World view – Sunday

Saturday GMT

WorldWatch2

For posting on events, news, opinions and anything of interest from around the world.

Leave a comment

43 Comments

  1. She’s right about Trump not being the cause of what is broken in the US.

    Can she fix it? Trump promised to drain the swamp, but has repaired Washington.

    Warren will need to succeed in the broken electoral system before she gets a chance to fix the governing system. That means she will need a lot of money to win in a system corrupted by big money interests.

    Reply
    • Corky

       /  10th February 2019

      She has little chance..she won’t be able to leave her Indian heritage, or lack thereof, behind.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  10th February 2019

        If only she was younger the Dems might have a chance with this one, she’s got a few clues.

        Reply
      • phantom snowflake

         /  10th February 2019

        or lack thereof“?? It’s pretty clear from her DNA test that she has Native American ancestry, so she’s right in one way. Where she’s wrong, and has been called out many times, is in her claims to to be “Cherokee”. There’s a lot more to being a member of a tribe than having native DNA and some vague story in her family about her ancestry.
        Are you repeating Trump’s bullshit claim that she has no Native American ancestry? Because bullshit it is, as usual.
        https://www.factcheck.org/2018/10/the-facts-on-elizabeth-warrens-dna-test/

        Reply
        • Corky

           /  10th February 2019

          No,I’m reminding everyone of this bs where people claim native heritage because it’s ‘cool and in.” I know people from my school era who you wouldn’t have known had Maori blood. They are now born again Mardee. It makes me puke.

          This woman v Trumpy…give me Trumpy any day.

          Reply
    • Patzcuaro

       /  10th February 2019

      This may be her achilles heel, will it hinder her run or will it just be another bone spur?

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  10th February 2019

        falsely claiming Swedish American heritage didnt seem to hurt Trump, who now embraces his German American heritage with a nod to his Scottish mother and his Slovenian wife ( chain migration bought her parents to America)
        Guess whos the anti immigrant President?

        Reply
        • Pink David

           /  10th February 2019

          “falsely claiming Swedish American heritage didnt seem to hurt Trump”

          Can you talk about how it help him get into an ivy league university as a minority. Then you can describe how he won the Presidency by trumpeting his intersectional virtue and lack of privilege because of his Swedish American heritage, while denying his oppressor German American heritage.

          Of course, he also submitted some fraudulent Swedish American recipes to a cookbook too, didn’t he? What was it called again? Pow Wow Chow?
          Here is one of Liz’s efforts;

          Cherokee Native cake
          –1 cup brown sugar
          –1024 cups pure white flour.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  10th February 2019

            Warren is graduate of the University of Houston and Rutgers Law School.
            Rutgers is the State University of New Jersey and not Ivy league

            She was already a Professor of Law at prestigious universities by the time she became an endowed Law Professor at harvard – where she had taught previously
            ‘As of 2011, she was the only tenured law professor at Harvard who had attended law school at an American public university.”

            Bridges while running for election as an MP and later a minister always talked about Maori as ‘they’ rather than the last year becoming ‘we’.
            We in NZ dont use ratios like is common in US for native american heritage, but Bridges is 3/16 , which until 1967 wouldnt have allowed to enroll on the maori roll.

            Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  10th February 2019

          Duker, you are a waste of space when you ignore the facts in pursuit of your agenda. Trump isn’t anti immigrant, he is anti illegal immigrant.

          Likewise when he wrote his grandfather came from Sweden he was repeating his father’s story. We don’t know if he knew the truth then since it dated back to around 1880. I’m guessing most people are vague about their family history so far back.

          Reply
    • Patzcuaro

       /  10th February 2019

      Trump hasn’t drained the swamp he has just brought along his own creepy crawlies.

      Reply
    • Pink David

       /  10th February 2019

      “Warren will need to succeed in the broken electoral system before she gets a chance to fix the governing system. That means she will need a lot of money to win in a system corrupted by big money interests.”

      Is it really that broken given the big money candidate lost in 2016?

      Reply
      • Yes. You’re referring to the bigger money candidate, but donors and well funded lobby groups still have far too much influence.

