LOL - I read their posts. If they come up with anything substantial, or even interesting, I'll respond.

That's actually easy to understand bro. China is investing heavily in the developing world. These countries are counting on China to raise them up. That's all that really is. But it doesn't mean China is a nation of angels either. Beijing has a horrible human rights record.

I dunno man... it just gets a little old after a while. Maybe I need to take a break. It's beautiful outside today and I only have a few more weeks before I get involved in my next project.

I will say one thing though... The idea that Trump is not my leader has nothing to do with my being a citizen or not. The president is a public servant and the public includes residential aliens. As a citizen I can vote, that's the difference, but even that doesn't make Trump my designated leader.

Yeah, like how he promised Mexico will pay for his idiot wall? Or how the pandemic will wash away by April? Or how he promised a healthcare replacement for Obamacare? Or for that matter, how he promised to kill Obamacare?

You keep telling yourself what a fantastic job he's doing and we'll just kick back and laugh.

BTW... It's by definition that a non-politician is someone who doesn't know how to run a government, just like a non-doctor is someone who doesn't have a doctorate in medicine. This brainless notion that a businessman with no political experience can handle the government makes as much sense as telling the hospital that you want the janitor to operate on your wife instead of a doctor.

A businessman can be anything from a CEO to a dog-walker, a babysitter, or even a drug dealer. Trump falls into the category of a celebrity investor, much like the Kardashians or any of those rappers that have a fashion line on the market. They get money and they pay for experts to guide them into buying their way into business. Trump got his money from daddy.

And that's all Trump ever did. He has NEVER invented anything nor has he EVER built a successful business from the ground up. His most successful enterprises have been the ones that only see his money not his management. In fact, the more involved he got in his businesses investments, the worse they did.

He's the worst businessman in history and quite possibly mentally retarded. The only reason why he is still going after he squandered the fortune his father gave him is because he was lucky enough to where some of his investments paid off AND because he keeps borrowing more money.

The public recently found out that all he paid in income taxes over the last few years is $750 and that's only because he is writing off his massive business losses. He has over 100 business-related lawsuits that are ready to come after him as soon as he gets kicked out of office and we also found out that he owes millions to foreign banks.

But... you like him. So I guess you're going to continue parroting the same lies that we all hear from right-wing media, since that's the only thing Trump's got.

Eagle... sometimes you can be a jerk.

Just because I migrated here with my parents when I was 2 years old, doesn't mean I'm not a citizen.

As I've probably told you before, the U.S. government worked with the Royal Air Force to rush my father's citizenship because he was an aerospace engineer and the defense contractor that recruited him from England needed him to have security clearance. On the other hand, I had to wait until I was 18 to be naturalized (as that is the law). I registered Republican and voted for Reagan. By 1984 I was registering independent and today I am entirely unaffiliated, but I am a citizen as I had stated in my original post.

Are you telling me you have never heard of democratic socialism?


According to right-wing propaganda. (BTW, socialism isn't a proper noun so you don't have to capitalize it)

But in reality, the most powerful and wealthy... Democrats (assuming that's what you mean by "your rich and powerful up elite") are free-market capitalists. In fact, the term for free-market capitalism, as applied to the world in the late 20th century, is neoliberalism.

(BTW, socialism isn't a proper noun so you don't have to capitalize it)

It cracks me up that in one breath you folks call socialism a system where everyone gets the same thing and in the next breath you say it's touted by the rich and powerful. Do you ever notice the irony in your BS?

The socialists that are indeed rising on the left, such as Bernie Sanders and AOC are pushing for something called democratic socialism and even then they are not asking for a complete turnover. Heck the largest and really, the ONLY significant socialist organization in America is the DSA, which stands for Democratic Socialists of America.


Aside from the fact that government bailouts have NOTHING to do with socialism, the government has been doing this for decades, even under Republican control. For instance, socialists were not the ones who suggested the government subsidize the coal industry or even agriculture.


Wow... OK - so you don't have the slightest clue what socialism is. I suggest you do some research. I will point something out though... privatization is actually the polar opposite to socialism. In socialism, the government controls the means and methods requiring that assets be nationalized, in democratic socialism that government itself is controlled by a democracy.

Privatization is where the means and methods are controlled by private interests based on free-market capitalism and yes, sometimes that results hostile takeovers, firing of workers and stealing of assets.


Trump's Excellent Adventure - LOL... That is such an appropriate description.

