|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
If anything, and this is just my own musings, it was half a declaration of might and war mongering, than a celebration of telling the Brits to piss off.
I really did not see this. I watched it because I did not know what to expect, and I really dont think you can compare a couple of airplanes flying over to a korean/chinese military parade with thousands of soldiers/tanks etc. The speech was about the evolution of the united states, he honored important or good people who did important things or just good things for the society of the united states. And he also honored the military. I remember the speech being roughly a third about american patriotism (of which I expected worse to be honest), about important or good people and about the military and its evolution.. I really I did not see any warmongering there.
|
On July 06 2019 08:57 Ben... wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2019 08:42 iamthedave wrote:On July 06 2019 06:52 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On July 06 2019 05:00 CosmicSpiral wrote:On July 06 2019 00:06 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
It's easy to make corporate profits grow when you cut their taxes, and create a 1.8 TRILLION dollar deficit with those missed taxes for future people to deal with Corporate profits were already overflowing with the botched implementation of QE, which lead to stock buybacks and other trends that technically added to GDP without increasing productivity or purchasing power. The taxes are the cherry on top. On July 06 2019 01:23 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
And so the march towards American Facism under Trump continues unabated under the rallying call of rightist commentary on American Patriotism. Seems like all that effort to elucidate what constitutes fascism went to waste. Military parade aren't facism, but the sentiment behind it and xdaunts are. Military parades in USA on independence day as a celebration? That should give you chills. The bad kind. Nation above all. But welcome to the thread. What's the usual 4th of July celebration like? For the Obama administration, they had a big fireworks display. The area closed off around the Lincoln Memorial for Trump's stupid event used to be where a lot of people watched the fireworks from. There's pictures of the Lincoln Memorial covered in people sitting waiting for fireworks. The Obama administration also used to have a barbecue on the WH lawn for veterans and their families. Both seem much better than spending millions of dollars to set up stands and bring in a few tanks for no reason other than to stroke Trump's ego.
I really like the idea of a barbecue for the veterans and families. That seems like a good thing to make a yearly event if you want to have a distinctly military aspect in there..
|
United States24701 Posts
I was invited to that along with my unit during the early days of the Trump Administration. This implies they weren’t easily able to fill the slots. In principle it’s a good thing, especially compared to a military parade.
|
On July 06 2019 23:28 MWY wrote:Show nested quote +
If anything, and this is just my own musings, it was half a declaration of might and war mongering, than a celebration of telling the Brits to piss off.
I really did not see this. I watched it because I did not know what to expect, and I really dont think you can compare a couple of airplanes flying over to a korean/chinese military parade with thousands of soldiers/tanks etc. The speech was about the evolution of the united states, he honored important or good people who did important things or just good things for the society of the united states. And he also honored the military. I remember the speech being roughly a third about american patriotism (of which I expected worse to be honest), about important or good people and about the military and its evolution.. I really I did not see any warmongering there.
We have enough holidays and events where we fly jets overhead. I can get behind him keeping it apolitical and giving some respect to the military personnel, I'm just not a fan of the reasoning he did it, nor the costs associated. In my opinion, he could have done this without the additional costs and still got his point across. It was just unnecessary.
|
On July 05 2019 19:19 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2019 18:17 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 05 2019 17:43 Danglars wrote:On July 05 2019 16:31 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 05 2019 15:20 Danglars wrote:On July 05 2019 09:04 IyMoon wrote:
Did anyone watch trumps speech? Was it any good? Big crowd? Yes it was good. Very good. You should watch it. Uplifting. Not full of the political jabs. If Biden were president and had delivered it, the praise in this forum would be effusive, for sure. Crowd was big, but it's a parade with tanks and fighter and bomber flyovers. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2019 14:32 ShambhalaWar wrote:
"Was it any good?"
Is that a real question? Some people here do ask questions to find answers. I can't believe the entertainment on this website comes free. Uplifting in what sense? Having just scoffed at even asking if the speech was good, I think you particularly need a little distance from who said it to look at it objectively. That tone or theme is established very soon after introducing the guests in attendance. Why would someone who can't believe the speech's quality is even a real question be believed to really engage with the speech itself? I scoffed at it because the man is known to frequently lie, attack, and insult others at every one of his speeches I've heard or heard reported. I've also never heard him say anything inspiring, the man's reputation is abysmal. I was asking for your perspective, because I'm genuinely interested in how you feel inspired. I'm not interested in (nor do I think it would be possible for) you changing my mind or opinion about the man himself. But I am curious about your perspective if you would share it? I'll bite a little, out of curiosity Show nested quote +As we gather this evening in the joy of freedom, we remember that all share a truly extraordinary heritage.
