Kirk Gallaway

That is about as involved as the Paine's could conceivably be. The Paine"s are a sort of a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" conspiracy honey pot. But the truth is there are people who do those things, whether it's out of the goodness of their hearts or some ideology, just as there are people who are committed to selfless acts to do relief work to relieve the suffering of others or even everyday people who work in hospitals. Similarly, There are people who are attracted to people from different countries, or have a fascination with a particular country!. Maybe it's deliberately contrarian to a prevailing public perception of that country. Could it be she just felt sorry for Marina's terrible circumstance, and maybe her most personal goal was that she could learn more Russian from it? But with that came Lee, who by accounts was known to beat his wife. So she takes on this husband who is by all society's count a loser, with a lot of personal problems and then when faced with the prospect that he may have killed the President. My attitude would have at first been disbelief, (as it was for both of them), and then I would have said to myself "enough of this selflessness,what the hell am I doing?, this guy could have committed an act that could even destroy my life!" What always kills me is how everything Ruth then said about Lee that is not positive is magnified 100 times here! People jump on it like leeches in heat! As Jonathan says, they are under no obligation to do anything or say anything for Lee. Is anyone here so selfless, that they can't understand that? There are a lot of unanswered questions about Ruth Paine, and whether she's been completely truthful doesn't rest on this.. But this whole business of Alan Dulles, career master spy organization head, in his greatest power play in his life, actually disposing of the President of the United States, using his mistresses' best friends family to wittingly or unwittingly take the enormous heat and scrutiny of setting up Oswald. Does that really make sense? Considering the other means we assume he had at his disposal? Was that really sound? In some ways the pressure to condemn Ruth Paine becomes more integral if holding on to this whole plot line. The search for who killed JFK has become like piling up grains of sand on a bedrock, and yet the CIA/ Dulles plot is maybe considered the best in a plurality of explanations? If Ruth Paine was completely innocent, would you believe that JFK was assassinated as result of a conspiracy 1 or 2 % less? .

Of course we're accustom to Ben repeatedly voicing his feelings about "absolute free speech", (which of course is protected under "free speech" heh heh ) but there may be some conflict of interest between another of Ben's most repeated warnings about China. A point I share. China is a key market for Tesla's cars. But not the only point I have against Musk. Let's do a 360 on this! Andre Ross Sorkin: But some will have sway over him, too, in ways that could distort what the public sees on Twitter. For example, Twitter has no presence in China. Musk does: A huge chunk of Tesla’s growth is dependent on that country. What happens when Chinese officials tell him to remove content from Twitter that they find objectionable? Another tweet. I'm sorry I lost the author. Back here in the U.S., Musk’s SpaceX business relies, in large part, on contracts with the Defense Department. His Tesla business is in discussions with the U.S. government about a national charging station infrastructure. His Boring Company, which digs tunnels, relies on governments for contracts. If a politician that controls the purse strings for any of Musk’s companies were to publish misinformation, would Musk remove it? But now Jeff Bezos, owner of the Washington Post, response! Bezos: Interesting question. Did the Chinese government just gain a bit of leverage over the town square? Apropos of something: -Tesla's second-biggest market in 2021 was China (after the US) -Chinese battery makers are major suppliers for Tesla's EVs. -After 2009, when China banned Twitter, the government there had almost no leverage over the platform -That may have just changed So that's the choice we everyday people are being given, the choice between billionaires??? But then, maybe Musk taking over twitter isn't "absolute free speech, as Ben had hoped? Still I'm a little confused. Musk: By “free speech”, I simply mean that which matches the law. I am against censorship that goes far beyond the law. If people want less free speech, they will ask government to pass laws to that effect. Therefore, going beyond the law is contrary to the will of the people.

Yes, Jim you're such an "inside teaser." Perhaps you could tell us the "best part?"

Wages are not eroding! There's actually a labor shortage. You've been spouting the Fox mantra for so long you have no idea what's really going on in the states. Anybody in the U.S. who requires services could be serviced by immigrants. If you're in the Hotel industry, whether it's a corporate chain or a small hotel owner , they requires immigrants to clean. The restaurant industry would collapse without immigrants. Why because whites don't want to do those jobs. Is that simple!! First off it's Ben: Are you the face of the New Donk Party? Higher blue-collar wages are bad.T Then it's Ben:But if a First World nation has open borders to a Third World gateway, we see the results. Which the elite Donks and 'Phants cheer! The coprolitic Purple Party! Oh it's the ":donks and the phants" now Ben and we're not directly accused of anything? That was quite a rant! We could be insulted but maybe a few too many Mai Thai's? 😝 🙃🤥