As for my blaming... I'm not a loyalist, I'm a realist. I blame Democrats for things too but in Trump's Excellent Adventure I am finding that Trump supporters blame Democrats for EVERYTHING and that often leads to me to point out the errors in the accusations.

Well, stepping on toes for the sake of your own interest could be a good reason for losing leadership status.

But to respond to your argument, I think what you folks fail to see is that we were never the "Sugar Daddy" as someone else recently suggested.

From the northern carpetbaggers that rebuilt the South following the Civil War to the Marshall Plan following WW2, to the neo-carpetbaggers that got all the contracts to rebuild Iraq, our "generosity" has always been motivated by what we get out of it.

Europe doesn't spend the billions of dollars that we do on defense because they know they don't need it. They live right next door to Russia and yet are not frightened into giving all their money to the military for protection like we are. Perhaps it's because they are more experienced with fighting wars, but they are apparently confident that if anything happens they can mobilize and expand as needed.

The reason why we paid so much for "their protection" is because we support a war industry that wants to sell weapons. Cha-Ching!!!

When the Europeans said no thanks, we have better things to spend our money on like healthcare and education, the U.S. said... "OK, how about WE pay for you?" After all, the U.S. government has the largest tax-base in the world to fund the sales, all they need is an excuse. It didn't matter if the Europeans paid or if the American taxpayers paid. So the Europeans were like... "Free defense systems? OK."

I mean why not, right?

Trump is trying to score brownie points with his base by insisting that he will make the Europeans pay instead of the American tax-payers. But if the American taxpayers were as smart as the Europeans they would simply refuse to pour half their taxes into the military-industrial complex and the whole problem would stop. But then how would the weapons industry profit?

In this case, that is hardly a defense. The fact that Trump has COVID is a tribute to his carelessness. Compared to Biden who managed to stay healthy by making smarter choices.

That's a fair question and I think Canuckus provided a pretty good answer. But you know me; I go into depth and you *did* ask why... So you may not like my opinion but I am providing some examples that I think explains the argument in more detail.

In economic terms, we are still the largest consumer market in the world, so we certainly say we lead the world in buying things, but that's about it. We've been falling behind in production since the 80's. Trump supposedly tried to revive manufacturing and there was indeed a rise in jobs during Trump's first two years when the economy was still benefiting from the momentum created under Obama. But in 2019, the first year affected by Trump's economic polices (if that's what you want to call a rash of tariff taxes and a tax cut for the wealthy) the growth rate actually started to decline and in January of this year, BEFORE the pandemic hit, we saw manufacturing take a dive.

Trump fans will point out the isolated examples of jobs created here and there through Trump's "deals" with specific companies. But these "stunts" have served more as symbolic references for bragging than an overall indication of revival... The realists aren't fooled. In the big picture, there was a net loss of jobs under Trump, and the world knows it.

In diplomatic terms, we did alright until Trump came and made it crystal clear to the world that we were not going to honor our promises. There is no better way to concede your leadership than to demonstrate the worthlessness of your promises.

In terms of leading by example, the world is very aware that the U.S. has the lowest rated school systems, the worst (AND most expensive) healthcare systems, the highest incarceration rates (we pay more for prisons than we do for schools) and the most exploited citizens in the developed world. We also have one of the most dysfunctional democracies. If that isn't enough to look elsewhere for inspiration there is also the fact that Trump supporters are giving the rest of the world the impression that as a population, we are not very bright.

In terms of military leadership, we are a far cry from the inspirational power that we were hailed for being at the close of WW2. We DO spend more money on our military than the rest of the world combined and our technology is second to none. But although this does result in a very scary looking military force. There is a reason why we are developing an "all bark, no bite" reputation.

We failed to defeat North Korea, we lost the war in Vietnam and although we were on the winning side in the Balkans, we only played a limited role where all the Europeans wanted from us was our expensive airstrikes because that's basically the one thing we do well.

The Gulf War was probably the last moment where the U.S. was seen as a viable military leader. We might not have been as successful without the help of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Britain AND France but George W.H. Bush did lead the coalition and the war was well deserved since Iraq did invade Kuwait.

