rec.sport.tennis@googlegroups.com
Google Groups
Topic digest
View all topics
Leftist women quaking in their boots - 3 Updates
If blacks are so sophisticated and cool, why do their houses all have bars on the windows - like cages? - 1 Update
Whisper outs himself! - 8 Updates
Trump does not have a reconciliation problem - he has an interference problem from the existing order Re: Trump-Lewis feud could be harbinger of new round of hyper-partisanship - 2 Updates
Donald Trump and Jack Ma channeled each other --- Jack Ol' Ma knows what he's talking about! - 1 Update
Dimitrov is advancing playing very well - 4 Updates
Good start Zverev - 2 Updates
Trump Deletes Misspelled Tweet, Which May Be Illegal - 2 Updates
cancel - 2 Updates
Leftist women quaking in their boots
calimero377@gmx.de: Jan 21 01:55PM -0800
Watching CNN. All day they are masturbating about those "women's marches" in US cities.
As much as I despise the orange clown I have to give him that - he drives the people I always hated nuts!
Now we only have to elevate Pence to the presidency by impeaching the clown. And then the "liberals" are set for open season ...
Max
Guypers <gapp111@gmail.com>: Jan 21 03:47PM -0800
> As much as I despise the orange clown I have to give him that - he drives the people I always hated nuts!
> Now we only have to elevate Pence to the presidency by impeaching the clown. And then the "liberals" are set for open season ...
> Max
'We'!!!!!!
When do the fukking germans decide what happens here in the usa douchebag???
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jan 21 03:58PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 3:47:38 PM UTC-8, Guypers wrote:
> > Max
> 'We'!!!!!!
> When do the fukking germans decide what happens here in the usa douchebag???
Since the USA cut the balls off Germany and the Russians got tired of running half the country. All Germans can do now is spout a lot of rhetoric about things they're powerless to do, and stick their noses in the politics of countries that still matter.
Back to top
If blacks are so sophisticated and cool, why do their houses all have bars on the windows - like cages?
"*Social Justice*" <social-justice@barackobama.com>: Jan 22 12:09AM +0100
Just an observation prompted since Obama got into office.
Then he got booted by President Trump.
Back to top
Whisper outs himself!
Scott <scottl44@yahoo.com>: Jan 21 12:20PM -0800
Particularly when a slam is underway. Threads on the dog-kicking weathervane need to wait until the Doha Open or similar.
TennisGuy <TGuy@techsavvy.com>: Jan 21 03:32PM -0500
On 1/21/2017 1:57 PM, Gracchus wrote:
> conversations and threads dedicated to him? I don't get that. Chronic
> bullshitters starve for attention in any form. I got bored with it
> ages ago. I don't know how anyone else doesn't.
Don't worry Gracchus this limelight will be relatively
brief and painless.
I know exactly what you mean about feeding a troll
free food.
But this was a ground-breaking admission that is fun
to rub in his face.
Reminders will pop up every once in a while to keep
the animal obedient.
StephenJ <stephenj@flex.com>: Jan 21 03:20PM -0600
On 1/21/2017 12:57 PM, Gracchus wrote:
>> since circa 2002!
>> Who would have thunk it?
> Brief exchanges with the dog-kicker are a diversion, but long conversations and threads dedicated to him? I don't get that. Chronic bullshitters starve for attention in any form. I got bored with it ages ago. I don't know how anyone else doesn't.
Come on. Whisper is easily the most impactful poster in the history of
this forum. It's not even close.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jan 21 04:30PM -0500
>> Brief exchanges with the dog-kicker are a diversion, but long conversations and threads dedicated to him? I don't get that. Chronic bullshitters starve for attention in any form. I got bored with it ages ago. I don't know how anyone else doesn't.
> Come on. Whisper is easily the most impactful poster in the history of
> this forum. It's not even close.
Most impactful isn't always positive.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jan 21 01:33PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 1:20:03 PM UTC-8, StephenJ wrote:
> > Brief exchanges with the dog-kicker are a diversion, but long conversations and threads dedicated to him? I don't get that. Chronic bullshitters starve for attention in any form. I got bored with it ages ago. I don't know how anyone else doesn't.
