Jump to content
The Education Forum

Kirk Gallaway

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kirk Gallaway

  1. Thanks Richard, I'm not claiming to be a super expert. I guess I'm not use to writing "John" as "Jon" so I change it to Ron. It's really remarkable to me that Georgia elected that guy because he actually seems he'd even thrive in California! heh heh
  2. Dennis said: When you give a private network the power to control credit, you have a major national security ticking time-bomb. In theory I agree with you. Would you like to make a prediction on when that will be? Because people have been saying that for 50 years! Maybe you're a gold bug Dennis. though maybe now it's crypto. There has always been people who have bought gold and silver promising that the terrible day will come when it all falls apart, then they'll be ready. They've always eschew the stock market and site previous crashes. So they were always invested in precious metals while the stock markets went up all around them. Then at certain particular points of great market uncertainty, they found themselves in the good position to sell. But the collapse never did happen quite as ominously as they had foretold and they never sold out to make any profit and just went back to holding a rather worthless commodity again. I agree with you Dennis in that everybody wonders about the power of the Central Banks. Dennis: The NY fed has distributed over $12 TRILLION to its friendly mega banks since September 2019, just a few months before the virus that then destroyed Main Street small business. This is tantamount to a coup Just facts here, You say "distributed" like they're giving the money to the banks.These are short term overnight "repo" loans made at low interest rates. But they don't go out to local banks, credit unions or small individuals. It's not fair and it has never has been. That's the real issue here. You're trying to make a case that the Central Banks knew of a "plandemic" without any real facts. I see in this article below they distributed 9 of that 12 trillion between Sept 2019 and 2020 , an equal amount of time before the beginning of the pandemic and after the start of the pandemic. I'll accept your figures that they've distributed 3 trillion more in the last 6 months, which shows a pretty even flow. What you have to prove now is, was that outlay at all precipitous to the 12 month period between say Sept 2018 to 2019? Even if the spending abruptly began in Sept 2019, you're a long way from making a plandemic connection by the Central banks 4 months in advance of the China breakout. But you have to first prove this is not beyond" business as usual", but even a discrepancy could be passed off to the market conditions at the time.. So you're saying in their omnipotence, they were aware of how infectious the strain was and how ominous the breakout would be, and also successfully predicted that Trump would handle it like a deer in the headlights and they would be able to instigate their vllanous plan to eliminate the corner liquor store? Is that your read of the plan? Those kind of plans always reflect to me more than anything else, the utter sense of powerlessness of the people who hold them. And of course one thing is true is that the neglected oversight in the case you're making did occur under the Trump Administration, but people have always wondered about the oversight. But we agree Jon Osoff is at least turning the public attention to the power of the Central Banks. And just because they've been saying it for years, doesn't mean the worse couldn't happen, particularly with the Central banks and the Federal government spending like crazy, like they are now. And if it did happen, the most protected will always be the wealthy. https://wallstreetonparade.com/2021/03/senator-ossoff-drops-a-bombshell-the-12-or-13-largest-banks-got-the-trillions-from-the-feds-repo-loans-last-year/
  3. Joe's is right. I remember thinking to myself that Beatty had that perfectly coiffed Hollywood long haired haircut at the time. (his next movie could have been "Shampoo") He didn't really look the part. He could have looked much more gritty, as befitting his role. But that kind of license was not uncommon at the time, and when he got into action, you could see he was pretty tough long haired guy. Beatty was a liberal who for a number of years considered going into politics. To me, he could have been a natural. America likes it's liberals sort of dashing, like the Kennedy's. When I think of a politician who was the real deal, always there to do the most for the most people, I think of Bernie Sanders and more recently Elizabeth Warren. But neither are really dashing. Even though Liberals were running for cover in the 80's and 90's. America is just image conscious enough and surface enough, I think they would have thrown that whole Liberal/Conservative thing out for a figure like Beatty. But at that time, even though there was a rather successful Ross Perot candidacy, most candidates had to have some experience in government. I'm not sure if he considered running for the California Senate or Governor. It's hard to speculate how good a politician he might be. Obviously he can't expect to suck at it and run for the Presidency. Anyway, he ended up becoming a family man, and now he's around 83.