Together, we are part of one of the greatest stories ever told, the story of America. It is the epic tale of a great nation, whose people have risked everything for what they know is right and what they know is true.
It is the chronicle of brave citizens who never give up on the dream of a better and brighter future. And it is the saga of 13 separate colonies that united to form the most just and virtuous republic ever conceived.
On this day 243 years ago, our founding fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to declare independence and defend our God-given rights. That's some goddamn uplifting shit. Like, definitionally. As in, if you read or heard the whole speech delivered by Biden, half of this thread would say it's great to finally have a president who acts Presidential. I just think the human condition means that for all Trump's other bullshit, nobody actually cares if he does one or two things right in the speechcraft. It's like all the hate can make you look at a slogan like Make America Great Again and not even recognize the aspirational qualities present in it, and need somebody to explain what exactly is appealing about that. I highly recommend watching the speech if you want further engagement on the topic; I'm not here to be anybody's intellectual slave.
That's a huge part of the problem for trump, but for all his "other shit" it still might be good words coming out of his mouth, but what good are words if they are just words. It might be inspiring for some, but I personally cannot divorce them from who he has shown himself to be in actions.
Did he say some good things and not speak divisively or in a way that continues to drive a wedge between all of us? Maybe, and if so, then that is a step in the right direction, but its 1 step of a thousand he has already taken in the wrong direction.
It reminds me of a father who is telling his son he loves him as he is hitting him, or screaming, "I'M NOT ANGRY!"
Here's an example you might appreciate, in one of Micheal Moore's latest films, he shows a time when Obama came to Flint to address the water crisis, and essentially showed up, gave a pretty speech... while everyone was waiting to hear what he would to save them... he essentially just said a bunch of flowery shit (while drinking a bottled water), got back on the plane and left.
Everyone was dumbfounded, and I personally thought the man was an asshole for doing that. His words didn't mean shit, and Flint is still fucked all these years later. Flint of all places is one of the most no brainer, lets fix this problem in America right now issues, and he threw a bunch of words at it and walked away.
Almighty Obama, who I still think did a great job, but is another example of how flowery words can be hollow and don't deserve praise.
Same for slogans.
|
Canada11363 Posts
On July 06 2019 11:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2019 11:26 Falling wrote:
I imagine you'd normally have soldiers marching in your parades? We do up here on July the 1st- at least if near an airbase like my city is. I imagine then the difference is the amount of hardware going down the street? That's a different thing and you know it Falling. This was a presidential spectacle just to show off. Nothing more.
Oh I know it's different. What I was fishing for (and clearly failed) is having not seen it, I was wondering if it was lots and lots or just a handful of tanks.
|
I can understand that. And like we've clarified, it wasn't many. To a lot of people, it was just him doing it because he could and because he idolizes places that do grandiose gestures.
|
On July 07 2019 03:28 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On July 06 2019 11:51 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 06 2019 11:26 Falling wrote:
I imagine you'd normally have soldiers marching in your parades? We do up here on July the 1st- at least if near an airbase like my city is. I imagine then the difference is the amount of hardware going down the street? That's a different thing and you know it Falling. This was a presidential spectacle just to show off. Nothing more. Oh I know it's different. What I was fishing for (and clearly failed) is having not seen it, I was wondering if it was lots and lots or just a handful of tanks.
I think a handful, but I didn't watch.
|
On July 06 2019 11:26 Falling wrote:
I imagine you'd normally have soldiers marching in your parades? We do up here on July the 1st- at least if near an airbase like my city is. I imagine then the difference is the amount of hardware going down the street?
Yes, you're correct in this. The tanks were a little over the top. Military plane flyovers are just common, there's one every year very close to where I live. Parades with military units, active and retired, are an American tradition on Independence Day. But so much is obvious, it's just people getting a little carried away with the criticism of the tanks.
|
On July 05 2019 15:20 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2019 09:04 IyMoon wrote:
Did anyone watch trumps speech? Was it any good? Big crowd? Yes it was good. Very good. You should watch it. Uplifting. Not full of the political jabs. If Biden were president and had delivered it, the praise in this forum would be effusive, for sure. Crowd was big, but it's a parade with tanks and fighter and bomber flyovers. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2019 14:32 ShambhalaWar wrote:
"Was it any good?"