> Come on. Whisper is easily the most impactful poster in the history of
> this forum. It's not even close.
Only if your chief criterion is sheer amount of bullshit content generated in RST. Ninety-five percent of what he posts is rehashes of long-dead arguments or unimaginative flame-bait. Only posters like you and John enjoy participating in that perpetual circle-jerk indefinitely.
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jan 21 04:53PM -0500
>> Come on. Whisper is easily the most impactful poster in the history of
>> this forum. It's not even close.
> Only if your chief criterion is sheer amount of bullshit content generated in RST. Ninety-five percent of what he posts is rehashes of long-dead arguments or unimaginative flame-bait. Only posters like you and John enjoy participating in that perpetual circle-jerk indefinitely.
John is the Whisper antidote.
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: Jan 21 02:02PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 4:20:03 PM UTC-5, StephenJ wrote:
> > Brief exchanges with the dog-kicker are a diversion, but long conversations and threads dedicated to him? I don't get that. Chronic bullshitters starve for attention in any form. I got bored with it ages ago. I don't know how anyone else doesn't.
> Come on. Whisper is easily the most impactful poster in the history of
> this forum. It's not even close.
Replace "impactful" with "opinionated". It will be close.
Gracchus <gracchado@gmail.com>: Jan 21 03:09PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 1:53:03 PM UTC-8, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> >> this forum. It's not even close.
> > Only if your chief criterion is sheer amount of bullshit content generated in RST. Ninety-five percent of what he posts is rehashes of long-dead arguments or unimaginative flame-bait. Only posters like you and John enjoy participating in that perpetual circle-jerk indefinitely.
> John is the Whisper antidote.
He's an enabler. The only real "antidote" would be universal shunning.
Back to top
Trump does not have a reconciliation problem - he has an interference problem from the existing order Re: Trump-Lewis feud could be harbinger of new round of hyper-partisanship
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): Jan 21 08:43PM
In article <9d620242-3f43-495f-8ee5-ae5440a34215@googlegroups.com>,
>said John Lewis is a bound man like Obama per Shelby Steele, I certainly
>would not disagree. But the issue is Trump does not have to behave like
>some kind of "bound man."
You (or your source) said, and I quote:
Like "Nixon goes to China", Trump is in a position to reconcile with
black Americans. But he does not see it that way. The feud would only
strengthen extremist elements on both sides of the color divide.
"A public feud between Donald Trump and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.)
seemed to jettison any lingering hopes that the inauguration would
temporarily ease partisanship in Washington and instead threatened
to widen the rift between the two parties.
Thus sombody is suggesting Trump needs to act in such a way that
extant division or antagony between the "two parties", viz., Trump and
anti-Trump, may have a chance to "temporarily ease" but his "feud"
with John Lewis "threatend to widen the rift between the two parties".
So you can understand that it is precisely such a statement that was
the basis of my response.
Trump was not behaving "like some kind of `bound man'". Trump was
merely acting as a counter puncher and reacted only when he had to.
Trump has enormous opposition from the Establishment, the neocons, and
the "Deep State". That is clear!
When people continue to push garbage around in the public in an
attempt to weaken his popular support and derail his presidency, he,
understandably, sees that he must respond. Trump had to respond to
Rep. John Lewis just as he had to respond to Captain Khan's father
because what they did and accused Trump of was to help people like
John McCain and Hillary Clinton to do the work for the neocons, which
is "carnage" (abroad and at home) for America.
lo yeeOn
------------------------------------------------
[My corrected post attached below for clarity and completion]
In article <fd4a7f29-3cae-4e72-98af-f6f3ea5ee4ea@googlegroups.com>,
ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
>announcement that he would skip Friday's inaugural ceremony prompted
>the president-elect to sharply criticize the civil rights leader
>Saturday morning.
Rep. John Lewis has every right to boycott the Trump inauguration and
he was courageous to stand with others at a time when civil rights
were absent for African Americans and other disadvantaged segments of
this country.
