Amerika, zemlja velika

[hazard]

Mislim ok, da ne grešim dušu, pročitao sam ceo članak izgleda da se fenomen javlja i u deolovima zemlje koji potpuno ,,beli"

[Weenie Pooh]

Naravno, malograđanski middle class prezir za white trash ne zna za granice jer bi ovi, zamisli, da im se obezbedi da imaju da jedu i da se leče. To se često previše lako svrsta pod rasna pitanja, iako je mnogo šire.

[WTF]

Mislim ok, da ne grešim dušu, pročitao sam ceo članak izgleda da se fenomen javlja i u deolovima zemlje koji potpuno ,,beli"

 

Pa dobro, ne moras da bas zivis medju drugim rasama/religijama/nacionalnostima da bi ih mrzeo ili podlegao propagandi da su oni ti koji su krivi za tvoje sopstvene probleme.

 

Naravno, malograđanski middle class prezir za white trash ne zna za granice jer bi ovi, zamisli, da im se obezbedi da imaju da jedu i da se leče. To se često previše lako svrsta pod rasna pitanja, iako je mnogo šire.

Upravo je taj white trash taj koji ne moze ill ne zeli da vidi da je problem mnogo veci od rasnog, pa sve svodi na rasna pitanja, naravno nevoljno koristeci kodirani govor i pizdeci usput sto to moraju tako da govore.  Zato su toliko zavoleli Trumpa koji ce da im omoguce da govore "onako kako u stvari jeste", i da zajebu tu odvratnu politicku korektnost, sto je izmislio taj malogradjanski middle class.  Mislim, pravda za white trash, oni bi jedini da u slast jedu mrvice sa job creators stola, a ne da ih dele sa nekim tamo ciji su preci dovedeni u 1 Muricu u nekim jebenim lancima, jel tako?

Edited August 13, 2016 by WTF

[Weenie Pooh]

Dobro sad, nema potrebe da otkrivamo rupu na saksiji o class warfare strategijama i zaključujemo da je alle gegen alle idealna atmosfera u društvu ako je cilj da se ne remeti status quo. To što neka priučena medicinska sestra glasa za Santoruma u nadi da će on sprečiti da se ljudi idu na dijalizu za džabe i tako razaraju državu, to je savršen primer zablentavljenosti pučanstva.

[Roger Sanchez]

Long read: kako smo nasmrt izmuzli glupe teabaggere™ zbog čega mi je sad malo krivo:

A small group of supposedly conservative lawyers and consultants saw something different: dollar signs. The PACs found anger at the Republican Party sells very well. The campaigns they ran would be headlined “Boot John Boehner," or “Drop a Truth Bomb on Kevin McCarthy.” And after Boehner was in fact booted and McCarthy bombed in his bid to succeed him, it was naturally time to “Fire Paul Ryan." The selling is always urgent: “Stop what you’re doing” “This can’t wait.” One active solicitor is the Tea Party Leadership Fund, which received $6.7 million from 2013 to mid-2015, overwhelmingly from small donors. A typical solicitation from the TPLF read: “Your immediate contribution could be the most important financial investment you will make to help return America to greatness.” But, according to an investigation by POLITICO, 87 percent of that “investment” went to overhead; only $910,000 of the $6.7 million raised was used to support political candidates. If the prospect signs a “petition,” typically a solicitation of his or her personal information is recorded and a new screen immediately appears asking for money. Vendors pass the information around in “list swaps” and “revenue shares” ad infinitum
...
For 18 months ending in 2013, I worked for one of these consultants, Dan Backer, who has served as treasurer for dozens of PACs, many now defunct, through his law and consulting firm. I thus benefited from the Tea Party’s fleecing.
The PACs seem to operate through a familiar model. It works something like this: Prospects whose name appear on a vendor’s list get a phone call, email or glossy mailer from a group they’ve likely never heard of asking them for money. Conservative pundit and Redstate.com Editor-in-Chief Erick Erickson described one such encounter. A woman called and asked if she could play a taped message touting efforts to help Senators Rand Paul and Ted Cruz fight for conservative governance. When the recording stopped an older man (the woman was gone) offered Erickson the chance to join “the Tea Party.” He wouldn’t say who paid him, just “the Tea Party.” Membership was even half price. For just $100 he was in! Erickson declined.
Erickson’s call came from InfoCision or a similar vendor hired by PACs to “prospect” for new donors. Often PAC creators have financial interests in the vendors—in fact, sometimes they are the vendors, too—which makes keeping money in house easier, and harder to track. PAC names include “Tea Party,” “Patriots,” “Freedom,” or some other emotive term to assure benevolence. And names and images of political figures the prospects admire (or detest), usually accompany the solicitation, giving the illusion of imprimatur. Those people are almost never actually involved and little money ends up supporting candidates.