  4. Re Oprah interview: Hey, You mean to tell me that this centuries old colonial empire monarch eugenics experiment is actually.......,... racist? Oh come on now! Have you any idea of the damage such an irresponsible statement such as that can have on their masses of people? Fake news, if ever there was!! ****** Back across the pond. The average American doesn't know his political interests from a hole in the ground. You look at these people who stormed the Capitol. I'm sure some of these people could be anxiously awaiting their covid relief checks. But of course they would never think of petitioning their idol Trump for to ask for assistance? Of course not, They got sucked into the one candidate who would never offer them assistance unless he thought he was in danger of losing an election. , You know this woman, Ashli Babbit who tragically got shot and killed at the Capitol. Bill Maher said in his show she had 10's of 1000's of dollars in credit card debt. I can't remember the exact amount. But she took out a cash advance on her credit card at 44% to go to the Capitol for Trump! Had she ever heard about Bernie Sanders? Had she heard about Elizabeth Warren? The only real anti elite candidates for President who would be sympathetic to her. No she gets sucked into the one candidate who would never help her with credit card relief, who never helped her to get by from May all the way to the end of 2020 with providing her relief from the pandemic. Trump didn't care enough to even lie about lowering excessive credit card rates and not deliver like he did with Health Care. It's like a battered housewife syndrome.There's absolutely no expectation that Trump should be working for them, or held to any standard of actual performance, his only purpose is just to air their grievances.
  5. So that's Leon's son, Ron? Joe said: Franken should have fought to keep his Senate seat. Agreed, that was shameful what they did to him! The Dems will eat their own over cultural issues. At least we can be comforted that Kirtsen Gillebrand who sort of lead the charge against Franken, will never be President! P.S. then I find this! Let's throw a cultural monkey wrench into things and elect Al Franken president in 2024! ********* Yeah Dave, Brian Williams, I don't know what he was thinking. What a weirdo! Always trying to end his interviews with an off the wall spin!
  6. Great article! W. Some good 21st century historic lessons. And a warning to not be tolerant of Biden should he try to advance this further. Wow! Neera Tanden, super hawk, no wonder the only problem the Republicans had with her appointment was caddy "Republican tweets". But as the article said: A 2018 survey found the public still infected, with over two-thirds in support of limiting military action overseas, including 78% of Democratic voters. And with registered Democrats outnumbering registered Republicans by 25%, (31-25) You can conclude that probably a little over half the Republicans don't see limiting military action oversees.So it's the Democratic base that has to prevail to nip a potential expanded conflict in the bud. Provided there isn't a major upset in the equation. Since Biden is not a peace candidate, My guess is that the general trend is to continue what started with Obama, and continued with Trump. And that is, when determined as needed, progressively more drone strikes at specific targets, to minimize loss of American life which Americans are becoming increasingly intolerant. They went into the press coverage of 2017 Trump authorized airstrikes in Syria: The article did quote "A FAIR study (4/11/17) found that 39 of the top 100 U.S. newspapers by circulation published editorials praising the Trump decision, with only one (Houston Chronicle, 4/7/17) offering limited pushback on technical grounds." 39 out of 100 is 39 too many but some of those newspapers have to be pro Trump already anyway. But I was sort of confused at the attempt at a strong ending. Using a Brian Williams quote about the 2017 Trump authorized airstrikes in Syria: Brian Williams: I am tempted to quote the great Leonard Cohen: "I am guided by the beauty of our weapons." And they are beautiful pictures of fearsome armaments. My first thought was that Brian Williams wasn't such a cultural bumpkin, that he has to be aware that a figure like Leonard Cohen wouldn't be one to write a line that would extol the glories of war, and it does seem unlikely that Williams would praise Trump for any such action. Among FAIR's assessment of only one press critique of Trump's action. They didn't mention this WAPO editorial below "Democracy dies in darkness", using Williams misplaced comments.. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2017/04/07/dear-brian-williams-leave-the-rhapsodies-to-cohen/ But as to Williams quote: I think it was more his sort clumsiness out of wanting to wax poetic.
  7. Last fall, there was a lot of this logic going on that "my enemies enemy has got to be my friend". And when the balance of elites starting abandoning Trump, there seemed to be this silly thinking that somehow I should then embrace Trump. I see that as so personality driven and vacuous of any real ideology, comprehension or sense of functionality. This is another such case in point. Lindsey Graham on Ted Cruz. “If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you,” I appreciate the sentiment. Though I don't believe it. As I've seen through experience Graham actually won't convict any Republican. So that could never cut it for embracing Lindsey Graham for me. But then, do we take from that, if public approval of Congress is at an all time low, and Congress hates Ted Cruz. I should like Ted Cruz? I think not. Check out this story from Al Franken about Ted Cruz that actually happened. This is really funny!
  8. I remember when I saw it, going back through the unsettling feeling of my experience of the JFKA, but by that time, I'd already Executive Action. It's gripping, very entertaining as well. Nice to see a hero with long hair like me at the time, beating the crap out of rednecks.
  9. If this was real, they should have kept quiet and ambushed them. You're under arrest, drop you weapons or else! ******* In the usual overkill, in mid January there was 25,000 National Guard in Washington. there's still quite a few there who came from without.These people have jobs and regular lives, and are forced to be in Washington.