Ben:I lived in America 60 years, and they were saying that for the last 30 years---"Americans won't do this work." So, millions of Americans are willing to go to Afghanistan and Iraq, in horrid heat and carrying 90-pound packs, and get their heads blown off, but not willing to do manual labor in the US? Well, since you've lived here 60 years, then you know the answer to that question is ---yes, right. We've had no problem recruiting soldiers for a volunteer army, and you never see white people out on the fields. You know I asked you once if we should have a minimum wage and you didn't answer? Ben:For the right wage, Americans, and people everywhere on the planet, will do the work.Supply and demand. Econ 101. Yes, wages may have to rise to fill some positions---good! Ok, and how would you accomplish that? What you're really asking for is something that will monumentally change our free market capitalist system. The closest thing I can interpret from what your asking is called a "guaranteed living wage." Then you come up with this idiocy. Ben: Are you the face of the New Donk Party? Higher blue-collar wages are bad.Then this rant! Add on: I hope the Donks learn to stop calling everyone, everywhere, 24/7, a "racist." Do Donks ever feel sheepish, or self-righteous, about defining whole groups of people they never met as "racists." So when you remove all your slogans, buzzwords, dogwhistles, and faux drama.You actually thought the candidate most likely to bring you that was Donald Trump?,and then seeing him in office for years trying to slashing benefits to everyday people, giving tax cuts to the wealthy, you still believed this? There is only one candidate who outright has come out for Guaranteed Living Wage and it's a Democrat Bernie Sanders, and maybe Elizabeth Warren, and yes Ben, that is about as anti Corporate and anti "Globalist" as you can get. You come off in these statements as if you think you're the only guy who would stand up for the working man? And you're not even aware of this? So do you believe in a guaranteed living wage or was all this drama just designed to impress us that your heart is with the everyday guy? Because all this knowledge was readily available to you. Are you sure you're not trying to BS us?.

It turns out now. Minority leader Kevin Mc Carthy and Mitch Mac Connell were exploring the 25th amendment and other remedies to remove Trump from office after the 1/6 riots and we have Mc Carthy plotting here on tape, but they lost nerve when they didn't have Republican support. Then Mc Carthy decided to patch up things with Trump and go down to Mar Lago and deliver a load of Trump's favorite Starburst candies! https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/21/us/politics/trump-mitch-mcconnell-kevin-mccarthy.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20220422&instance_id=59157&nl=the-morning&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=89932&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55 Then Salon goes into various other off the wall gaffes by Mc Carthy. https://www.salon.com/2022/04/22/kevin-mccarthy-caught-on-tape-wont-forgive-him-this-time/ Among those; Kevin McCarthy lets GOP's Benghazi mask slip: It's all about derailing Hillary Clinton As if we couldn't figure that out , what was it 60 hours of HC testimony about that? 2.McCarthy even went so far as to admit that he wished the social media companies would ban Republicans in his caucus like Rep. Lauren Boebert of Colorado as they had banned Trump. Then when it was reported he said that, this was Mc Carthy's response. Lies camouflaged under the "Democrat corporate media" dogwhistle! Where have we heard that? Beware of buzzwords! Another illusion, the truth is, both parties want some social media censorship , they just want to censor their own different things. Then Mc Carthy's "There's two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump," McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016 exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post. Well at least he got that right. But what does that matter to Kevin? What a hipocrite!

As Ron says, that's the danger of escalation. When Ben was first calling for a no fly zone. . Russia didn't have air superiority and 2 months in, still doesn't. I'm not sure if they've tried and don't want to push it. There are things we don't understand. But there's no problem getting our tactical weapons inside Ukraine up to now..But Russia's threatening to stop that. Everything on one level seems so measured. Ben talks about Poland being our proxy army, but I haven't read where they are at willing to do that. They've only offered to give us their Soviet era Mig 29 flying jets for us to use if we replenish them.. Which apparently surprised us. Now Slovakia is offering some Mig 29's, and are scheduled to upgrade to our F-16's in 2024. So they don't expect that they might need to use them for themselves in the meantime? As I was saying a month ago,, nothing can stop Russia from just lobbing bombs into East Ukraine, and that's what's going on. Is it now just a matter of Putin accepting the hollowest victory? You have to wonder if the largely pro Russian Ukrainians in the East can really approve of being bombed out of their homes and livelihoods? Maybe that can curiously offer a road to a peaceful settlement. Obviously Ukraine's going to have to give up Crimea, but maybe that 20% corridor could be established as an independent region? Of course, I'm not sure how that would really work. To hear us tell it, it's been a huge Russian disaster. As far as having high hopes to rush in and overtake the country and install a regime change. I do tend to think that was a hope. So in that limited sense, it's a failure. But I don't necessarily accept the west's claims that Putin is as desperate as we portray him. Then there's always that gambit possibility. Could the attempted, then failed invasion of Kiev just end up being a plan B ploy to give the west some victory to save face?, while Putin's hoping to get an Eastern corridor out of it? Could he be that clever? It may not be likely but.....Whoa!