..

POLITICO last year reviewed the activity of 33 conservative PACs for the 2014 cycle. Combined, they raked in $43 million dollars, according to the POLITICO report. Of that, $39.5 million went to overhead including $6 million to entities owned by PAC operators; candidates got $3 million. Another report analyzed 17 conservative PACs from the 2014 midterm. It came up with different numbers than POLITICO, finding that the bottom 10 PACs in terms of the ratio of spending to actual candidate support received $54,318,498 and spent only $3,621,896 supporting candidates. And who is Constitutional Rights’ treasurer? My old boss Dan Backer. Backer also serves as treasurer to TPLF, and many others. An analysis found 10 conservative PACs whose treasurer was Scott MacKenzie spent 92 percent of the $17.5 million they raised on operating expenses, and less than 1 percent on candidate support.

...

The PACs keep cash flowing by trolling the news for supposed apostasy. The government botches the rescue of employees in a foreign embassy? “Stand with us for Benghazi!” A bunch of kids are murdered in Connecticut? “Help us defend your Second Amendment rights!” “Sign our petition!”

Another favorite tactic is the “Draft Committee.” Pick a popular figure then start a committee to “draft” him or her to run for office. TPLF “drafted” Sarah Palin for Senate in Alaska and Backer “drafted” Newt Gingrich for Senate in Virginia. After I left his firm, Backer “drafted” new Texas resident Allen West for Senate in Florida. None of these candidates were remotely interested or associated with the effort, and in fact could not be by law. But there were signatures to collect and donations to request. (As a litigator, I rarely participated in the conduct described here. I nonetheless knew these schemes paid most of my salary.)

The “draftees” or their campaigns often send cease-and-desist letters, as Gingrich and Palin did. This cycle, Backer and MacKenzie have kept Trump’s lawyers busy. Despite Trump’s constant protests about “corrupt” super PACs, MacKenzie started “Patriots for Trump” and Backer founded “TrumPAC.” MacKenzie shuttered Patriots when the Trump campaign complained, although the Facebook page remains active. The campaign persuaded Backer to change TrumPAC’s name to “Great America PAC.” But the PAC begged off requests to shutter and “refund any funds raised” based on Trump’s candidacy. Jesse Benton, Great America’s chief strategist and formerly a Ron Paul operative, explained the PAC would remain active because Trump would need “a robust and effective finance organization … after he secured the nomination.” By law, the campaign can have no say in how this “finance organization” spends its money, though its website still prominently features the candidate and his trademark slogan. It pledged to raise $20 million dollars before the Republican convention.

 

[3opge]

A bunch of kids are murdered in Connecticut? “Help us defend your Second Amendment rights!” “Sign our petition!”

 

so fuckin true.

[Roger Sanchez]

Texas might be in for some blues in the future...

 

[Anduril]

Moze biti ali ne treba zaboraviti da i nekada mladi liberali cesto postaju konzerve pod stare dane...

[boshoku]

autobiografija? s nestrpljenjem očekujem (oksford pres?)

[bigvlada]

The US is promoting war crimes in Yemen

Trevor Timm

The humanitarian disaster there is, by some measures, greater than that in Syria. Why is Obama continuing to enable the Saudi bombing campaign?

Saudi Arabia resumed its appalling war in Yemen last week and has alreadykilled dozens more civilians, destroyed a school full of children and leveleda hospital full of sick and injured people. The campaign of indiscriminate killing – though let’s call it what it is: a war crime – has now been going on for almost a year and a half. And the United States bears a large part of the responsibility.

The Guardian view on Yemen: stop arms sales to Saudi Arabia

Editorial: Coalition air strikes resumed when peace talks stalled – and Britain is complicit in the civilian deaths that result

 

Read more

This US-backed war is not just a case of the Obama administration sitting idly by while its close ally goes on a destructive spree of historic proportions. The government is actively selling the Saudis billions of dollars of weaponry. They’re re-supplying planes engaged in the bombing runs and providing “intelligence” for the targets that Saudi Arabia is hitting.