  10. Joe said: Biden's eventual improbable "plurality" only win, made possible because Bloomberg diluted Warren's and Sander's vote counts, which before Bloomberg entered the field were actually ahead of Bidens. First off, it was not a "plurality", or it would have gone to the second ballot at the convention. Joe, you're the only person in the world who believes that. Bloomberg never harbored a ghost's hope of taking votes from Warren or Sanders. He's a very ambitious guy whose aim was to take votes from Biden because Biden started out so poorly, he thought he could take over the centrist Democrat vote and skew it to Wall Street and get the nomination. We've told you that over and over again. Any person on the inside of politics would tell you that, including Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. * Again, These are just facts. This is no way to be interpreted as an endorsement of Joe Biden. heh heh *** Steve, good article! More improprieties from guys like Louie Gohmert! And yet apparently anybody can do anything and nobody can do anything about it. Just like this stock conflict charge against Mac Connel's wife Elaine Chao. Too little , too late! *** W. Yeah, I've heard about that mayor of Stockton. Cool story!
  11. Ron,I know you're no supporter as you've said. But instead of Texas Governor Abbott being completely embarrassed and going off to lick his wounds after the Texas power debacle. He's doubling down, saying school's out for summer and lifting all mask restrictions in Texas right when we're making progress on the virus. https://gov.texas.gov/news/post/governor-abbott-lifts-mask-mandate-opens-texas-100-percent Will I ever stop seeing General Barry Mc Caffrey on TV as a talking head, when they're "some threat" we should al know something about? Mean people suck!
  12. Why are you directing this at me? The only thing I said even remotely concerning Biden was really about Manchin and the $15 dollar minimum wage. But I do remember you showing us an editorial you wrote your readership in October where you praised Trump when he jumped on the Democrat bandwagon toward a $2000 payment to everyone, after he was party to denying you any kind of check from May to October, but you didn't tell your readership that. You made a reference to Trump caring about them when in reality it was a very transparent move to try to give everybody a check that he insists must have his name on it, to try to save his election prospects. The big problem in the U.S. is that people don't vote in their interest. You even said, though Thank God not in your editorial, that Nancy Pelosi was going to "do nothing" about getting these checks and what I'm telling you now is that if you're eagerly awaiting those checks, she is your number one champion in Washington, and its not even close! The reason you didn't get that $2000 or near it is Mitch Mac Connell, and his Senate. Period! We have a President and a bi cameral legislature, that are involved in this process. Throughout the Trump presidency during the covid pandemic, in 9 months in 2020, you got one check worth $600 (if single). If you didn't like that, did you tell your readership? If you're like most people, You've already got one check in the first 2 months of 2021, and maybe you got your hopes up for a $2000 payment and will be bitter that you're probably only going to get another one for around $1400. But if Mitch Mac Connell was still in charge, do you realize Andrew, more that half the Senate Republicans think we're starting an economic recovery, and don't think you deserve anything! You'd probably get nothing! At the most another one time check for $600. (that you probably already got in January!) Where you're probably going to get $1400, and from what I understand it's somewhat open ended that you'll probably get more checks, particularly if the economy isn't recovering. I'm sorry, I'm just giving you the facts, and if it's also of interest to your readership, they should know to.
  13. Fighting? Tanden 's been dead for a week. Biden met with Manchin probably saw it useless. It just wasn't at all a progressive victory for the Dems in the 2020 election. It was the narrowest of margins. The political reality is if you're a person who wants the biggest stimulus check you can get and a $15 minimum wage for all. Your person in Washington is Nancy Pelosi, believe it or not. If she had her way, you'd probably be $6000 dollars richer by now! She probably would have cut you a $1500 check starting last May, and every quarter since, or maybe $600 every month. People would have been able to plan much better knowing they would at least have had that income. Pelosi was holding out for more in October to try to compensate for the fact that she could only cut one check up to that one point. Trump waved the white flag, abandoned his Republican Party and conceded to his enemy, Pelosi,and came tagging along, even though he never gave a crap about aid for the 6 months prior, thinking if he could buy votes by giving people a $2000 check with his name on it, he might be able to salvage the election. But even that was a pipe dream! Pelosi has completely out maneuvered Trump for the last 2 years! He's probably never been emasculated like that by a woman before! I haven't received my $600 check yet, and was told by the IRS that if I didn't receive it by now, I can deduct from in my 2020 taxes. I don't really need a $1400 check, but I'm sure as hell not going to turn it down after paying taxes all my life. It's a bifurcated economy and people are either not missing a stitch or financially in horrible shape. Of course, a massive outlay of 1.9 trillion is debt to be paid off in the future, and is saddling those of us who have children with a enormous debt. Of course, we've have been saying that for years. For those of us who remember 19% interest rates, when we were young, they've done a remarkable job at taming inflation through monetary policy. But can we count on that forever? '
  14. All very cool. This was the R&R hit version of Apache with the warm Gibson hollow body sound that popularized Apache by Jorgen Ingmann . More rock history. This was the first big R&R hit that featured the synthesizer sound. Named after the first communication satellites. Actually a pretty song. Telstar
  15. Damn! Jim and Jeff can rejoice! Old nemesis Navalny won't be able to mouth off anymore. Putin sends him off to Gulag! Foiled again! https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/01/world/europe/navalny-prison-russia.html?campaign_id=9&emc=edit_nn_20210301&instance_id=27632&nl=the-morning&regi_id=61798350&segment_id=52604&te=1&user_id=48552702f942aacb0810b9de5ca41c55
  16. ahem..I say Cliff, this word "butthole" leaves me rather flummoxed! Even more so the phrase 'Butthole surfing" though it does sound rather exhilarating indeed! Are these American colloquialisms? Anyway, a bit back we did a bit of a Byrd a thon that was largely of the early Byrd Dylan folk era. Here's some later Byrds. Hey where's Hugh? I always liked the intro. A little Byrd country action.
