myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Biden 2020
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 87, 88, 89 ... 94, 95, 96  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
coachg



Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3246

PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2022 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
August 2021........

mrgybe wrote:
So, while there is no doubt in my mind, that Biden would be an awful President, rather than four more Trump years of whining and divisive vitriol, it may be better to endure some short term pain to give voters real exposure to the ludicrous Democrat programs and people. Most voters are sensible and, just as happened in Obama's first term, are likely to throw them out in record numbers..


On the anniversary of his inauguration, 72% of Americans don't want him to run again, including a majority of Democrats.


And yet voters tossed out Trump in even greater record numbers. Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes Rolling Eyes
It would appear that most Americans, in your words, want neither the right nor the left but something in between; something that neither the right nor left can offer thus the pendulum that keeps swinging after each election.

Coachg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20657

PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How is "I will appoint a black woman to the Supreme Court" not absolutely, clearly, and blatantly racist AND sexist AND unconstitutional AND illegal? (Do I have to explain that Biden promised that live, deliberately, and emphatically in front of millions of people?)

ANY and EVERY appointment, election, hiring/firing action, etc., at every level of government, should be based on merit relative to the position ... i.e., proven suitability for that specific job. Anything less, besides being illegal, guarantees mediocrity at best. If your local baker wants to hire her idiot nephew or thieving sister because of skin color, gender, or nepotism and thus flush her business down the toilet, that'a her money, her livelihood, her prerogative. Running a tax-funded office that way is criminal at every level and guarantees a substandard ROI on YOUR money.

Besides all that, Biden discriminated against every person with brown, white, yellow, red, or plaid skin AND every person without female genes, genitalia, hormones, or self-proclaimed female orientation.

How is such blatant discrimination in any way "progressive"?

Yeah, yeah ... I know ... I'm a stupid, lying, fear mongering, unedumacated, homophobic, anti-science, obese, factophobic, gay-bashing, misogynistic, white supremacist, all-around hater. Whaddaya got that's relevant, intelligent, and true?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SAS



Joined: 18 Feb 1997
Posts: 124
Location: planet earth

PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2022 2:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Where was Isoconfused's rant against sexism when Trump said "It will be a woman, a very talented, very brilliant woman" when RBG died?

Last edited by SAS on Thu Jan 27, 2022 9:27 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17050
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2022 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Appointing right wing abortion opponents is just finding good judges, not rewarding the radical evangelicals who got you elected. Appointing a black woman is racism, obviously has nothing to do with rewarding the group that got you elected.

Anyone from Alabama can tell the difference.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coachg



Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3246

PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IyamwhatIyam wrote:
Where was Isoconfused's rant against sexism when Trump said "It will be a woman, a very talented, very brilliant woman" when RGB died?


The same place the rest of his selective outrage is; shoved so far up his ass he can smell his fart before it occurs.

Coachg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coachg



Joined: 10 Sep 2000
Posts: 3246

PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2022 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:
Whaddaya got that's relevant, intelligent, and true?[/i]


We have your silence when Trump said he was going to nominate a woman. The only difference between what Trump said & Biden said was the word black followed by the above outrage.

Coachg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17050
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Fri Jan 28, 2022 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
By Anneken Tappe | CNN Business
The US economic recovery from the depths of the Covid pandemic continued strong last year.

US gross domestic product — the broadest measure of economic activity — expanded 5.7% last year, the fastest pace since 1984 when Ronald Reagan was in the White House, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported Thursday.

The final three months of 2021 got a much better scorecard than economists had predicted: GDP grew at an annualized rate of 6.9% in the fourth quarter.

It was a substantial uptick from the Delta-ridden third quarter, GDP grew at an annualized pace of only 2.3%. In fact, it was the best quarterly performance since the third quarter of 2020 when the initial reopening boom buoyed economic growth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5118

PostPosted: Tue Feb 22, 2022 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This from nearly four months ago to much sneering. No surprise that the usual suspects prefer to talk about short board tacks than today's momentous events. Consensus building, foreign relations expert, "solid B+" Joe, is being watched very closely by China and Iran.

mrgybe wrote:
GT, If you were hoping for a reasoned response, the posters from the left here will have left you in despair. They simply will not accept that the President Biden is incapable of leading the world. China is sending hypersonic missiles around the globe against which the US military admits they have no defense. China is also conducting exercises simulating an invasion of Taiwan. Russia has amassed 90,000 troops on the border of Ukraine and is squeezing gas supplies to Europe. Iran has doubled its stock of enriched uranium in the last month. The people on the left either don't know or don't care. All they want to talk about is Trump, racism and climate change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17050
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2022 12:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
This from nearly four months ago to much sneering. No surprise that the usual suspects prefer to talk about short board tacks than today's momentous events. Consensus building, foreign relations expert, "solid B+" Joe, is being watched very closely by China and Iran.

mrgybe wrote:
GT, If you were hoping for a reasoned response, the posters from the left here will have left you in despair. They simply will not accept that the President Biden is incapable of leading the world. China is sending hypersonic missiles around the globe against which the US military admits they have no defense. China is also conducting exercises simulating an invasion of Taiwan. Russia has amassed 90,000 troops on the border of Ukraine and is squeezing gas supplies to Europe. Iran has doubled its stock of enriched uranium in the last month. The people on the left either don't know or don't care. All they want to talk about is Trump, racism and climate change.


While the seditionist in chief—who told us he could trust Putin, and launched his campaign on a lark so he could build a Trump tower in Russia, just called Putin a genius.

Of course, Iran started enriching uranium again because Trump walked away from an agreement—with no plan B.