Is that a real question? Some people here do ask questions to find answers. I can't believe the entertainment on this website comes free.
Uplifting is a word for it I guess. David Frum (same guy you quoted re: immigration policy) wrote a an excellent review of the speech in the Atlantic commenting that while the speech was good, it was also a speech that could have been given more or less verbatim by people like Julius Caesar, Kaiser Wilhelm, or Napoleon. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/trumps-july-fourth-speech-had-no-purpose/593401/
There was no serious attempt in Trump's speech to describe America as somehow different from any of the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history.
In some sense I find that refreshing, I always found the American narrative of America as exceptional or as embodying some general human principle of liberty or virtue rather grating. America as yet another in a long line of powerful, awe-inspiring empires is somehow much easier to swallow.
|
On July 07 2019 09:09 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 05 2019 15:20 Danglars wrote:On July 05 2019 09:04 IyMoon wrote:
Did anyone watch trumps speech? Was it any good? Big crowd? Yes it was good. Very good. You should watch it. Uplifting. Not full of the political jabs. If Biden were president and had delivered it, the praise in this forum would be effusive, for sure. Crowd was big, but it's a parade with tanks and fighter and bomber flyovers. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2019 14:32 ShambhalaWar wrote:
"Was it any good?"
Is that a real question? Some people here do ask questions to find answers. I can't believe the entertainment on this website comes free. Uplifting is a word for it I guess. David Frum (same guy you quoted re: immigration policy) wrote a an excellent review of the speech in the Atlantic commenting that while the speech was good, it was also a speech that could have been given more or less verbatim by people like Julius Caesar, Kaiser Wilhelm, or Napoleon. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/trumps-july-fourth-speech-had-no-purpose/593401/There was no serious attempt in Trump's speech to describe America as somehow different from any of the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history. In some sense I find that refreshing, I always found the American narrative of America as exceptional or as embodying some general human principle of liberty or virtue rather grating. America as yet another in a long line of powerful, awe-inspiring empires is somehow much easier to swallow.
He had some choice words to say about Trump's retelling of the Pacific War. He'd prefer more discussion of the just cause, than Trump's focus on our drive and lethal efficiency. Frum and others have historically shown an aversion to patriotism, unity, American exceptionalism, and prided "Democracy. Justice. Individuality. Peace." You can conclude that they'd prefer a Rubio Romney or McCain tailored speech more to their sensibilities, or maybe dispositions. Trump's really not courting that kind of audience with what they'd rather like to hear in speeches. On the flip side, Frum and others wear the criticism that they overvalue delicate speech and posturing, to the diminishing of America's actual capabilities and interests. The comparisons to literal conquerors and empire-expanding heroes in speech is too silly for me. He omits the less confirmatory elements, like Wilhelm's talk of empire and comparison to Huns, or Caesar's --well actual lack of preserved speeches. It's just a little rhetorical flourish to get people talking from Frum.
I don't give a lot of countenance to people suggesting that Trump should use a 4th of July Speech to differentiate itself from "the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history." You don't celebrate independence by catering to critics that want to hear America apologize for it's actions overseas and sate their conspiracy theories of America conquering and founding colonies. The critics will disbelieve Trump no matter what Trump says, indeed they'll delight in writing the stories about disbelief in Trump's sincerity. Hmm, satisfy the internationalist, globalist dovish crowd that will immediately reject it wholesale, or deal in inspiring oratory about American struggle and success from founding to today. What a tough choice!
I want to make a point drawing on recent history, and really only valid in that context. Obama, Trump's predecessor, gave speeches that Trump's voters called apologies/apology tours. There's a partisan divide, not everybody agrees that's the best characterization, but I think it's a fair criticism. Go to the world, and tell other countries how much we must atone for our past. The guy was lauded for it. As you put the emotion, I found it rather grating. We elect an American president, who goes overseas to bash America and tell everyone we must take a back seat in international diplomacy. We must give indulgences for past arrogance. I don't know if Trump and his speechwriters intend to draw contrast, but they did and do. Speaking about defending America's interests and America's past courage (yes, imperfectly and sometimes haltingly) is nothing to be ashamed about. And a celebration of America's independence from the UK is the right place to say it.
xDaunt's talked way more on this vein than me, but the other countries of the world do a great deal in their own personal and national self-interest, all the while spouting empty rhetoric about grand partnerships and the liberal world order. It's sort of a European conceit. Talk about one thing, do the other, and ridiculously defend the latter as being in service of the former. Maybe America's more plain, maybe we have a cultural anti-elitist default, but that style of double-dealing is hogwash. Perfumed shit. Crafty egotism. I don't think you will agree with my description of European supercilious ways any more than you will about American exceptionalism. But so things stand, in my opinion, for a great deal of the American right (excluding center-right figures like Frum), and for good reason too.
|
Today is a good day in America. Now let's hope he sings on bill Clinton and Donald trump.
