• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The Official Paracast Political Thread! — Part Three

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
To be fair Both candidates were compared to Hitler in this debate, and both were mocked sometimes humorously ,Sometimes not.
Certainly newspaper cartoonists had a field day with both candidates down here. As they do with our own political figures.
Political satire has long been a part of the game.

Political satire is a significant part of satire that specializes in gaining entertainment from politics; it has also been used with subversive intent where political speech and dissent are forbidden by a regime, as a method of advancing political arguments where such arguments are expressly forbidden.

Political satire is usually distinguished from political protest or political dissent, as it does not necessarily carry an agenda nor seek to influence the political process. While occasionally it may, it more commonly aims simply to provide entertainment. By its very nature, it rarely offers a constructive view in itself; when it is used as part of protest or dissent, it tends to simply establish the error of matters rather than provide solutions.
Political satire - Wikipedia
 
2016 US Presidential ElectionPopular Vote (still being counted) -

Current numbers, as of 12/7/16

Hillary Clinton (D) 65,746,544 48.2%
Donald Trump (R) 62,904,682 46.2%

Difference is 2,841,862 - 2.8 million, 2%.
 
The right has its own version of political correctness. It’s just as stifling.
Conservatives use “patriotic correctness” to regulate speech, behavior and acceptable opinions.
LINK: The right has its own version of political correctness. It’s just as stifling.
TEXT: "[...] conservatives have their own, nationalist version of PC, their own set of rules regulating speech, behavior and acceptable opinions. I call it 'patriotic correctness.' It’s a full-throated, un-nuanced, uncompromising defense of American nationalism, history and cherry-picked ideals. Central to its thesis is the belief that nothing in America can’t be fixed by more patriotism enforced by public shaming, boycotts and policies to cut out foreign and non-American influences.

"Insufficient displays of patriotism among the patriotically correct can result in exclusion from public life and ruined careers. It also restricts honest criticism of failed public policies, diverting blame for things like the war in Iraq to those Americans who didn’t support the war effort enough."​
 
This is what happens when Donald Trump attacks a private citizen on Twitter
LINK: This is what happens when Donald Trump attacks a private citizen on Twitter
TEXT: "About a year ago, 18-year-old college student Lauren Batchelder stood up at a political forum in New Hampshire and told Donald Trump that she didn’t think he was 'a friend to women.'

'The next morning, Trump fired back on Twitter — calling Batchelder an 'arrogant young woman' and accusing her of being a 'plant' from a rival campaign. Her phone began ringing with callers leaving threatening messages that were often sexual in nature. Her Facebook and email inboxes filled with similar messages. As her addresses circulated on social media and her photo flashed on the news, she fled home to hide. 'I didn’t really know what anyone was going to do,' said Batchelder, now 19, who has never discussed her experience with a reporter until now. 'He was only going to tweet about it and that was it, but I didn’t really know what his supporters were going to do, and that to me was the scariest part.' "​
 
Another example of someone who has voiced criticism of Trump suffering attacks from Trump supporters. :mad:

Robert Reich: Trump is already abusing his power and acting like a two-bit dictator
LINK: http://www.rawstory.com/2016/12/rob...his-power-and-acting-like-a-two-bit-dictator/
TEXT: "On the evening of December 7, minutes after a local Indiana union leader, Chuck Jones, criticized Trump on CNN for falsely promising to keep Carrier jobs in the U.S., Trump tweeted, 'Chuck Jones, who is President of United Steelworkers 1999, has done a terrible job representing workers. No wonder companies flee country!'

"Since that tweet went out, Chuck Jones says 'I’m getting threats and everything else from some of his supporters.' ”​
 
Moore didn’t just predict Trump would win the election, he nailed the four states that propelled Trump to victory: Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin.

He tells the truth - 54% of the US population did not want Trump as president (if you combine the votes for Hillary, Stein and Johnson). He makes a second prediction: he thinks the electoral college will vote against Trump (though the video cuts off before he states that idea).

Michael Moore Explains How He Predicted Trump's Election
TEXT: "Published on Dec 8, 2016: Michael Moore hit the negative lotto when correctly predicted how and why Donald Trump would win the presidency."

P.S. You can see the entire interview within the whole show.
 
Last edited:
Interesting prediction........