When you want the Exxon or WSJ talking points, buggy whip is Johnny on the spot. Seldom in doubt, rarely insightful.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17050
Location: Berkeley, California

PostPosted: Wed Feb 23, 2022 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trolls like gybe rarely post suggestions as to what might work better. They seldom think beyond "gotcha." Or a tribal message.

Here is a bit of analysis on Ukraine. Of course, partisans like gybe never complained about Trump's withholding military aid to try to blackmail their leader.

Quote:
Eight years ago, after Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, the U.S. and its allies harshly condemned the invasion and imposed economic sanctions on Russia.

It barely seemed to matter.

Russia still controls Crimea. Russia’s economy, after going through a recession, soon started growing again. President Vladimir Putin remains firmly in control of his government — and has now begun another invasion, this time of eastern Ukraine.

In response, President Biden yesterday announced a new set of sanctions, imposed in tandem with Britain and the European Union. Putin’s aggression, Biden said, is “a flagrant violation of international law, and it demands a firm response from the international community.” Biden also signaled that more sanctions may follow.

The obvious question is whether these sanctions will be any more effective than the earlier ones. Today’s newsletter lays out the possibilities.


By The New York Times
Targeted and weak
The 2014 sanctions against Russia did have some effect — arguably more than many people have realized. They made it harder for Russian banks to obtain foreign loans and restricted Western companies from working with Russian oil companies, among other steps.

By the summer of 2014, Russia’s economy was shrinking, and it continued shrinking for two years. The value of the ruble plunged on global markets, increasing the price of many goods for companies and consumers. Russian businesses had a harder time raising money for new projects.

These economic problems seem to have softened Putin’s domestic support. His approval rating among Russians initially surged after the Crimea invasion — to around 80 percent — before falling. It has hovered between 60 percent and 65 percent for much of the past two years, according to the Levada Center. Last year, opposition groups held some of the largest protests of Putin’s nearly two decades in power.

The sanctions might even have been painful enough to have deterred Putin from invading eastern Ukraine in 2014, which he seemed to be planning, as Anders Aslund and Maria Snegovaya have argued in an Atlantic Council report.

Still, the sanctions clearly did not reorder Russian politics. Putin, after all, moved to claim eastern Ukraine this week. Experts say that the sanctions’ limited effect is not surprising, because they were less ambitious than the sanctions the U.S. has imposed on other countries that have flouted global rules, like Iran, North Korea and Venezuela.


Russian howitzers outside Taganrog, Russia, yesterday.The New York Times
In 2014, when Putin invaded Ukraine the first time and annexed Crimea, the West acted too slowly and timidly initially,” Michael McFaul, the U.S. ambassador to Russia from 2012 to 2014, told me yesterday.

One reason is that the 2014 sanctions were the product of negotiations with European countries that wanted to be more cautious than the U.S. The sanctions were also intentionally narrow, designed to hurt sectors of the economy with close ties to Putin’s regime while minimizing the effect on most Russians and on the global economy.


The reality is that for sanctions to have big political repercussions, they often need to be harsh. “‘Smart’ or ‘targeted’ sanctions won’t work,” Edward Fishman and Chris Miller, two international-relations experts, recently wrote in Politico. “To really impose pain on Russia, the U.S. and Europe will have to bear some burden, too — although, fortunately, there are ways to minimize the fallout for Western economies.”

Biden acknowledged as much in his remarks at the White House yesterday. “Defending freedom will have costs, for us as well and here at home,” he said. “We need to be honest about that.” He added that he would take steps intended to minimize the increase in gas prices.

This is the approach that the U.S. took toward Iran more than a decade ago. It imposed tough sanctions, despite their likely effect on world oil markets and the damage to Iranians’ living standards. Those sanctions helped push Iran’s regime to negotiate over its nuclear program.

In Russia’s case, a more aggressive set of sanctions would start with a refusal to buy its oil — by far Russia’s biggest revenue source — perhaps phased in to mitigate the price increases on global markets. It could also involve restricting exports to Russia, like automobile parts and computers, or forbidding other banks from working with Russian banks.

Russia would still have access to parts of the global economy, especially if China continued working with it. But the effect could nonetheless be substantial, because Russia’s economy is now quite integrated with the European and U.S. economies.


President Biden announcing sanctions against Russia.Al Drago for The New York Times
More to come?
Which path are Biden and the E.U. choosing?

For now, they have imposed sanctions that Biden said went beyond the 2014 sanctions while still falling well short of what the U.S. and Europe could impose. The measures include blocking Russia’s government from borrowing money in Western financial markets and cutting off two large Russian banks from the U.S. financial system.

(My colleague Edward Wong has more details here. And Peter Coy of Times Opinion has written that isolating banks can be an effective tool.)

In the short term, those sanctions will almost certainly not cause Putin to stop menacing Ukraine. “Russia right now is sitting on quite a pile of extra cash,” Melissa Eddy, a Times correspondent in Berlin, told my colleague Claire Moses. “They have a war chest.”

But there are two big uncertainties: whether the sanctions hurt Russia’s economy once that war chest is drawn down; and whether the U.S. and Europe will impose tougher sanctions if Putin continues his war.

“The U.S. and the E.U. have worked hard over eight weeks to pull together what would be a serious, painful, massive package of sanctions that is designed to hurt,” Steven Erlanger, The Times’s chief diplomatic correspondent in Europe, told us. They have not yet enacted all of those potential sanctions. But yesterday’s announcement, Steven added, “gives them room to hit Putin harder if he does more.”

Biden vowed yesterday to follow that strategy: “If Russia goes further with this invasion,” he said, “we stand prepared to go further.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 87, 88, 89 ... 94, 95, 96  Next
Page 88 of 96

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group