User was warned for this post
|
On July 07 2019 10:08 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2019 09:09 KlaCkoN wrote:On July 05 2019 15:20 Danglars wrote:On July 05 2019 09:04 IyMoon wrote:
Did anyone watch trumps speech? Was it any good? Big crowd? Yes it was good. Very good. You should watch it. Uplifting. Not full of the political jabs. If Biden were president and had delivered it, the praise in this forum would be effusive, for sure. Crowd was big, but it's a parade with tanks and fighter and bomber flyovers. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2019 14:32 ShambhalaWar wrote:
"Was it any good?"
Is that a real question? Some people here do ask questions to find answers. I can't believe the entertainment on this website comes free. Uplifting is a word for it I guess. David Frum (same guy you quoted re: immigration policy) wrote a an excellent review of the speech in the Atlantic commenting that while the speech was good, it was also a speech that could have been given more or less verbatim by people like Julius Caesar, Kaiser Wilhelm, or Napoleon. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/trumps-july-fourth-speech-had-no-purpose/593401/There was no serious attempt in Trump's speech to describe America as somehow different from any of the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history. In some sense I find that refreshing, I always found the American narrative of America as exceptional or as embodying some general human principle of liberty or virtue rather grating. America as yet another in a long line of powerful, awe-inspiring empires is somehow much easier to swallow. He had some choice words to say about Trump's retelling of the Pacific War. He'd prefer more discussion of the just cause, than Trump's focus on our drive and lethal efficiency. Frum and others have historically shown an aversion to patriotism, unity, American exceptionalism, and prided "Democracy. Justice. Individuality. Peace." You can conclude that they'd prefer a Rubio Romney or McCain tailored speech more to their sensibilities, or maybe dispositions. Trump's really not courting that kind of audience with what they'd rather like to hear in speeches. On the flip side, Frum and others wear the criticism that they overvalue delicate speech and posturing, to the diminishing of America's actual capabilities and interests. The comparisons to literal conquerors and empire-expanding heroes in speech is too silly for me. He omits the less confirmatory elements, like Wilhelm's talk of empire and comparison to Huns, or Caesar's --well actual lack of preserved speeches. It's just a little rhetorical flourish to get people talking from Frum. I don't give a lot of countenance to people suggesting that Trump should use a 4th of July Speech to differentiate itself from "the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history." You don't celebrate independence by catering to critics that want to hear America apologize for it's actions overseas and sate their conspiracy theories of America conquering and founding colonies. The critics will disbelieve Trump no matter what Trump says, indeed they'll delight in writing the stories about disbelief in Trump's sincerity. Hmm, satisfy the internationalist, globalist dovish crowd that will immediately reject it wholesale, or deal in inspiring oratory about American struggle and success from founding to today. What a tough choice! I want to make a point drawing on recent history, and really only valid in that context. Obama, Trump's predecessor, gave speeches that Trump's voters called apologies/apology tours. There's a partisan divide, not everybody agrees that's the best characterization, but I think it's a fair criticism. Go to the world, and tell other countries how much we must atone for our past. The guy was lauded for it. As you put the emotion, I found it rather grating. We elect an American president, who goes overseas to bash America and tell everyone we must take a back seat in international diplomacy. We must give indulgences for past arrogance. I don't know if Trump and his speechwriters intend to draw contrast, but they did and do. Speaking about defending America's interests and America's past courage (yes, imperfectly and sometimes haltingly) is nothing to be ashamed about. And a celebration of America's independence from the UK is the right place to say it. xDaunt's talked way more on this vein than me, but the other countries of the world do a great deal in their own personal and national self-interest, all the while spouting empty rhetoric about grand partnerships and the liberal world order. It's sort of a European conceit. Talk about one thing, do the other, and ridiculously defend the latter as being in service of the former. Maybe America's more plain, maybe we have a cultural anti-elitist default, but that style of double-dealing is hogwash. Perfumed shit. Crafty egotism. I don't think you will agree with my description of European supercilious ways any more than you will about American exceptionalism. But so things stand, in my opinion, for a great deal of the American right (excluding center-right figures like Frum), and for good reason too.