As a matter of fact, it has since become known that John Lewis also
boycotted G W Bush's 2001 inauguration, about which John Lewis now
claims amnesia. (His reasoning apparently had more to do with the
election, and therefore partisanship, than anything else about Bush.)
John Lewis made a great contribution to the Civil Rights Movement of
America in the last century. Let no-one forget that the Civil Rights
Movement helped to continue to right a wrong committed against our
African American brothers and sisters - long after the unfinished work
of Abraham Lincoln and others in that era.
But John Lewis has forgotten that the journey of righting that
mega-sized wrong is far from finished. We need only see the lot of
our African American brothers and sisters today to know.
John Lewis mistakenly thinks that he is entitled to wear that halo
called the "last standing civil right leader" and just sits and coos.
As it happens, John Lewis is wrong on many counts.
First, Andy Young, one of the civil rights leaders who was a close
aide of Martin Luther King, Jr., is still alive.
And there is Harry Belafonte, who has consistently and strongly
opposed the Iraq War. (If the MSM and the powers-that-be aren't
mentioning others active in the Civil Rights Movement than John Lewis,
maybe it's because John Lewis is serving a useful purpose as the few
who are pliantly supporting Washington's Democratic party leaders -
the insiders and the existing order - and their deceptive foreign
policy.)
Second, I have seen him repeatedly value his relationship with the
Democratic Party leadership more than the progressive cause.
John Lewis is more concerned with his relationship with the party
establishment than with the African American community at large which
has needed his leadership the most. But I remember him going around
at a crucial moment last year to question Bernie Sanders' involvement
in the Civil Rights Movement - repeatedly saying something like "I saw
Bill and Hillary at the civil rights protests but didn't see Bernie
Sanders there" - despite evidence of Bernie Sanders' overt activism to
the contrary.
It is indeed terribly ironic that despite John Lewis' belief,
Bernie Sanders was volunteering with the Congress of Racial Equality
(CORE) and getting arrested in Chicago during a demonstration.
Hillary Clinton was a Young Republican and volunteering with Barry
Goldwater, who voted against the Civil Rights Act.
Bernie Sanders was the leader of the University of Chicago chapter
of CORE and as early as 1961 was leading sit-ins to protest racial
discrimination in the university's housing policy --- the first
sit-ins to take place in the North. He also led a protest of a
Howard Johnson's restaurant in Chicago for the chain's refusal to
adopt a non-discriminatory policy in the South. In 1963 Sanders was
arrested and convicted of resisting arrest after a protest of the
city's segregationist policies in its public schools. And, also in
1963, Sanders attended the March on Washington which featured
leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr and John Lewis.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-harris-jr/why-bernie-sanders-civil-rights-movement_b_9415736.html
Well, in fact, Bernie Sanders represented the progressive cause and I
voted for him in the primary. Yet my vote was never counted due to
corruption of the Democratic party which John Lewis has been
consistently eager to please. But while my vote would not have meant
anything, tens of thousands of similar Sanders votes that were not
counted cannot be ignored. Yet all that mattered to John Lewis was to
ensure the nomination of Hillary Clinton, an ambitious career
politician who is the antithesis of a progressive candidate.
Indeed John Lewis himself contributed to the loss of the presidential
election because of what he and other Democratic party elites
ignominiously did in sticking to a less-than-progressive,
less-than-desirable candidate in the general election.
Third, what has John Lewis been doing to improve the lives of African
Americans in the decades since he marched with Martin Luther King,
Jr. and other civil rights activists? If John Lewis is a leader of
the African Americans, he has been missing in action for decades in an
age when few of them go to college while a disproportionate number of
them go to jail and are in a perennial state of unemployment.
And what was John Lewis thinking, if he attended G W Bush's second
inaugural, after Bush knowingly killed so many Muslims in the Middle
East with his fraudulent wars?
John Lewis should have learned from Martin Luther King, Jr. who
actively opposed the Vietnam war and saw his opposition as a logical
extension of his civil rights advocacy. MLK Jr was a vocal opponent
of the war even though established leaders of the time, whose
assistance he might really find helpful, were pro-war. John Lewis
should have recognized at the least how discriminatory wars are.