This is all I said specifically to you Chris. And i wasn't the least interested in hearing you further explore your petty hostilities with Matt. .If you're really not the least upset, then why is 1/2 of of your response talking about your interaction with Matt? Outside of that. I would say most of your last half was a little closer to relevant, but generally your Smedley Butler thing, which I didn't ask for either. I was trying to make a point to you, but I sense 90% of your being is just invested in your interaction with other members here.

Ben: Leave it to the globalists to spend unlimited money and lives on counter-productive wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan...and then tip-toe around Ukraine. That's really a cop out. What you're advocating enables them! I'm not just trying to engage in rhetorical jousting here. You've aggressively staked out the most hawkish position of anyone here, immediately assuming we should perpetuate a no fly zone. This is for real. This is the biggest crisis in 60 years. It's not unfair to say you're firmly to the right of both Hilary Clinton and Liz Cheney, who have made no such aggressive statements.So from a anti U.S.war machine perspective, you're hardly in a position to criticize Clinton or Cheney on defense issues. In fact you're swiftness in advocating that puts you to the right of the entire U.S. Congress! Similarly no one in congress, D or R is criticizing Biden everyday as being flat footed and ineffectual. About the only ones who would be would be politicians running for President against Biden in an election year. Of course this is a forum and you're not running for Congress. .But you can't have it both ways. Ben: I wish Europe would take the lead to a multi-state humanitarian interdiction in Ukraine. But that's another cop out.That's not going to happen. I wish they had done that years ago, but right now, as you've pointed they've been sort been whistling by the graveyard. I understand in your cheer leading for escalation, you're keeping us abreast of politicians turning toward your position. Interesting to hear about Dennis Coons joining little Marco about escalation. Maybe you'll eventually get your wish.

This is how confusion exists. Chris why I see you're upset about Matt's pro west, and anti Putin rhetoric. The truth is, it is just sincerely felt rhetoric. Matt hasn't been an aggressive proponent of Nato or American direct involvement in Ukraine. If you really have a beef, you should go after Ben. Not that I'm trying to pair you guys off. Ben listed as a topic to address:. The runaway DoD and VA budgets. Ben, You know a consensus we've had here for years and you've come here and added to, is the vileness of the U.S. Defense budget and war machine. And yet you don't see that your lofty aims of intervention are just going to stoke a locomotive of Defense spending for many years to come? ***** Ben: And also my apologies with W. I guess i thought we were all over our pride about our anatomies. I known I don't want to be seen in public without my shirt off.. Though I might dive out into the ocean occasionally, and I'd be more accepted in Europe! Matt; I like Snowden, I was merely commenting on the oppressiveness of his personal reality.

Yeah W. , I saw that and I immediately thought of Ben tanning his testicles as well, then maybe deep freezing them to help them regain shape! heh heh heh But on the other hand. I do agree with Ben's statement here. Ben: First I blame Europeans---this is on their doorstep. The Germans, French, Brits, Poles have plenty of capacity for humanitarian interdiction. Yeah,history repeating itself. They certainly were cavalier about this to the end. All this warning was just some paranoid dream kicked up by the American Deep State. Now they're rushing to get tickets to Nato! Ben: The US looks inert also. Yeah, we'll see. But isn't that what everybody says about the "deep pockets?"