It's slightly unclear to me if you think that the comparison of America to empires past is 1) a silly exaggeration, 2) something to be proud of, 3) a conspiracy theory, 4) an obvious fact that Europeans should get over.
I personally agree with 4, for the record.
|
On July 07 2019 11:37 KlaCkoN wrote:Show nested quote +On July 07 2019 10:08 Danglars wrote:On July 07 2019 09:09 KlaCkoN wrote:On July 05 2019 15:20 Danglars wrote:On July 05 2019 09:04 IyMoon wrote:
Did anyone watch trumps speech? Was it any good? Big crowd? Yes it was good. Very good. You should watch it. Uplifting. Not full of the political jabs. If Biden were president and had delivered it, the praise in this forum would be effusive, for sure. Crowd was big, but it's a parade with tanks and fighter and bomber flyovers. + Show Spoiler +On July 05 2019 14:32 ShambhalaWar wrote:
"Was it any good?"
Is that a real question? Some people here do ask questions to find answers. I can't believe the entertainment on this website comes free. Uplifting is a word for it I guess. David Frum (same guy you quoted re: immigration policy) wrote a an excellent review of the speech in the Atlantic commenting that while the speech was good, it was also a speech that could have been given more or less verbatim by people like Julius Caesar, Kaiser Wilhelm, or Napoleon. https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/trumps-july-fourth-speech-had-no-purpose/593401/There was no serious attempt in Trump's speech to describe America as somehow different from any of the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history. In some sense I find that refreshing, I always found the American narrative of America as exceptional or as embodying some general human principle of liberty or virtue rather grating. America as yet another in a long line of powerful, awe-inspiring empires is somehow much easier to swallow. He had some choice words to say about Trump's retelling of the Pacific War. He'd prefer more discussion of the just cause, than Trump's focus on our drive and lethal efficiency. Frum and others have historically shown an aversion to patriotism, unity, American exceptionalism, and prided "Democracy. Justice. Individuality. Peace." You can conclude that they'd prefer a Rubio Romney or McCain tailored speech more to their sensibilities, or maybe dispositions. Trump's really not courting that kind of audience with what they'd rather like to hear in speeches. On the flip side, Frum and others wear the criticism that they overvalue delicate speech and posturing, to the diminishing of America's actual capabilities and interests. The comparisons to literal conquerors and empire-expanding heroes in speech is too silly for me. He omits the less confirmatory elements, like Wilhelm's talk of empire and comparison to Huns, or Caesar's --well actual lack of preserved speeches. It's just a little rhetorical flourish to get people talking from Frum. I don't give a lot of countenance to people suggesting that Trump should use a 4th of July Speech to differentiate itself from "the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history." You don't celebrate independence by catering to critics that want to hear America apologize for it's actions overseas and sate their conspiracy theories of America conquering and founding colonies. The critics will disbelieve Trump no matter what Trump says, indeed they'll delight in writing the stories about disbelief in Trump's sincerity. Hmm, satisfy the internationalist, globalist dovish crowd that will immediately reject it wholesale, or deal in inspiring oratory about American struggle and success from founding to today. What a tough choice! I want to make a point drawing on recent history, and really only valid in that context. Obama, Trump's predecessor, gave speeches that Trump's voters called apologies/apology tours. There's a partisan divide, not everybody agrees that's the best characterization, but I think it's a fair criticism. Go to the world, and tell other countries how much we must atone for our past. The guy was lauded for it. As you put the emotion, I found it rather grating. We elect an American president, who goes overseas to bash America and tell everyone we must take a back seat in international diplomacy. We must give indulgences for past arrogance. I don't know if Trump and his speechwriters intend to draw contrast, but they did and do. Speaking about defending America's interests and America's past courage (yes, imperfectly and sometimes haltingly) is nothing to be ashamed about. And a celebration of America's independence from the UK is the right place to say it. xDaunt's talked way more on this vein than me, but the other countries of the world do a great deal in their own personal and national self-interest, all the while spouting empty rhetoric about grand partnerships and the liberal world order. It's sort of a European conceit. Talk about one thing, do the other, and ridiculously defend the latter as being in service of the former. Maybe America's more plain, maybe we have a cultural anti-elitist default, but that style of double-dealing is hogwash. Perfumed shit. Crafty egotism. I don't think you will agree with my description of European supercilious ways any more than you will about American exceptionalism. But so things stand, in my opinion, for a great deal of the American right (excluding center-right figures like Frum), and for good reason too. It's slightly unclear to me if you think that the comparison of America to empires past is 1) a silly exaggeration, 2) something to be proud of, 3) a conspiracy theory, 4) an obvious fact that Europeans should get over. I personally agree with 4, for the record.