Poor families are over-represented among our soldiers, and every one
of our soliders who has fallen in Iraq was a life needlessly thrown
away, and left a family with a needless tragedy.
What was John Lewis thinking when he completely ignored Hillary's role
in the murder of Gaddafi and the destruction of Libya?
Didn't he know that Gaddafi helped many of the poor in various African
countries with his pan-African policy that also befriended a much
bigger and more significant country as far away on the continent as
South Africa?
But all John Lewis cared about was being close to Nancy Pelosi and
other Democratic Party elites, while ignoring the African-American
youths not getting an education nor having a job.
So, it is inaccurate to characterize the "feud" as all innocent on
Lewis' part. According to the BBC News:
Mr Lewis, a revered member of the 1960s struggle, sparked
controversy on Friday when he called Mr Trump's victory illegitimate
because of Russia's alleged interference in the election.
Trump is put in a position in which he cannot remain silent when
someone with influence like Lewis is participating in a rumor which
accuses him of working for Volodya, instead of the American people.
Why Trump is in such a position is because the existing order in
Washington is doing everything it can to stop him, despite his win.
Keep in mind that John McCain is the one who brought that despicable
anti-Trump dossier to the FBI chief Comey and demanded that he make an
assessment of it. And the Democrats have consistently blamed Putin
for Hillary's election loss.
To understand why McCain's active role in this, we can listen to Ron
Paul Institue's executive director Daniel McAdams:
We should be clear what McCain's role was in this. McCain is a
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, an extraordinary
powerful individual in Washington DC.
McCain just today released his own new defense budget: five years -
five trillion dollar defense budget; a lot of that is aimed at
Russia. It is great for the American military-industrial complex,
which is what keeps John McCain in office. So that is one of the
reasons he does this. One of the reasons why he cannot stand Donald
Trump and he could not stand to have any change in Washington's
anti-Russia policies... If anyone is hurting American democracy,
it's people like John McCain and whoever hired this person to dig up
this supposed dirt to create this dirt...
They've created the narrative that Trump is somehow in the pay of
the Russians.
Again, John Lewis is entitled to boycott anything he wants.
But he has chosen to do things that have diminished his own
credibility as a leader of the African American community, by
mindlessly invoking unsubstantiated accusations against the
president-elect that smacks appeasement of the powers that be rather
than virtue.
John Lewis did not choose to boycott George W Bush's second inaugural
despite the objective evidence of having caused massive deaths in the
Middle East. John Lewis chose to align with Hillary and actively
oppose Bernie in the Democratic party nomination process.
So it seems that John Lewis has repeatedly chosen to help the neocons
in Washington to push around garbage and dump it into the public arena
- all apparently because the Democratic party echelons have chosen to
be a part of the war party (in the last few decades) and to now play
this gambit of accusing Russia of having interfered in America's
election and resulted in Hillary's loss. Consequently, I don't think
it is fair for anyone to say that Trump has no right or reason to take
his counter punch. I would go further to say, as explained above,
that Trump has no choice in this matter.
As for what the "feud" might have on our African American brothers and
sisters. It all depends on what Trump will actually do. But is every
known "progressive" siding with Lewis? I doubt it. Harry Belafonte
was an important ally of Martin Luther King, Jr., when was the last
time John Lewis talked to him? Trump will have an extra hard time to
do his job, since the McCain, the Democratic party elites, and the
deep state are all working hard to thwart any progress Trump will try
to make. And of course, if Trump avoids war with Russia and China, it
will be a little easier for his domestic program to advance.
lo yeeOn
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): Jan 21 10:47PM
In article <01662bed-9c6c-401b-8eca-4f4c76615268@googlegroups.com>,
>please the white folks to join the club. Is Trump also a bound man
>because he has little or no idea on how to run the US government for the
>greater good?
Thank you for your clarification. But it is so insulting to say that
black leaders "have to act a certain way to please the white folks to
join the club" because, for one thing, it would be a sure sign that
they cannot be trusted to do the right thing for their people, and
therefore all the people in this country. And for another, while
Rep. Lewis might not have asserted leadership for the African American
community at large, Trump see it his duty to lead all the people of
the United States. And he can't when Rep. Lewis insinuates that he is
illegit and that he is an agent of Russia.