Matt, Re Snowden: another at least on the surface, pro Putin apologist bites the dust, but in fairness to Snowden, probably the last place he would choose to be is Russia if not for the fact that he probably couldn't go anywhere else and not be arrested. Re: Putin's claims of "De Nazification" I'm amazed at some of knee jerk adoptions of Putin's "denazification claims" in Ukraine. Would the question be weighed near as seriously if charismatic leader Putin hadn't invoked it? How great is the neo N-z- problem in Ukraine?. Particularly in light of recent history where the Ukraine people in democratic elections, elected a Jew with near 75% of the vote. Forget electing a President by 75% of the vote. Have we in the U.S., ever elected a Jew? And we don't have problems with neo Nazis and fascists? We had to find out in a phone call from Pelosi to General Milley where he agrees that he and all of his subordinates will not take phone calls from Trump, that the only reason we don't have a more serious problem is that the Military is behind the anti fascists. But still, that's not enough for Oliver Stone in a recent interview to scoff at those skeptics of Putin denazification claims for war saying the fact the Zelensky is a Jew and is President doesn't mean shi-t!!. As if Zelensky is just some domestic pawn, in a greater game. ( yes, more conspiracies Oliver? or is it just politics?) Obviously he's already staked out his territory on that claim as that is the major theme in his pro Putin "Ukraine on Fire" film. As well as his film interview with Ukraine former President, billionaire in exile Yanukovsky. In a lot of ways,, we're faced with a country of people who can't admit they were wrong. And despite shrieks of liberties being infringed. We're too open a society to engage in a Soviet style "deprogramming". We can go after those who cause or commit illegal acts, and only hope that time brings these moonie, potential followers, and political parties down from their illusions. I have an older brother's Stones age but of a middle class background, so I know what influences were weighing on them in the mid 60's. I understand people who would applaud people of privilege offering to go to Viet Nam when they so obviously could have avoided it, like Oliver and John Kerry. But personally while I appreciate everyone who was willing to sacrifice for his country,and I'm sure it was a unique life changing experience that no one else can really know. I have to wonder just what imagery, what sort of naive, false identifications Stone and others of some privilege had. But the same could be said on one level of Zelensky. We all have an allegiance to the country we were born in. Obviously he has a lot of historic persecution among his countryman to forgive, being Jewish. But he's not a naive person. He's aware of the obstacles that have to be overcome, and he's up to doing it, even if he ends up failing. But in the case of this war. I think he's going to end up keeping the good majority of his country.(The rest will be bombed unmercifully and inherited by a giant, deadbeat country, what a future!) And, he doesn't need a lot of scoffing by rich well off westerners. I'm also sympathetic to those who want peace, but it should come as no surprise, by looking through history, that some people do think there are things worth fighting and dying for. But whatever some of us may think of Israel, who would better hold Zelensky's feet to the fire about the extent of Anti Semitism in his country as they did in this interview with Zelensky during his visit there in January of 2020. They asked him about the Holodomor, the Soviet-imposed deliberate famine of 1932-33, which killed millions, and the Holocaust, and he's asked about the influence of Banderas and other historic nationalist figures who at one point collaborated with the Nazis below, as well as about the legalities of his interactions with Trump.. ****** https://www.timesofisrael.com/a-serious-man-zelensky-bids-to-address-ukraines-dark-past-brighten-its-future/ The naming of streets after Ukrainian nationalist heroes has been quite controversial. What are you doing about that? Zelensky:This applies not only to streets but also to monuments. It’s a question of how people with different history, with different attitudes, can live together in practice. It is a very complicated and sensitive issue. There are heroes that are honored in the west and in the center of Ukraine, and there are other Ukrainians that have their own heroes and think otherwise. And I understand the different feelings. And that’s why I’ve said several times, very clearly: When we have so complicated a history, let’s build a common history. Let’s find those people whose names do not cause controversy in our present and in our future. Let’s name the monuments and streets for those people whose names do not provoke conflict. Nowadays, we have our own modern heroes — people who have made history, scientists, people in space exploration, great sportsmen, many writers… people who are widely respected in all parts of Ukraine. Let’s keep politics out of this issue. What kind of Jewish home was yours? Orthodox, not at all Orthodox? Zelensky: Not Orthodox. An ordinary Soviet Jewish family. Most Jewish families in the Soviet Union were not religious. You know religion didn’t exist in the Soviet state as such. Of course, I believe in God. But I speak with him only in those moments which are personal for me Is religion important to you now? Zelensky: (Pauses.) I had one attitude when I was a boy, and another now. I never speak about religion and I never speak about God because I have my own personal opinion about it. Of course, I believe in God. But I speak with him only in those moments which are personal for me, and important, and where I feel comfortable in those places.

Aleksandr Dugin is Putin's main literary geopolitical influence. In this 2017 interview. He says he wants a re establishment of a Russian empire to it's proper place as co equals to the U.S. and China, sort of bridging the gap as Eurasia. And annexing Ukraine is an integral part of that. Unfortunately he thinks Putin is a bit of pussy, because he's done nothing toward that end in 17 years. Putin is pushing 70 this year. Putin thinks if he's going to be a great Russian historical figure, times running out and he's going to have to push it now, at least as far as he can. A more detailed interview by the BBC below .

Paul, Of course, any body from anywhere is"entitled to state their opinions" in this case about America. But it's really about anything. But there are "facts". When they're challenged to produce facts, they may not be able to but that in no way infringes their free speech. Yet that's what I'm hearing a lot. 2. Paul:If we can read and think we see Democrats (or the NYT)lie about Biden’s son, or Hillary, or whoever the target is, understand why they are doing it, wish they had more courage to just do what’s right and oppose corruption in their own ranks as well as in the thoroughly corrupted elected segment of the Republican Party. You bring up Hunter Biden. Biden can't open up a case against his son. That would be seen as autocratic. No one would believe such results. The DOJ opens a case against Hunter Biden. It takes time to build a case or haven't we noticed how slow justice has been for Trump? Despite recordings of Trump attempting voter fraud? Now we hear the case is getting traction. What evidence do you have the Democrats are lying?. They're doing the same things the Repubs are doing, waiting and seeing what happens in the courts. It's simply not their job.. You're saying you wish the Dems had the courage to do what's right and oppose the corruption of Hunter Biden and Hilary, so you're making the assumption that Hunter Biden and Hilary are guilty but you refuse to answer guilty of what? Aren't those all legitimate questions to ask?

