Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Whitley]

Just watched last night's Phil Mayer show. He and his cast of visitors that included Elliott Spitzer tore Trump a new ass hole. That's not to be unexpected on that show. There was some focus on his decision to withdraw from the Paris Accords. What was missing in that discussion was some balance. The withdrawal is not without basis.

What was particularly interesting to me in McCarthy's POV was how BO skilfully avoided steps that would have required the Senate to step up and consent on the Accords. That act would have forced Senators to vote the interests of their constuents. Its not likely that the treaty would have enough votes to consent under those circumstances and there is no way Obama would have ratified it with his signature. Instead he dropped a mostly symbolic, arguably a steaming pile of shit, at the feet of the incoming administration. At the same time he claimed the Accords as the gleaming cornerstone of his leadership on global environmental action.

IMO he goes a little overboard in the piece in some ways but there are important points here, not the least of which is that the US signed up to nothing of substance. When one realizes how symbolic and pretty useless the Paris Accords actually are, that they were nothing past political posturing on reducing green house emissions, that sort of renders all the hand wringing by the left over the US withdrawl moot.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...n-constitution

It is not just the Paris Accords but the Trump administration's entire attitude to the environment. If they can't make a buck off it---it does not matter to them.

[SeattleLionsFan]

I'll bite on that one Buchanan! .

I'll assume for this argument that the Paris Accords were/are largely symbolic. The message sent with signing those accords? I posit that the message sent was that global warming is a threat to the planet and we recognize that truth and are willing to be part of the process to make things better. By withdrawing, we use the symbol to show we don't give a fuck about global warming and refuse to have any role in the process.

Now let me ask you this, if the accord was symbolic only, why did we feel the need to withdraw and abandon any role we have in crafting solutions ? What benefit do we achieve from the terrible PR and abdication of our role on the world stage?

[Ghengis Jon]

Trump desperately needs a "win". Immigrant ban? Fail. Build a Mexican paid wall? Fail. Health care reform? Fail. Rally American people? Fail. Show domestic leadership? Fail. Fire the head of the FBI to end an investigation? Massive fail.

For the first time during this administration, Trump will actually not be lying when his lips are moving. Promised to abandon the non-binding agreement during the campaign and has carried out his promise. The Loser-in-chief finally gets a 'win'.

[Jeff Buchanan]

.......... Now let me ask you this, if the accord was symbolic only, why did we feel the need to withdraw and abandon any role we have in crafting solutions ? What benefit do we achieve from the terrible PR and abdication of our role on the world stage?

Something I've become increasingly aware of over the course of 9 presidencies in my life time is how presidents and their administrations work to create a reality that suits their political purposes and agenda. In this age of increasing disengagement of an electorate with substantive information while at the same time that electorate deepens it's reliance on social media as its main source of informing their personal views, the kind of symbolism the Trump administration works to create and how they do it, shouldn't surprise anyone.

I put the withdrawl from the Paris Accords in the category of the creation of a reality that suits this administration's political purposes and agenda. Despite the failures of this administration - the ones Jon points out - to implement policy, the messaging with regard to those failures rallies a particular base to a particularly agenda. You may be appalled by it. Nevertheless, it represents an emerging agenda of Donald Trump and the inner circle of those advising him.

Although you and I may not like what we're seeing from this administration on the global environment, there's data out there that shows the economic costs and tradeoffs of pursuing environmental goals established in the Accords. Trump can be accused of cherry picking data to support his administration's position on the environment but it's there and the markets, the business community affected by reductions in green house gases, are apparently applauding this move.

So, in light of this circumstance and the easily surmountable technical aspects of withdrawl from the Accords there's an answer to your first question. Trump has said his job as President is to protect the citizens of Pittsburgh not Paris symbolically establishing his position that he does not want the US to take a leadership role in reducing global greenhouse gas emissions given the potential economic costs. We may not agree with this position.