And what factual basis does Rep. Lewis have to make such a spurious
accusation against President Trump? None, other than believing a pile
of dubious say-sos by the spies - people with little reputation on
credibility, at least since the WMD lies that allowed the warmongers
of Washington to go to war, kill a lot of people, destroy our economy,
and accrue a growing debt that is now nearly 20 trillion. Are these
spies what a leader of the oppressed African American community wants
to associate himself with?
Bob Woodward of the Watergate fame has denounced the "Trump dossier"
as garbage. Rightly so. Therefore Rep. Lewis has been pushing around
garbage in the public arena for pure partisanship. And Trump needed
to respond, lest that the stench will stick.
I wouldn't judge Trump at this early stage and I continue to believe
that he had no choice in how he responded to Rep. Lewis.
lo yeeOn
In article <9d620242-3f43-495f-8ee5-ae5440a34215@googlegroups.com>,
ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
>said John Lewis is a bound man like Obama per Shelby Steele, I certainly
>would not disagree. But the issue is Trump does not have to behave like
>some kind of "bound man."
You (or your source) said, and I quote:
Like "Nixon goes to China", Trump is in a position to reconcile with
black Americans. But he does not see it that way. The feud would only
strengthen extremist elements on both sides of the color divide.
"A public feud between Donald Trump and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.)
seemed to jettison any lingering hopes that the inauguration would
temporarily ease partisanship in Washington and instead threatened
to widen the rift between the two parties.
Thus sombody is suggesting Trump needs to act in such a way that
extant division or antagony between the "two parties", viz., Trump and
anti-Trump, may have a chance to "temporarily ease" but his "feud"
with John Lewis "threatend to widen the rift between the two parties".
So you can understand that it is precisely such a statement that was
the basis of my response.
Trump was not behaving "like some kind of `bound man'". Trump was
merely acting as a counter puncher and reacted only when he had to.
Trump has enormous opposition from the Establishment, the neocons, and
the "Deep State". That is clear!
When people continue to push garbage around in the public in an
attempt to weaken his popular support and derail his presidency, he,
understandably, sees that he must respond. Trump had to respond to
Rep. John Lewis just as he had to respond to Captain Khan's father
because what they did and accused Trump of was to help people like
John McCain and Hillary Clinton to do the work for the neocons, which
is "carnage" (abroad and at home) for America.
lo yeeOn
------------------------------------------------
[My corrected post attached below for clarity and completeness]
In article <fd4a7f29-3cae-4e72-98af-f6f3ea5ee4ea@googlegroups.com>,
ltlee1 <ltlee1@hotmail.com> wrote:
>announcement that he would skip Friday's inaugural ceremony prompted
>the president-elect to sharply criticize the civil rights leader
>Saturday morning.
Rep. John Lewis has every right to boycott the Trump inauguration and
he was courageous to stand with others at a time when civil rights
were absent for African Americans and other disadvantaged segments of
this country.
As a matter of fact, it has since become known that John Lewis also
boycotted G W Bush's 2001 inauguration, about which John Lewis now
claims amnesia. (His reasoning apparently had more to do with the
election, and therefore partisanship, than anything else about Bush.)
John Lewis made a great contribution to the Civil Rights Movement of
America in the last century. Let no-one forget that the Civil Rights
Movement helped to continue to right a wrong committed against our
African American brothers and sisters - long after the unfinished work
of Abraham Lincoln and others in that era.
But John Lewis has forgotten that the journey of righting that
mega-sized wrong is far from finished. We need only see the lot of
our African American brothers and sisters today to know.
John Lewis mistakenly thinks that he is entitled to wear that halo
called the "last standing civil right leader" and just sits and coos.
As it happens, John Lewis is wrong on many counts.
First, Andy Young, one of the civil rights leaders who was a close
aide of Martin Luther King, Jr., is still alive.
And there is Harry Belafonte, who has consistently and strongly
opposed the Iraq War. (If the MSM and the powers-that-be aren't
mentioning others active in the Civil Rights Movement than John Lewis,
maybe it's because John Lewis is serving a useful purpose as the few
who are pliantly supporting Washington's Democratic party leaders -
the insiders and the existing order - and their deceptive foreign
policy.)