I was talking about speechcraft, and think Trump’s rhetoric compared to the emperors and conquerers Frum talked about is silly and simply rhetorical flourish. Had he compared America to Attila the Hun, as one of Frum’s citations did, he might have a point. But refer to my post for that context. The rest you agreed with, or what LOL?
|
Epstein's relationship to Trump is so huge that I am fascinated to see how this turns out. Trump can't possibly defend Epstein if it has gotten this far. Trump must have had no idea.
This could end up being absolutely huge, taking down bill Clinton for example. Please for the love of god tell me bill ends up going down from this
|
United States15275 Posts
Shows how much Frum actually knows about history.
No one knows the content of Julius Caesar's speeches. Sadly most records of his oration perished before modern historians could preserve it. Comparing Trump's powers of rhetoric to Napoleon practically invites disgrace to the latter. His impromptu speeches after the battle of Lodi and his abdication didn't need the clandestine work of speechwriters to outshine anything Donald has ever produced. As for Wilhelm, neither the unifier of Germany nor the last official emperor were ever anything but courteous and sophisticated. Wilhelm II's worst gaffs sound positively regal compared to what modern-day political figures spout.
Additionally he mentions Sennacherib, or rather he mentions the Biblical figure from the iconic poem by Lord Byron. Question the real historical figure and you would receive quite the mouthful to say about renovating Nineveh. He reserved all the boasting for his murals.
On July 07 2019 09:09 KlaCkoN wrote:
There was no serious attempt in Trump's speech to describe America as somehow different from any of the many powerful, expansionist, militaristic empires that have attempted to rule the world throughout history.
In some sense I find that refreshing, I always found the American narrative of America as exceptional or as embodying some general human principle of liberty or virtue rather grating. America as yet another in a long line of powerful, awe-inspiring empires is somehow much easier to swallow.
As much as I like to reserve venomous barbs to point out how antithetical Trump is to the ideal model of a U.S. president, Frum is wildly exaggerating a point he mistakenly believes reveals the president's cluelessness.
Simply put, there's no point in pondering "Were these wars right or just? Why were they fought? What were their outcomes?" for any of the wars Trump invoked. There's no moral ambiguity in the general theater of operations during WW2 or hunting down Osama bin Laden (U.S. presence in the Middle East since the Gulf War is an entirely different matter, hence why he doesn't bring it up). In this case Trump is using common sense while Frum is twisting himself into pretzels with pointless 4-D linguistic analysis stemming from personal distaste.
On July 07 2019 10:08 Danglars wrote:
I want to make a point drawing on recent history, and really only valid in that context. Obama, Trump's predecessor, gave speeches that Trump's voters called apologies/apology tours. There's a partisan divide, not everybody agrees that's the best characterization, but I think it's a fair criticism. Go to the world, and tell other countries how much we must atone for our past. The guy was lauded for it. As you put the emotion, I found it rather grating. We elect an American president, who goes overseas to bash America and tell everyone we must take a back seat in international diplomacy. We must give indulgences for past arrogance. I don't know if Trump and his speechwriters intend to draw contrast, but they did and do. Speaking about defending America's interests and America's past courage (yes, imperfectly and sometimes haltingly) is nothing to be ashamed about. And a celebration of America's independence from the UK is the right place to say it.
On the hypocrisy front Obama is responsible for more international deaths and warmongering than Trump, the supposed successor to Adolf Hitler and handler of yellow cake, can claim to date. The difference was he understood how to charm us in a manner that belied his actions. Trump lacks the proper debonair demeanor and credentials that can bait the aspiring white-collar bourgeoisie into worshiping the ground he walks on.
|
|
|
On July 07 2019 13:04 Mohdoo wrote:
Epstein's relationship to Trump is so huge that I am fascinated to see how this turns out. Trump can't possibly defend Epstein if it has gotten this far. Trump must have had no idea.
This could end up being absolutely huge, taking down bill Clinton for example. Please for the love of god tell me bill ends up going down from this
Why can’t he pardon him after the election?
|
|
|
Norway28685 Posts
Trump demands loyalty but he isn't actually loyal. Him being an old friend of Epstein isn't gonna matter with what he's being charged with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