        Reply
        • Duker

           /  10th February 2019

          yes . Theres candidates raising big money from a lot of small donors and theres big donations from a very small number of people.
          Thens there supposedly separate groups who campaign against a candidate, thats often hidden money and huge amounts.

          PD seems an ingenue regarding US campaign money.
          Not all like ‘one person’ who claimed -some years back- ‘to be the biggest expert on campaign funding law’

          Reply
  2. Reply
  3. Patzcuaro

     /  10th February 2019

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at work

    Reply
    • She’s been effective at getting attention.

      Reply
      • Pink David

         /  10th February 2019

        Yes, she is working from the Trump playbook.

        Reply
      • Gezza

         /  10th February 2019

        Quite an interesting article. AOC seems to have mastered the art of social media and stunting for attention at a very young age – something Trump’s made his trademark.

        Reply
        • Pink David

           /  10th February 2019

          ” AOC seems to have mastered the art of social media and stunting for attention at a very young age”

          She was running a training course for other members of the Democrat Party on how to be better at social media, here is her course;

          Rule 1, be young and attractive.

          There are no other rules.

          Reply
          • Gezza

             /  10th February 2019

            At least her rule is simple.

            Compare with Trumps.

            1. Be filthy rich or pretend to be.
            2. Lie a lot.
            3. Threaten people you’ve shafted who can’t afford lawyers with expensive litigation.
            4. Call people nasty names.
            5. Lie some more.
            6. You’re fired.
            7. Say nobody knows more about everything you know fuck all about.
            8. Rant on Twitter every day.
            9. Make shit up. All the time.
            10. Like the Saudis.
            11. Make money out of this.

            Reply
            • Pink David

               /  10th February 2019

              AOC has a slightly different slant, but man is she as close to a carbon copy as you could imagine.

              1. Pretend to be from the hood when your actually from a nice middle class family and when to a good school.
              2 Tick
              3. Too old school for AOC, she uses the intersectionist victim card to good effect.
              4. She is significantly better at this, she turns insults into another intersectional comeback using no.3
              5. Yeap, she is firmly in the lie lie lie, as long as the narrative is maintained school. She has stated that quite clearly.
              6. Nope, she has never had the chance to develop that trick. Give it a few years.
              7. She uses her ignorance in place of this. Her tone down moments where she talks like a school girl are a better trick really. Will lose effectiveness if she gets real power.
              8. Very active on Twitter
              9. Tick
              10. ‘Hates’ the Saudis, but it’s an obvious play.
              11. Tick

            • Pink David

               /  10th February 2019

              Her is one of her best moments. When people point out she didn’t come from the hood, she turns it around into a claim she is ‘rich’, then bends it with a claim she has been mocked about her struggle when her father died. She gets called out for her lie, but deflects it totally with some real truth. Very, very effective operator. She is going to win 2020 for Trump hands down.

            • Gezza

               /  10th February 2019

              I thought you said she only had 1 rule?

              I don’t LIKE her David. I think her policy platform what I can see it so far is as shallow as a puddle, some of basically anti-whatever Trump’s is. But she’ll work well as an anti-Trump little bee in his bonnet. I doubt she’ll make a run for President or get selected if she does. I think as things progress from it just gets more and more obvious that such a giant cast of bloody clowns, dodgy characters & outright bought candidates (including Trump) that American culture these days has landed them in their White House, Congress & State legislatures is making their entire system of government look like a completely chaotic circus. But it’s what they deserve.

            • Pink David

               /  10th February 2019

              “I thought you said she only had 1 rule?”

              Not rules, that’s how she operates.

              “I don’t LIKE her David. I think her policy platform what I can see it so far is as shallow as a puddle, some of basically anti-whatever Trump’s is.”

              It’s not a question of like. I don’t like any of them.

              “White House, Congress & State legislatures is making their entire system of government look like a completely chaotic circus. ”

              The wonderful thing about the system, and how the founders established it, is that it is designed to be functional while staffed with a “giant cast of bloody clowns, dodgy characters & outright bought candidates “.