Second, I have seen him repeatedly value his relationship with the
Democratic Party leadership more than the progressive cause.
John Lewis is more concerned with his relationship with the party
establishment than with the African American community at large which
has needed his leadership the most. But I remember him going around
at a crucial moment last year to question Bernie Sanders' involvement
in the Civil Rights Movement - repeatedly saying something like "I saw
Bill and Hillary at the civil rights protests but didn't see Bernie
Sanders there" - despite evidence of Bernie Sanders' overt activism to
the contrary.
It is indeed terribly ironic that despite John Lewis' belief,
Bernie Sanders was volunteering with the Congress of Racial Equality
(CORE) and getting arrested in Chicago during a demonstration.
Hillary Clinton was a Young Republican and volunteering with Barry
Goldwater, who voted against the Civil Rights Act.
Bernie Sanders was the leader of the University of Chicago chapter
of CORE and as early as 1961 was leading sit-ins to protest racial
discrimination in the university's housing policy --- the first
sit-ins to take place in the North. He also led a protest of a
Howard Johnson's restaurant in Chicago for the chain's refusal to
adopt a non-discriminatory policy in the South. In 1963 Sanders was
arrested and convicted of resisting arrest after a protest of the
city's segregationist policies in its public schools. And, also in
1963, Sanders attended the March on Washington which featured
leaders like Martin Luther King, Jr and John Lewis.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/larry-harris-jr/why-bernie-sanders-civil-rights-movement_b_9415736.html
Well, in fact, Bernie Sanders represented the progressive cause and I
voted for him in the primary. Yet my vote was never counted due to
corruption of the Democratic party which John Lewis has been
consistently eager to please. But while my vote would not have meant
anything, tens of thousands of similar Sanders votes that were not
counted cannot be ignored. Yet all that mattered to John Lewis was to
ensure the nomination of Hillary Clinton, an ambitious career
politician who is the antithesis of a progressive candidate.
Indeed John Lewis himself contributed to the loss of the presidential
election because of what he and other Democratic party elites
ignominiously did in sticking to a less-than-progressive,
less-than-desirable candidate in the general election.
Third, what has John Lewis been doing to improve the lives of African
Americans in the decades since he marched with Martin Luther King,
Jr. and other civil rights activists? If John Lewis is a leader of
the African Americans, he has been missing in action for decades in an
age when few of them go to college while a disproportionate number of
them go to jail and are in a perennial state of unemployment.
And what was John Lewis thinking, if he attended G W Bush's second
inaugural, after Bush knowingly killed so many Muslims in the Middle
East with his fraudulent wars?
John Lewis should have learned from Martin Luther King, Jr. who
actively opposed the Vietnam war and saw his opposition as a logical
extension of his civil rights advocacy. MLK Jr was a vocal opponent
of the war even though established leaders of the time, whose
assistance he might really find helpful, were pro-war. John Lewis
should have recognized at the least how discriminatory wars are.
Poor families are over-represented among our soldiers, and every one
of our soliders who has fallen in Iraq was a life needlessly thrown
away, and left a family with a needless tragedy.
What was John Lewis thinking when he completely ignored Hillary's role
in the murder of Gaddafi and the destruction of Libya?
Didn't he know that Gaddafi helped many of the poor in various African
countries with his pan-African policy that also befriended a much
bigger and more significant country as far away on the continent as
South Africa?
But all John Lewis cared about was being close to Nancy Pelosi and
other Democratic Party elites, while ignoring the African-American
youths not getting an education nor having a job.
So, it is inaccurate to characterize the "feud" as all innocent on
Lewis' part. According to the BBC News:
Mr Lewis, a revered member of the 1960s struggle, sparked
controversy on Friday when he called Mr Trump's victory illegitimate
because of Russia's alleged interference in the election.
Trump is put in a position in which he cannot remain silent when
someone with influence like Lewis is participating in a rumor which
accuses him of working for Volodya, instead of the American people.