Nobel Winner Who Predicted Fall Of Soviet Union Just Made A Prediction About Trump
LINK: Nobel Winner Who Predicted Fall Of Soviet Union Just Made A Prediction About Trump
TEXT: "In 1980, a Norwegian sociologist published a book that predicted the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics would crater to internal contradictions and tension in a matter of 10 years. As is now commonly known history, the USSR did collapse, in 1989, and Johan Galtung was propelled into academic stardom.

"Galtung, now faculty at the University of Hawaii, also made waves in 2009 when he published a book predicting a similar fate for the United States by 2025. His 15 potentially catastrophic points of contraction now eerily align with social and cultural conflicts surrounding Donald Trump’s election to the presidency. The professor told Motherboard earlier this week that Trump fits the bill of what his book refers to as the 'strong leader', and predicted a major decline in US power over the next ten years, possibly including a Soviet-style collapse.

'The collapse has two faces,' Galtung told the website. 'Other countries refuse to be good allies: and the USA has to do the killing themselves, by bombing from high altitudes, drones steered by computer from an office, Special Forces killing all over the place. Both are happening today, except for Northern Europe, which supports these wars, for now. That will probably not continue beyond 2020, so I stand by that deadline.'
​
"Here are a few examples of how Galtung’s 2009 contradictions, as outlined in Motherboard, are playing out since the election. This isn’t intended to be an exercise in sociology, but rather a current, fresh look at some of the many contradictions as they have emerged over the last few months.

"Economic contradictions
Trump promises to save middle-class jobs from outsourcing, then uses his vice president to arrange tax incentives for a company (Carrier) that will lay off 800 people anyway.​

Military contradictions

Political contradictions
Trump lambastes established political leaders, including Mitt Romney and President Barack Obama, during his campaign, then turns to them for help filling his cabinet.​

Cultural contradictions
Trump promises to build a wall and deport millions of illegal immigrants, then tells Time magazine, in an interview about young immigrants currently somewhat protected under President Obama’s executive action, that he is going to 'to work something out that’s going to make (them) happy and proud.'​

Social contradictions
Trump campaigns and is elected on the back of largely middle-class Americans without college degrees, then appoints as labor secretary a fast food executive who has actively opposed improvements to minimum wage and labor laws that hover below 1968 levels.​

(For the more sociologically accurate explanation of these points, read Galtung’s interview.)

"The silver lining in this unmitigated disaster? Once the U.S. Empire falls, Galtung says, perhaps the U.S. Republic will stand a chance at achieving its promises."


US Power Will Decline Under Trump, Says Futurist Who Predicted Soviet Collapse
LINK: US Power Will Decline Under Trump, Says Futurist Who Predicted Soviet Collapse
 
Last edited:
An excellent post summing up Trump. The post is in reply to the idea being floated that Hillary could release her electoral delegates to vote for a Republican other than Trump: "The problem is that Trump is personally unfit for the office, but many of his actions will be indistinguishable from those any Republican president would take.

"It's the overwhelming position in the party that
- climate change is a fiction,
- that unions should be destroyed,
- that reproductive rights are for highly affluent white women only,
- that there's no problem with official violence against minorities,
- that taxes should be slashed for the rich and transferred to the rest of us,
- that Social Security and Medicare need to be undermined,
- and on and on.

"He has already dropped every position he claimed to have that was not orthodox Republican. My fear is that any 'compromise' would undercut the resistance that is the only thing which holds any hope of interfering with their agenda."
 
Last edited:
The CIA is now saying they have evidence that the Russian government directly meddled in he election by targeting Hillary's campaign.

And they're doing it to Germany right now, too.

Let me ask you Trump supporters: if it is definitely shown, will it matter to you that a foreign state helped determine your president because he is more friendly to their interests?

Given that the US has been doing this in South America and the Middle East for decades, perhaps turnabout is fair play?

CIA says Russia intervened to help Trump win White House, U.S. official says
 
marduk said:
The CIA is now saying they have evidence that the Russian government directly meddled in he election by targeting Hillary's campaign.