              It was designed with that expectation.

            • Gezza

               /  10th February 2019

              I wouldn’t mind betting they had no idea what it would look like today & if they’d known they might have spent more time on that Constitution.

            • Pink David

               /  10th February 2019

              I’s take that bet. They knew very well. The Constitution was very well thought out, it’s essential nature was built for this. They expected the people who are politicians to behave like this. There is a ton of documentation showing their thoughts on this.

              Just the simple fact that The Constitution outlines the rights of Government, not people, tells you they understood the true nature of politics.

          • Blazer

             /  10th February 2019

            that should be enough.

            It is the anti thesis of ‘white,male and stale’ ‘ I guess.

            Reply
      • Pink David

         /  10th February 2019

        This is nearly a perfect replication of a Trump maneuver….

        Reply
      • Corky

         /  10th February 2019

        ”So far it’s been the same in Congress, where she’s using her star power to turn ordinarily dry hearings into viral, must-see TV.”

        Wow, she obviously doesn’t see the writing on the wall. What’s that old showbiz adage: ” Be kind to people on the way up…..”

        Reply
        • Gezza

           /  10th February 2019

          Yes but that doesn’t apply in the US of A where being foul-mouthed, notorious or a plain arsehole is just as likely to get you to the top of the pile in the entertainment arena. Nobody know more about that than your hero Trump, believe him! 😎

          Reply
          • Corky

             /  10th February 2019

            True.. the difference is Trumpy has money for a soft landing and making things go away when the star dust dims. This sheila will be collateral damage when she’s of no further use.

            Reply
            • Duker

               /  10th February 2019

              Unless he gets a republican president to pardon him-like Nixon did- Trump will be walking into very deep shit once he leaves the White House, then theres NY state investigations.
              Cant see him NOT being indicted outside of his campaign stuff

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th February 2019

              You’re forgetting how many judges he’s appointing. The Dems won’t own the courts by then.

            • Duker

               /  10th February 2019

              Thats where the state courts , especially in NY will come in. Judges and prosecutors appointed by democrats.
              he might have to push Donald Jnr under the bus

    • Pink David

       /  10th February 2019

      Oddly, they missed Smith’s final response to AOC in that clip.

      “There are a couple things for example that would not be, she asked if there is anything that could apply here? There are things that do not apply here. For example, the whole point of the article she held up that I wrote was that you cannot use your campaign funds to make those payments that would be illegal personal use. Campaign funds are not dark money. They are totally disclosed so they are not dark money. It’s worth noting be the way that dark money constituted by $1.7 billion, I believe that figure is incorrect by factor of about 500%. Dark money constitutes 2% to 4% of total spending in U.S. elections and has always been involved in U.S. elections. Those are just a couple of points. I did kind of chuckle at the question is it possible, asked of us, that these influences are, this money is influencing the questioning here. To that, I’d say that is something you have to ask yourselves, if you are being influenced, then see what you think. If you are then you might question yourselves, if you’re not you might question this hearing.”

      The last passage being a rather interesting question.

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  10th February 2019

        “I believe that figure is incorrect by factor of about 500%. ”

        Believe is different from knowing or even having proof.
        “More than half of the general election advertising aired by outside groups in the battle for control of Congress has come from organizations that disclose little or nothing about their donors, a flood of secret money that is now at the center of a debate over the line between free speech and corruption.”
        Fifty-five percent of broadcast advertising in the midterm elections has been paid for by groups that do not fully disclose their donors [aka dark money], according to an analysis by The New York Times of advertising data from the Campaign Media Analysis Group, compared with 45 percent from super PACs, which are required to file regular financial disclosures with the Federal Election Commission.

        That was 2014 , no different now

        Dark money isnt about disclosing spending , its about hiding donors – which isnt really possible for candidates to do , but the various groups which campaign against candidates – both republican and democrat are the issue.

        You seem to have shallow views about US campaign spending PD

        Reply
    • High Flying Duck

       /  10th February 2019

      Reply
  4. Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s