Why Trump is in such a position is because the existing order in
Washington is doing everything it can to stop him, despite his win.
Keep in mind that John McCain is the one who brought that despicable
anti-Trump dossier to the FBI chief Comey and demanded that he make an
assessment of it. And the Democrats have consistently blamed Putin
for Hillary's election loss.
To understand why McCain's active role in this, we can listen to Ron
Paul Institue's executive director Daniel McAdams:
We should be clear what McCain's role was in this. McCain is a
chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, an extraordinary
powerful individual in Washington DC.
McCain just today released his own new defense budget: five years -
five trillion dollar defense budget; a lot of that is aimed at
Russia. It is great for the American military-industrial complex,
which is what keeps John McCain in office. So that is one of the
reasons he does this. One of the reasons why he cannot stand Donald
Trump and he could not stand to have any change in Washington's
anti-Russia policies... If anyone is hurting American democracy,
it's people like John McCain and whoever hired this person to dig up
this supposed dirt to create this dirt...
They've created the narrative that Trump is somehow in the pay of
the Russians.
Again, John Lewis is entitled to boycott anything he wants.
But he has chosen to do things that have diminished his own
credibility as a leader of the African American community, by
mindlessly invoking unsubstantiated accusations against the
president-elect that smacks appeasement of the powers that be rather
than virtue.
John Lewis did not choose to boycott George W Bush's second inaugural
despite the objective evidence of having caused massive deaths in the
Middle East. John Lewis chose to align with Hillary and actively
oppose Bernie in the Democratic party nomination process.
So it seems that John Lewis has repeatedly chosen to help the neocons
in Washington to push around garbage and dump it into the public arena
- all apparently because the Democratic party echelons have chosen to
be a part of the war party (in the last few decades) and to now play
this gambit of accusing Russia of having interfered in America's
election and resulted in Hillary's loss. Consequently, I don't think
it is fair for anyone to say that Trump has no right or reason to take
his counter punch. I would go further to say, as explained above,
that Trump has no choice in this matter.
As for what the "feud" might have on our African American brothers and
sisters. It all depends on what Trump will actually do. But is every
known "progressive" siding with Lewis? I doubt it. Harry Belafonte
was an important ally of Martin Luther King, Jr., when was the last
time John Lewis talked to him? Trump will have an extra hard time to
do his job, since the McCain, the Democratic party elites, and the
deep state are all working hard to thwart any progress Trump will try
to make. And of course, if Trump avoids war with Russia and China, it
will be a little easier for his domestic program to advance.
lo yeeOn
Back to top
Donald Trump and Jack Ma channeled each other --- Jack Ol' Ma knows what he's talking about!
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): Jan 21 10:10PM
Trump inaugural speech:
"We've defended other nations' borders while refusing to defend our
own and spent trillions and trillions of dollars overseas while
America's infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay," Trump
said. "We've made other countries rich while the wealth, strength,
and confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon."
Jack Ma (Alibaba founder) to US:
Nobody `stealing' your jobs, you spend too much on wars
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Np-HQH_ruGY
"Past the 30 years, America had 13 wars and spending 14.2 trillion
dollars ... the money go in there.
"What if part of that money on building the infrastructure, helping
the white collars and blue collars? ...
"No matter how strategic good it is, you're supposed to spend money
on your own people. ...
"In 2008 [the last year of George W Bush's presidency and after 6 or
7 years of hugely expensive wars abroad], the financial crisis wiped
out 19.2 trillion ... destroyed 34 million jobs....
"So what if the money, was spent, not [for] Wall Street, [but] in
the Midwest of the United States and developed an industry there?
That could change ... a lot.
"So, it's not the other country steal jobs from you guys, it is your
strategy ... you did not distribute your money in the proper way
...."
In a definitive text of mathematics penned by the noted mathematician
Andre Weil, a French number theorist, it begins with a congratulatory
message consisting of a 4-word Chinese proverb from the equally noted
mathematician S.S. Chern, a world-class geometer of the 20th century.
The page displays a beautiful specimen of calligraphy with assertive
and enormously beautiful brush strokes - along with the calligrapher's
name. The message (in translation):
The Old Ma Knows The Way!