Exactly Matt, Ben's deep in his Thai cave, peering at the imaginary glimmerings of life in the U.S. Has absolutely no real understanding. He's fallen prey to every Fox buzzwords, dog whistles and faux dramas like a lamb lead to slaughter. Maybe that's why this alienated rant. Ben: Krugman is smart, and makes some good points.And, remarkably, Krugman goes entirely mute on US border controls against cheap and illegal immigr labor. Oh my god that is remarkable Ben!. "Krugman's entirely mute!!, What an insightful 2 sentence "everyman' summary review, Ben. Sorry he couldn't read your mind and hear you barking at the moon, and give you the attention you deserve.. What could be wrong with him?. You can't challenge yourself to come with a less dimwitted, cheap review than this! Ben:Are you the face of the New Donk Party? Higher blue-collar wages are bad!!!!. No, Ben We're not bad.! We are the DONKS!, We're going to make sure you never work beyond $7.25 an hour again. But don't worry. if you just let us do our MSM mischief on you. You'll eventually grow to like it. Just keep watching Fox!. Ben:. I hope the Donks learn to stop calling everyone, everywhere, 24/7, a "racist." Do Donks ever feel sheepish, or self-righteous, about defining whole groups of people they never met as "racists!!!." Oh my god, Ben !!! You've nailed the Donks! They've been keeping you underneath their heels all your life! It must feel good to must finally cry out at your Donk oppressors.. So you're always being victimized Ben? Is that why all the anger? Ben:If you meet some racists from a particular demographic, party or group, does that mean all people in that group are racists? That's a bunch of self pitying BS. As is your whole rant. Nobody's directly called you a racist here, or referred to any imagined demographic.. Maybe if you didn't approach us with multiple personalities and stop trying to be the "shock jock", and tried being earnest, we might disagree, but you'd find out we're pretty nice guys.

Ben: So then I point out holes in your military strategy and you go back to Hilary Clinton! Let me tell you the truth about Hilary Clinton you're going to hear nowhere else. Just imagine your situation living in Thailand and yet your privy to this information! Hilary Clinton on policy foreign has always been a manicured centrist! She had been meticulously dotting ever "I" and crossing every "t" to run for President for 16 years!, never doing anything that, to the mainstream was controversial. I'm not a big fan of Hilary's foreign policy. Hilary did vote for GW's war in Iraq. It was for that reason, I voted for Barack Obama who was against the war, over Hilary in 2008. It's a solid reason to not vote for Hilary, if you choose. But really politically it was a very calculated, prudent move from someone aspiring to run for President who was serving in the Senate in 2004. She could ride Bush's coat tails if he was successful, ( because no one knew how it was going to turn out) and disavow it and say she was supporting the country in time of crisis after 911 if he wasn't. You and I won't forgive her but most people will. I would say her worst infraction listed in your article turned out to be Libya , where we ended up supporting taking out Khadaffy ( don't correct me on spelling) and throwing the country into a disorderly tailspin for years. Still it's nothing that any mainstream Republican wouldn't have done at the time. It's very calculated. Hilary won't position herself to the right of any Republican in foreign policy! All those incidents of Hilary's hawkishness in a subordinate position cited in your article Ben, are small potatoes.They've been warning about this confrontation with Russia over Europe for 60 years. Stop this peacenik crap Ben! You and Curtis Lemay E. are way to the right of Hilary Clinton on this critical issue! There's your proof to what I'm saying about Hilary being a centrist. You haven't heard Hilary spout anything near your aggressive posturing on this, at least yet. My guess is that when push came to shove you were also in favor of Bush's War in Iraq, and maybe would have switched if things didn't go right. The Republican Party did not criticize the War in Iraq for over a decade until Trump took it up against Jeb in the 2016 primaries, which finally gave Republicans an excuse to saying they're against it. I don't see any consistency in you from your early repetitive references to the U.S. military "Deep State" (which has become such a trite term!) and then now jumping on to your super Hawk position in Ukraine. ****** W:At least Chris can be excused for knowing so little about American history and politics. I agree with W. Chris. You are excused, now run along! heh heh heh heh heh It's a joke Chris! Do we really have to hear back from you about it?