What I'm paying attention to right now is the kind of thing that Fareed talks about in the WaPo piece he published on Thursday and was widely referenced here. This is a big deal. What it amounts to is the potential for a major change in America's leadership role among the world's nations. So, it appears for the Trump administration this is beyond just the environment. In answering your second question, it appears to me that Trump sees a decreased role in NATO and an increased role in the ME and probably Asia. As far as the ME is concerned there's no question that stabiliy there economically and politically is how we defeat IS. Frankly, I see the the current threat of Islamic extremism and terrorism as a greater danger to our way of life than global warming. This is not to say I'm disinterested in the negative impact of global warming but if I'm going to measure costs of combating one or the other, I'm going to go with combating the threat of global terrorism.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Good read on the Paris Pullout:

http://www.csmonitor.com/Daily/2017/20170602#1046159

[Da Geezer]

The US currently has the lowest GDP growth rate in the G7.

Not true.

https://interactive.guim.co.uk/charts/embed/may/2017-05-31T13:22:16/embed.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/blog/2017/feb/23/germanys-gdp-shows-19-rise-over-last-year

[Dr. Strangelove]

The fact that there's been 3 successful terror attacks in England in the past 3 months is proof that only Theresa May, and not Jeremy Corbyn, can keep Britains safe from terror!

Trump's trying to argue that this attack shows why the 'travel ban' (his own words) is needed. One, it only covers a handful fo countries. Two, the entire justification for the ban, which lasts 4 months, is that a pause in immigration was needed to give the Trump admin time to develop a better vetting process. Well, they've been in power for over 4 months now...have they been doing ANYTHING towards creating this so-called vastly superior process? Why is the pause still needed when they've had more than the time they promised it would take?

Charles Krauthammer pointed out months ago that the ban was all for show, and had no real substance. There's absolutely nothing preventing the Trump people RIGHT NOW from creating a tougher immigration process. Yet they're obsessed with this travel ban because one, it hurts Trump's ego to ever admit defeat in anything, and two, large portions of the base somehow thinks a 4 month halt of immigration from 6 countries (no longer Iraq) will fix terrorism.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Not true.

https://interactive.guim.co.uk/charts/embed/may/2017-05-31T13:22:16/embed.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/bl...over-last-year

Brexit will be great for Britain. Absolutely great. Tremendous. Finally jobs will be added in the Welsh coal mines again! The future is so bright, it's positively bituminous!

[Dr. Strangelove]

Another Middle Eastern war potentially brewing...Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE, and Bahrain sever all ties with Qatar, block all borders, accusing it of 'terrorism' and interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. Bahrain is giving its citizens 14 days to leave Qatar

Al Jazeera is based out of Qatar, FWIW. We also have a Central Command base there.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/04/saudi-arabia-bahrain-and-egypt-cut-diplomatic-ties-with-qatar.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jun/05/saudi-arabia-and-bahrain-break-diplomatic-ties-with-qatar-over-terrorism

[Dr. Strangelove]

LMAO...all it takes is an unflattering segment on 'Morning Joe' to get Trump to act like a buffoon and damage his own legal case. Now it's Jeff Sessions' turn to get thrown under the bus. Does he not remember signing the 'watered-down pc version'?

[ame]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871674214356484096[/ame]

[ame]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871675245043888128[/ame]

[ame]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871677472202477568[/ame]

[Dr. Strangelove]

Tillerson, Mattis, and McMaster wanted and expected Trump to reaffirm Article 5 at the NATO meeting. Trump himself apparently eliminated that line from his speech.

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/05/trump-nato-speech-national-security-team-215227

Also the lead photo is great

[iam416]

News re Qatar is fantastic. Hopefully they'll move the World Cup and some good will finally come from that shitball region.

[froot loops]

I wonder why he would remove the Article 5 line in the speech.

Good call by talent on Qatar, I didn't think of the World Cup.

[Dr. Strangelove]

News re Qatar is fantastic. Hopefully they'll move the World Cup and some good will finally come from that shitball region.

Heh, I was thinking of that too...F U Sepp Blatter

Have seen reports from Doha suggesting supermarkets are already running out of food

[Dr. Strangelove]

Simpy put, this is an outright lie and evasion of responsibility. The Dems can't filibuster any of these positions. The holdup has been that the White House is way behind all other recent administrations in simply nominating anyone to these posts. Out of 559 posts requiring Senate confirmation, Trump still hasn't nominated ANYONE for 442 spots. In their defense, a lot of qualified people probably aren't interested in joining the clownshow.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/

[ame]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/871722020278587393[/ame]