Ma is, of course, the Chinese word for horse!
One thing China has done right since 1949 was follow an extremely wise
policy of peaceful development. China has stayed out of messy
alliances and was thus able to remain independent and pursue her
domestic policy of infrastructure building, education, and raising the
people's living standard. China heeded George Washington's advice
about entangling alliances far more closely than the city named after
him. It is something that Jack Ma and many of his compatriots have
apparently noticed. When the people are free to pursue their personal
goals - better than at any other time in their memory - why shouldn't
they be relatively content and focus on following and fulfilling their
own dreams?
Our neocon rulers say that China is not a democracy.
But China does have a parliamentary system.
If it represents the people and if the government is keen on fighting
corruption and serving the people, it is certainly better than a
broken democracy which has been taken over by elements which sacrifice
the people's welfare for their selfish goals like the neocons have
been doing in this country.
Actually, China will continue to open up further and further as the
threat of the nation's security recedes from the horizon.
Now, when neo-colonialists are still using NGOs and endowments to stir
up trouble in Tibet, Xinjiang, Hong Kong, etc, there's a real risk
that all the hard work of the past decades that have made China such
an economic success would just go up in smoke like what happened in
Libya, Iraq, and Afghanistan. What thinking Chinese would want that
to happen? And that's why the current system enjoys strong support
from the people.
I hope Trump recognizes the destructiveness of war and pursues a
peaceful development future for America, like China has been pursuing,
so that America will be great again and there will be peace on earth.
lo yeeOn
Back to top
Dimitrov is advancing playing very well
PeteWasLucky <Waleed.Khedr@gmail.com>: Jan 21 01:45PM -0800
No one is paying attention to him
calimero377@gmx.de: Jan 21 01:57PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 10:45:54 PM UTC+1, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> No one is paying attention to him
Who is he?
Max
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: Jan 21 02:04PM -0800
> > No one is paying attention to him
> Who is he?
> Max
'baby' Federer.
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jan 22 12:08AM +0200
>> No one is paying attention to him
> Who is he?
> Max
Sounds Russian.
Back to top
Good start Zverev
TT <ascii@dprk.kp>: Jan 21 10:42PM +0200
21.1.2017, 15:41, RaspingDrive kirjoitti:
>>> final from here.
>> Not necessarily. Nadal will probably beat Monfils easily but I'm not so sure he'll beat Raonic (assuming Raonic wins his next two matches.)
> With ever match win the Danimal's confidence soars. I will be surprised if he loses to Raonic.
I don't know... watching Raonic makes me think that he probably deserves
his rank 3... His ground game looks pretty dangerous nowadays and
combined with that serve he'll be very hard to beat by anyone on this
quick surface.
RaspingDrive <raspingdrive@gmail.com>: Jan 21 02:07PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 3:42:24 PM UTC-5, TT wrote:
> his rank 3... His ground game looks pretty dangerous nowadays and
> combined with that serve he'll be very hard to beat by anyone on this
> quick surface.
Haven't watched him, so will defer to your judgment.
Back to top
Trump Deletes Misspelled Tweet, Which May Be Illegal
PeteWasLucky <waleed.khedr@gmail.com>: Jan 21 04:33PM -0500
https://www.google.com/amp/gizmodo.com/trump-deletes-misspelled-tw
eet-which-may-be-illegal-1791466204/amp?client=ms-android-google
--
----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/
calimero377@gmx.de: Jan 21 01:43PM -0800
On Saturday, January 21, 2017 at 10:33:05 PM UTC+1, PeteWasLucky wrote:
> https://www.google.com/amp/gizmodo.com/trump-deletes-misspelled-tw
> eet-which-may-be-illegal-1791466204/amp?client=ms-android-google
Still butt-hurt?
Max
Back to top
cancel
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): Jan 21 08:40PM
<o5tosm$62s$1@reader1.panix.com> was cancelled from within trn.
acoustic@panix.com (lo yeeOn): Jan 21 08:45PM
<o5tvn1$ba0$1@reader1.panix.com> was cancelled from within trn.
Back to top
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.tennis+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.