You guess?? The pronunciation I assume was a bit tricky for you. (Was it May-ee?) heh heh heh You must be an expert, what does the E. stand for? Remember your nostalgic spin out on the segway speedway, Ben?, That's Italian, it's segue. But you missed the whole point. Irony can also be tricky. And serious discussions about Hilary's domestic policies, I can understand would be trickier still for you Ben. But to give you some foreign policy forum context, the kick on this forum from the Hilary emasculated is HC and Liz Cheney are super hawks. In reality that case can be made more for Cheney's daughter, but actually once Jeff Carter said positively if Hilary was elected President, she was planning a nuclear attack on both Russia and China while a unique window he said was open but never explained how it was open! But you and Curtis E. (and maybe GW) make them look like defense pussycats! There's no telling where this could lead. You can claim credit if we eventually invade and gain the glorious triumph you foresee. But you're actually counting on an attack that would make Putin give up all the gains he's made, so you're confident you could precipitously push Putin in a corner, make him give up everything , including his position as ruler and the prospect of being tried as a war criminal, and not strike back?? That's easy to say from the jungles of Thailand with no real knowledge of modern warfare, or weaponry or military strategy in an online world where everyone is an expert. Of course,this has been discussed a lot , and everyone's entitled to their opinion, we'll leave aside past history but why would any of us pay much attention?, as it seems we don't.

About the same as General Curtis Le Maye, if he were living would be applauding Ben Cole for his forum "Give me a Ukraine flyover zone, or give WW3" jingoes. Does that answer your question, Ben?

Actually Paul, My Dad said "maybe you should go to Russia and see how you like it " to me in about 69-70! heh heh I think about the best example you can make about relative happiness would be the young person in the U.S. with 100k in education debt with no reasonable prospect of paying it down and watching some of his friends lead an upwardly mobile lifestyle, is certainly weighed down a lot more more than a typical Russian youth with similarly no prospects, and no other friends with those prospects, but very little debt. But it seems it's harder to imagine the suppression of being round up for political belief's against an autocracy. !.Paul:The problem with Democrats engaging in media censorship, 2. Paul:If we can read and think we see Democrats (or the NYT)lie about Biden’s son, or Hillary, or whoever the target is, understand why they are doing it, wish they had more courage to just do what’s right and oppose corruption in their own ranks as well as in the thoroughly corrupted elected segment of the Republican Party. The first point I was making Paul that you automatically assume is in evidence and haven't addressed is "How are the Democrats are engaging in media censorship?" And the how are they "lying" about Hunter Biden and Hilary Clinton?.And what specifically is it that you're charging them with, that the Democrats are lying about? Have you ever thought that there is a sort of "cancel culture" here about of debunking conspiracy theories on a conspiracy website?" Because I have. This question is immediately avoided by calling it a red state/ blue state partisan issue, when in reality I'm just asking you to clarify. What on earth are you talking about here? Is this a hyphenated Democrat/NYT/DOJ conspiracy theory? You've just sort of hit and run here and haven't explained in any detail your theory.But what's worse to me is your saying anyone who would question that is somehow an "American" or "Democrat" "homey" and the usual followers come in and support that, and nothing is clarified.. Could you support your argument? Because it's not clear.

To the dismay of Ben and Chris, more red state blue state kool aid to ponder. ( Of course, When has having zero detailed understanding of the American political system iever stopped Chris from pontificating about it to mere American inhabitants? Ben's jingoes are at least, brief!) Fellow Trump obfuscator , and fervid 2020 stolen election advocate.Mark Meadows has now been found to have voter registration in a red and blue state. Virginia and North Carolina. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article259506469.html kool aid, kool aid ----- tastes great! wish I had some--- can't wait!

Paul, I assume you wrote that long thoughtful piece, because you're inviting discussion about it. Paul: If we can read and think we see Democrats (or the NYT)lie about Biden’s son, or Hillary, or whoever the target is, understand why they are doing it, wish they had more courage to just do what’s right and oppose corruption in their own ranks as well as in the thoroughly corrupted elected segment of the Republican Party. The question i have here Paul is what are your examples of "Democrat media censorship?" So the NYT and the democrats are synonymous? I'm not sure of the specific case you're making with Hilary, was that the e mails? I'm sure there's something there, Of course once you start talking about Hunter Biden, it gets somewhat trivial about "democrat corruption". Because he's not really in their ranks. But still are the Democrats "lying" about Hunter Biden or hiding the dirt on Hunter Biden? What are they supposed to do? I haven't seen any evidence of that. The FBI has been investigating Hunter Biden. But Biden hasn't interfered in the case off his son, but Trump was continually stonewalling aiding he investigations involving his kids and Jared Kushner. Paul:The problem with Democrats engaging in media censorship, which Matt and maybe others don’t think worth mentioning, is that it reveals something deeper, which is that they are not the good guys and gals we imagine them to be, other than in comparison to the goons on the other side. Specifically, I saw something completely different here with Matt. You said , "The US calls RT Russian propaganda without putting in perspective that our media is also propaganda. " You weren't talking about Democrat controlled media. You were comparing the U.S. with Russia. I would agree with you that both sides are propagandizing maybe more than I think Matt might. (though i don't know) But I agree with Matt completely, there's no comparison of the censorship of Russians people getting thrown in jail for speaking their minds about the Russian war in Ukraine. One such case happened today. Your examples of Trump getting kicked off twitter, they are a private company. In Russia there are no private news companies or they've been disband by Putin and some independent dissident Russian voices have left the country. Chris Hedges having his earlier stuff on youtube scrubbed is worth getting upset about. But he's still free to push his point of view, just not on Youtube and it's worth mentioning, he's never a guest on CNN and MSNBC, yes. But people can seek him out online. The average Russian can't find information outside of state TV. There is a growing number of people who are buying VPN's because they don't want the government tracing them and they're probably scared to death to purchase it.. As for Trump getting banned on twitter. Personally i can respect other people's point of view on this one. But in my mind, if our justice system worked fairly and equitably at a faster speed. Trump should be in jail. I don't have anymore sympathy for him than I do for O.J.'s sentence in Las Vegas. Yes they're not the same, but for right now, Trump is free.