Put simply, the US is quite literally funding a humanitarian catastrophe that, by some measures, is larger than the crisis in Syria. As the New York Times editorial board wrote this week: “Experts say the coalition would be grounded if Washington withheld its support.” Yet all we’ve heard is crickets.

High-ranking Obama administration officials are hardly ever asked about the crisis. Cable television news has almost universally ignored it. Both the Clinton and Trump presidential campaigns have been totally silent on this issue despite their constant arguing over who would be better at “stopping terrorism”. Beyond the grotesque killing of civilians, it’s clear at this point that the Saudis’ bombing campaign has also boosted al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (Aqap) to a level which Reuters described as “stronger and richer” than anytime in its 20-year history.

Jake Tapper commendably broke the television news blackout about Yemen on his CNN show on Wednesday. Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, one of the very few elected representatives talking about the crisis, told Tapper that “it’s wild to me” that the Congress isn’t debating the “unauthorized” war in Yemen. The Saudis “could not do it without the United States”, he said. “We have made the decision to go to war in Yemen” – against Saudi Arabia’s enemies, not ours – without any debate.

“If you talk to Yemenis, they will tell you that inside Yemen this is not perceived to be a Saudi bombing campaign, this is a US bombing campaign,” Murphy continued. “What’s happening is we are helping to radicalize the the Yemeni population against the United States.” This statement was also backed up by longtime Yemen reporter Iona Craig this week, who emphasized to NPR that Yemenis blame the US for the carnage just as much as the Saudis.

The fact that the Obama administration has allowed the Saudis to continue committing war crimes should be a full-fledged scandal. Officials should be resigning over this and shouting from the rooftops. Instead, for months, we’ve heard almost nothing from the administration beyond a couple boilerplate, lukewarm expressions of “concern” as the death toll has mounted over a year and a half. Finally, after prodding from reporters last week, the US state department condemned the bombing of a Doctors Without Borders (AKA Médecins sans Frontières) hospital that killed at least 15 people. But then, the state department spokesman refused to say whether the US would stop supplying the Saudis with the weapons they are using.

At the same time, the US military can’t even articulate why our government is helping at all. As Micah Zenko pointed out last year, Gen Lloyd Austin, commander of US Central Command, admitted in March 2015: “I don’t currently know the specific goals and objectives of the Saudi campaign, and I would have to know that to be able to assess the likelihood of success.” Yet that hasn’t stopped the military from helping the Saudis kill thousands of civilians since.

In Washington, pundit after pundit has spent years now writing ad nauseam about how the Obama administration should be bombing Syria more to stop the humanitarian crisis there, despite the fact no one can explain exactly how more bombs will curtail, rather than exacerbate, the situation. Unlike in Syria, as the excellent foreign policy analyst Daniel Larison articulated last week, the US has the ability to step in and stop the disaster unfolding Yemen right now. Yet most of those same pundits remain disturbingly silent on the issue.

Will the Obama administration officials ever act at this point? Given US officials think they need to placate Saudi Arabia after the Iran nuclear deal, it seems unlikely they have the spine. But I hope they understand: the White House’s continued facilitation of this awful crime against the people of Yemen will stain Obama’s legacy long after he leaves office.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/18/us-promoting-war-crimes-yemen-saudi-bombing-obama

[Meazza]

Ali kako im uspeva uz sav taj pritisak demokratske javnosti???

[Pečorin]

2 reci- legalisticka tradicija.

[Meazza]

Makar kad bi se izvinili pa covek i da proguta nekako, ali ovako....

[Eraserhead]

Ali kako im uspeva uz sav taj pritisak demokratske javnosti???

 

 

Ja bi ocekivao da ti lepo kazes da i Rusi rade isto ili bar da kazes da su odgovorni oni koji su zapoceli rat i izvrsili nasilnu promenu vlasti.

 

Nego, korak mali ali u dobrom smeru:

 

The US military has slashed the number of intelligence advisers directly supporting the Saudi-led coalition's air war in Yemen, the US Navy said on Saturday, following concerns over civilian casualties.

 

Dobro su se setili.

[iDemo]

 

 

Just another example of 99% of us having to jump through hoops for the 1% who are offended.

 

 

 

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/mom-responds-pledge-allegiance-waiver