Bush Jr, set that reputation way back when with great fanfare he invaded Iraq, a country that was already defeated, stripped of all it's defenses (except the Republican Guard), squeezed between no-fly zones and monitored by U.N. weapons inspectors. His invasion was based on the false claim that Iraq had WMD that posed an immediate threat to the U.S. Of course such weapons were never found. This time around, the French, the Saudis and Egypt declined I'm guessing because they didn't want to be involved in kicking the crap out of a defenseless country for the sake of controlling their oil.

Then the world watched the results... In Iraq, the rise of the Sunni insurgency, which eventually developed into the ISIS caliphate. In America, the largest economic crash since 1929 and a commitment to a no-exit state of war in the middle-east.

Hardly a model for inspiration.

Obama helped fix the economy and cranked up the engines that pushed it forward all the way to 2018, but he hobbled through the wars in the Middle-East. Nevertheless, he didn't do anything to compromise our position as a military leader.

But then came Trump and all of a sudden, America was OK with being the asshole in the global community. Trump likes to take bows for destroying ISIS but Iran had far more to do with that under Soleimani since they did most of the fighting against ISIS. But Trump had Solemani assassinated and tried to take credit for destroying ISIS. What a dick.

Trump supporters, in their personal silos of "reality" will swear up and down that Trump deserves the credit and that Soleimani killed Americans, not ISIS fighters but the world knows better. And no one wants to be led by someone who killed the general that defeated the enemy then takes credit for his success.

Canuckus also mentioned the election meddling by foreign powers, but this is the one point he made that I'm not 100% on board with and only because Russia AND China are meddling with elections all over the world, including the last election in France. I wouldn't be surprised to find out we're doing the same thing. In simple terms, the government doesn't really have a way to control social media without serious infractions on free speech. I'm not even sure how much we can blame on Moscow or Beijing because a lot of people, especially in Russia and Eastern Europe are finding ad-based commercial success in routing popular content through their websites and right-wing conspiracy theories just happen to be ranked #1 in terms of popularity.

I wouldn't even suggest Trump had as much to do with the meddling in 2016 as the young Russians and East East Europeans running websites in their basements. But it's hard to imagine he didn't benefit from it.

I think the rest of the world agrees with you and so does at least half of the American people.

well, in all fairness... Seth was responding to your comment that we should stop calling ourselves the leaders of the free world by saying "...but we are."

I don't doubt that he is still calling us the leaders of the free world. But, for reasons you've mentioned (and many more) the reality is far removed from that claim.

LOL - yes, a bit.


Oh, I didn't say isn't my president - I said he isn't my leader. That's why I said he works for me. (of course, as our president, he works for all of us) ...Well, he's supposed to work for us, anyway.


Thanks!

Yup, and he still is. He still continues to inspire millions of Americans. I didn't always agree with his foreign policy, but I know the deep state always sets the foreign policy agenda.

I do actually like the idea of a president that stands up to the deep state but not if that president winds up making a mockery of our global influence like Trump has.

I agree!

I'm glad you can see my point and yes, it would apply to Obama also. I just didn't see him or his supporters gravitating to the idea that he was some kind of supreme leader to pledge allegiance to.

As for Obama fundamentally changing the country...

I believe his contribution toward the racist society we see today was simply being born half black. I was living in South Carolina when Obama was elected the first time and I remember the reaction among the people there and thought - where did all this racism come from? I think most Americans know it wasn't Obama's words or actions that created the racial rift, it was the people who have been racist all along and got all worked up when a black man stepped into the Oval Office.

As for the socialist utopia. That's typical right-wing drama. Regarding economic policy, Obama was far closer to Reagan that even Sanders. Obamacare, for instance is a market driven system, not a socialist one, with the exception being the public option.

I will concede that in general, Democrats are more socialist-friendly. And certainly the call for socialism is on the rise as is always the case when Americans start losing out to the pyramid scheme that capitalism becomes if not sufficiently managed.

But I am finding that most Trump supporters have no clue what socialism is, other than something their thought leaders tell them to avoid at all costs. I know the common cud is that somehow socialism is linked to Stalinism, but it's really not.

What I want (and I think I speak for a LOT of Democrats) is a hybrid system like what we see in Germany, where the market is open for all goods and services but the government should be allowed to provide socialist options (such as the public option) for human critical services that offer little to no profit.

...and when I say "socialism", I am not referring to communism or any of its implementations ie,.. Stalinism, Leninism, Maoism or even the Israeli Kibbutz system. Nor am I referring to right-wing socialism, otherwise called nationalist socialism (Nazism).

I am referring to Democratic Socialism.