Paul you've come up with a lot of stuff here. There's a lot to sort out. Paul: Ask yourself this - if the 2016 election had been between Trump and Bernie Sanders who would have won? That would have been a great race, with 2 anti establishment candidates, occupying ideas out of the conventional political spectrum. I honestly think Trump would have won. People loved Trump's strength although it was really just masking his insecurity and incompetence. In the primaries , Hilary handily had more total votes than Bernie. That whole pro Hilary - anti Bernie DNC thing by Debbie Wasserman Schultaz sucked but it didn't matter. Yes the Dem donor class won with Hilary. But it's really more because of the Dem minorities not warming up to Bernie, as illogical as that seems. It played out again in 2020. Black voters don't want anything new and flashy. They wanted 3 time loser Joe Biden who made the most savvy political decision of his career by putting himself below Barack Obama in 2008. There's no question, we've all said many times Clinton sold out to The Republicans and Democrat globalists. He came into office with a typical liberal vision of being the next JFK. He appointed Robert Reich as Labor Secretary. That was a great appointment. ( Reich laments now that they had their chance and blew it.) He tried to pass an ambitious health care program and made Hilary his point woman. The Republicans stalled around and eventually ended up crucifying her. That same tactic was used 15 years later, the Republicans were going to fake like they were interested, Obama was sort of naive thinking they could all work together but Nancy Pelosi wasn't going to let that happen this time, but they got a lot less and got what? 12 million more people health care. Then in 1994, there was the "Republican revolution" and Gingrich's "Contract with America" and Clinton lost his chance for any sort of Progressive Presidency and started cooperating with the Republicans on the corrosive crime bill and went completely with the Republicans on Nafta, never to return, until they started paying a political price with the Trump candidacy. Nancy Pelosi is a Northern California guilty liberal, who would like to hold on to all of her appurtenances of power, like unregulated stock trading, not that she needs to, because she's come from a wealthy Mayland political family background. But ultimately she knows how well she's done and would pay more taxes if asked. She is aware of the inequalities of wealth and it could be in part out of a fear that things could get so out of control, that there could be a class revolution, that she wants to appear on the side of the lowly. I'm not in any way comparing her to FDR, as he was a President, from an aristocratic background during a very economically challenged era. But some have said of Roosevelt that his New Deal legislation and his attempt to a construct a social safety net "saved Capitalism." These "self hating white liberal" Democrats have somewhat of a guilty conscience and are not prepared to put up a strong stand against the hippocracy of their position, should there be a unified, concerted effort by constituents who know the issues. Just as Pelosi herself backed off on her insistence on Congress free stock trading rights. She may not work for it, but she won't use her power against it.There's a lot going on right now, so maybe not this session but something is going to done about that because it's developed bipartisan support. But Pelosi is pretty typical of blue state city liberals. You have a quarter to a third of the Democrats who are "the base". That is,they are politically active. They may knock on doors,circulate petitions, attend rallies. These are largely the Bernie, Elizabeth Warren people. They're mostly young, liberal, informed, intelligent,up on all the issues, civil rights, abortion rights, who goes to the Scotus. They're largely anti defense. They know what Citizen's United is. Then you have some entrenched capitalist globalist from rich districts and a few freaks who enjoy their privilege and somehow can swing in it in working class districts or states, like Joe Manchin. All this group is probably 10% of the total Democrat party, though they're generally well financed. Each party is polarizing ideologically. Whereas the Republicans may anticipate class warfare, but their attitude is to hunker down, and question the legitimacy of a government safety net at all, and they'll tell you further the government isn't effective at all at addressing these problems anyway, so they're making it a self fulfilling prophecy by simply opposing everything the Democrats are trying to enact. At the most generous assessment, they are adopting a bargaining position that the government should be at the size it was in the 50's, or maybe 100 years ago. The only moderates left of the House Republicans, that is the minority, come from wealthy districts. But the majority will tell you that governments just tax your hard earned pay and are really an evil, that just take away your rights. Many of the new or newly adapted Trump Republicans these days, push government conspiracies. Of course bringing up the Granddaddy of all conspiracies, the JFK assassination, is very profitable for them to allude to. Though, they have little detailed understanding.

