.”

...and yet i am going to carry on with my day, i guess. after all, he's actually been a very ineffective president who doesn't have much of an effect on the world because of how incompetent he is, right

the euphemism "cultural sites" makes me wanna barf

why

maybe "designated collateral damage"

I mean as employed by numbnuts himself, because he dgaf about culture

what makes you say that?

https://i.imgur.com/uHJgcQ7.jpg

at least Little Bush had The Fart Book

that poor kid looks so sad :(

Don't think that I won't judge him the instant he chooses to become a public figure.

Just, if people don't know, the US isn't in the top 15 when it comes to Military spending / Total government spending. It's 9% according to the World Bank. Which is a lot, it's 2,3% in Denmark. But it's not why you don't have M4A. In Israel it's 11,1%, and afaik, Israel has better social services. Anti-imperialism is just the completely wrong way to look at this.

― Frederik B, Monday, 6 January 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Just hundreds of billions, anti-imperialists are so greedy they just want it all for cultural sites!

I wouldn't be able to keep myself from peeling off the gold foil and eating the load-bearing chocolate superstructure

New John Bolton statement: "I have concluded that, if the Senate issues a subpoena for my testimony, I am prepared to testify." pic.twitter.com/1UIVIhLVb6

— Dustin Volz (@dnvolz) January 6, 2020

chances of senate issuing a subpoena to bolton?

subpoena the tax returns

good morning!

Fri. (12/27): we notify Deutsche Bank about our piece

Sun. (12/29): Trump + Putin have mystery phone call

Wed. (1/1): we tell DB we are publishing Fri.

Wed. (1/1): Trump decides to kill Soleimani

Thurs. (1/2): Soleimani assassinated

Fri. (1/3): we are cyberattacked

😳 weird

— Robert J. DeNault (@robertjdenault) January 5, 2020

xp

I mean, Fred's right, even if we cut military spending in half there is zero chance that money wouldn't somehow end up in the pockets of the rich

― frogbs, Monday, January 6, 2020 9:43 AM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

yes but this is mostly* useful as a rhetorical strategy, i.e. "if you're concerned about that cost, you should logically also be concerned about this cost, unless your concern isn't actually about cost"

* except maybe not really, because the likely retort to that would probably be something along the lines of "we need to do this, we don't need universal health care," and then it's a stalemate, because what do you even do with that?