And they're doing it to Germany right now, too.
Click to expand...
Scary. But then, why not? From Russia's perspective, makes sense. In fact, this was what all the hullabaloo was about in the 1950's with the 'Red Scare' - fear that Communism and Russia would be influencing the US. Now we have proof it is happening, but certain people seem to be welcoming it with open arms. Curious how that is being rationalized as 'sticking it to the system'.
marduk said:
Let me ask you Trump supporters: if it is definitely shown, will it matter to you that a foreign state helped determine your president because he is more friendly to their interests?
Click to expand...
They will likely now be pro-Russian, after decades of making a big deal about being 'Red' - or the stigma of being "Socialist'.
marduk said:
Given that the US has been doing this in South America and the Middle East for decades, perhaps turnabout is fair play?
Click to expand...
Bingo! Sadly - now we know how it feels. :(
 
DaveM said:
Kill the politics and stick to the real business.
Click to expand...
One thread devoted to politics should not be a 'threat'. Curious. Seems that we are talking about marching to the drum-beat of one prescribed political pov - or get out of Dodge City asap. Experienced the same sort of attitude in the Climate Change threads. Only one pov could be tolerated by certain posters - Denial - any other faced opposition by way of hectoring and personal attack to the point of shutting down threads. (Numerous threads - one after the other over the course of years).

The intolerance for allowing opposing pov's to be allowed expression is a consistent attribute in these two instances. Basically it's a 'think like I do - capitualte to my way of seeing things - or stay silent'. One finds this intractibility in religious contexts where dogma is espoused outward - but to have it be around science and politccs is a new one for me.
 
This could get very nasty very fast.

"On top of all the above, leaders of one of our two political parties—I’ll let you hazard a guess as to which one—argued against letting the American public know about all this before the election, reportedly saying it would be too partisan. That’s not hardball politics. That’s a hair’s breath away from treason."

World War III: Democrats and America vs. Trump and Russia
 
Gene, this is for you. What I was clumsily trying to say about manufacturing:

"So, the overall effect would be something like this: some manufacturing that is currently done in Mexico might come back to the U.S. But some manufacturing jobs that are currently in the U.S. would be lost as a result of declining American exports, leading to lower sales and reduced demand. In addition, making cars will become more expensive because the parts will be more expensive, leading to higher prices for American consumers, which will reduce demand (more expensive cars means more people will stick with the car they have rather than buy a new one) which will lead to more job losses in the U.S.

The reality is that the decline in manufacturing jobs in the U.S. over the last 40–50 years has many, many causes. NAFTA is only a small part of that. Automation is responsible for a lot of it; the greater global competitiveness (compared to the 1950s and 1960s, when American manufacturing was booming) of goods manufactured in other countries like Japan and Germany is another; reduced transportation costs making imports cheaper even in the absence of trade agreements are another; trade agreements are also part of the picture, but just a part."

In opinion: Will repealing NAFTA bring back jobs?

The only thing different is that I'm saying what many say behind closed doors: the perceived quality of American goods is also low on top of being more expensive.
 
marduk said:
This could get very nasty very fast.

"On top of all the above, leaders of one of our two political parties—I’ll let you hazard a guess as to which one—argued against letting the American public know about all this before the election, reportedly saying it would be too partisan. That’s not hardball politics. That’s a hair’s breath away from treason."

World War III: Democrats and America vs. Trump and Russia
Click to expand...
Reminds me of Lyndon Johnson making a similar decision in the late 60's during the 1968 election when he knew that Nixon was committing treason by contacting the North Vietnamese to make a deal before the election - I think I have that right. Johnson was not willing to let the news be leaked to the press - was he talking to Senator Dirkson on the phone? - expressing the opinion that it would undermine public confidence. Sorry if I am getting this mangled but I think I have the general jist - basically a kind of paternalism - "We/I know best" - to keep the masses in line.

But it's more - far more than Russia. BTW this documentary that is being discussed (in the video below) will be shown on the RT Network tonight (Saturday 12/10/16) - Hartmann gives the times. If you have access to RT might be worth a look. What seems patently clear to me is that Trump is far more a danger to world peace than Hillary ever was. She was status quo and checks and balances. Trump is very much the reverse. I am endlessly reminded of the sentence Dorothy Parker used when she answered the telephone: "What fresh hell is this?" Every day is a phone call from Trump - usually via Twitter - and the rejoinder is apt.

The Coming War On China
TEXT: "Published on Dec 9, 2016: Thom talks with author and filmmaker John Pilger about his new documentary “The Coming War On China” and the military escalation that could lead World War III."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top