Exactly Pat, our forum tabloid contributor New York Post er boy Ben, is smelling blood on Hunter Biden again! So what is it?, privileged families, using their connections to get cushy jobs on corporate boards? Tales of drug abuse? Tax infractions, After the Trump Presidency?? "Oh, you just wait" says Ben. Hoping to find the usual Fox News, Democrat pedophile gold, Ben? Obviously whatever information can be exposed, should be exposed on both the Trump and Biden family. And can there be any doubt who exponentially has more to hide? Exclusive: Leaked Messages Reveal the Origins of the Most Vile Hunter Biden Smear Fugitive Chinese tycoon and Steve Bannon ally Guo Wengui pushed out explicit material—and lies—on the eve of the 2020 election. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/04/hunter-biden-laptop-guo-wengui-bannon-giuliani/

I agree with you about Chris Hedges, that is absurd. I think in part it's because he worked for the NYT and is one of them. RT always had some good stuff you wouldn't see on our MSM. I was watching their coverage for a few weeks before the they shut it off, just to see what they reported. But their lead story for many weeks had been the Trucker's convoy in Canada. Then they'd repeat a story of a young passenger in a U.S. airliner wearing a "Let's go Brandon" T shirt and matching cap making a fuss when the attendants asked him to put on a jacket, as if such dissent is regularly tolerated in Russia. Just before they invaded they showed film of people the Russian Army were evacuating from East Ukraine over the border to Russia. But it wasn't clear if there was really a danger or the Russians just told them they are better off going, probably because they were about to invade. Part of it is that during war, all countries have restricted speech. I understand the global town square but if things got heavy enough, could we really trust the government? Why wouldn't that also eventually turn out to be the fox guarding the hen house? It would then be up to the legislators. Has there ever really been such a thing as unlimited free speech anywhere? Or is it just like "liberty and justice for all." Above everything, MSM is really about money. Trump was a boon for for ratings. MSNBC and CNN decided they boost ratings by going anti Trump, and Fox was pro. It was kind of absurd that CNN was for a long while still trying to act like they were just "reporting the news", when it became so Trump dominated, Then MSNBC decided they can broaden their base by pulling in neocons for no other reason than they're anti Trump. The closest thing they got to an anti U.S. imperialist, anti defense spending person is say a Michael Moore, whose not really treated as one of their pundits, but mostly an entertainer.

News flash! Get this, My the tables have turned! Previous Putinites (and Ben idols) Tucker Carlson and Glenn Greenwald are now claiming that Ukraine hawks (like Ben) are calling them "treasonists and traitors" because they don't want the U.S. to get directly involved in a "hot war" with Russia in Ukraine! I'm more or less in the same "restraint mode" about U.S. involvement in Ukraine as them. And that's actually the majority point of view! So bottom line is even though Carlson and Greenwald are now actually in the majority, they are crying wolf that they're being persecuted as "traitors". Am I old school? Or are these guys just 2 whiny little privileged wimps! Listen to them commiserate! I can understand where people don't want to get in involved with these Greenwald bottom feeding twitter wars. But there's more to this. Both Carlson and Greenwald urged restraint on the reports of civilian killings in Bucha. And what Greenwald is reacting to is one twitter comment from Rick Wilson, (who he calls a Liberal icon,but Glenn didn't know in reality, he's a Republican media strategist). who responded satirically .\ Wilson tweets: Greenwald: See they tied their hands behind their backs, and shot themselves in the backs of their heads. Vladimir Putin's brave, strong, morally upright men were merely trying to liberate them.In fact, I'm sure it's a neocon plot to make Putin look bad. To this Glenn responds! Liberal icon @TheRickWilson fabricated a quote, attributed it to me, and now his drooling Dem fans are saying this is proof I'm a traitor! They should transfer more of their paycheck to his account to satiate their rage. *Fake quotes are fine with Twitter if for the right cause! It's called satire! The fact that people fall for satire and parody — even when it’s obvious — doesn’t make it not satire or parody. That’s the point. Someone said all satire is a joke between the writer and reader at the expense of a hypothetical third party who takes it seriously. Only the most humorless, self absorbed person like Greenwald couldn't see that, as the only Glenn I've seen is a guy whose hair is perpetually on fire and has never uttered anything near what I would consider a joke in anything I've read from him. Bottom line, don't fall for Greenwald's self victimization!