  17. That's a good thing. Doesn't really surprise me much as Biden started out more pro Labor. Definitely a good political opportunity to try to put some distance between the Democrats and the tech titans that's always such a blight from our Hollywood Foreign Press Association. heh heh
  18. I saw the middle half of that. I didn't see one reference to the JFKA. But I suppose all of them believe in the JFKA Conspiracy. We're like the originals, dude! They a see you Pat, and you tell them your work on the JFKA, they'd probably rip your clothes off! But inevitably if they talk with you they will end up feeling betrayed and disappointed that you're not down the wacko wabbit hole they've gone down, much as Wheeler was with his visit here.
  19. You'll probably have as hard a time proving that as we are pinning down if JFK was said he wanted to" scatter the CIA to the winds." I'm not sure anybody really "coined" it anymore than someone coined "philosophical theories" or "stolen election" theories. What else would you call a hypothesis involving a conspiracy that is yet to be proven? While I understand that it is a pejorative term for us, as it tends to throw us in bed with wackos such as Q anon. But what tight little phrase can you use to describe "the why" behind Q anon.? It's fueled by conspiracy (adjective) theories (noun). Actually calling them "theories' are wrong. They are as discredited as theories as the flat earth beliefs. If you can come up with a more apt phrase, let's hear it. But for example I'll make a statement and say the great proliferation of new "conspiracy theories" that have aired since Trump became President has caused greater skepticism and a general dismissal by the everyday public to the JFK Assassination Conspiracy.
  20. It's a cycle that started first with spikes of exposure during the holidays, then spikes of infection, followed by spikes of hospitalization, then spikes of death. The cycle from from Xmas is finished. Now a good number of people are seeing a much greater effort toward vaccination. More people are being vaccinated and more people are behaving better anticipating vaccines. Now, There's a race to get more people vaccinated before the one thing that poses the biggest danger, the most dangerous of the variants enter the population.
  21. Wow Joe! So only Trump gets the lifetime opportunity to install a post master just like he does Supreme Court judges? I suppose he just can't ask him to resign? I think Biden's going to end up stepping on some Republican toes anyway. **** Clarence Thomas was probably the most mediocre pick for Scotus ever! George Bush was eager to be the first Republican to first nominate a black judge who was a conservative Republican. But there was just one problem. There were no good judges fitting those criteria! His few written rulings I've read all seem to sound sort of the same.
  22. I don't put much faith in it, but that is interesting Benjamin. I've always thought Woolsey most looked the part of a tortured CIA chief of any chief in the last 40 years. As I remember the story. During the fall of the Iron Curtain in the early 90's, Nicolae Ceausescu', head of Romania came back from a short trip and found the population had turned on him, then escaped in a car into the countryside and were hunted down. Eventually him and his wife were hung. His wife's final public words. " I was a Mother to you all!" .
  23. I bought a generator a long time ago for power failure up in the Mountains. It works well, but it doesn't give you heat and you have to get an ice chest, for food. It's kind of loud because logistically I can't dig a hole for it. But it's been quite a security blanket.
  24. Cory said: If it is not press, but more of a forum for discussion, it is more like a business and can be regulated by the government. Cory, I first started writing this. Then this thread became so bloody personal. I know you see yourself as a conservative, which doesn't obligate you to dot every "i" and cross every"t". A classic conservative, makes no distinction between the social media platforms and the Press. They are both businesses and the government should keep out of private business-period!. . One criticism by the Left of conservatives as hippocrisy is their insistence of not regulating business but wanting to legislate personal matters of the bedroom. Cory said:It is odd that people are concerned with the government regulating -or nationalization as you call it- speech but fine with businesses regulating speech. Regulation of speech by any entity is still regulation. Europe and Canada are by in large much more regulated than the U.S. Still regulation of free speech and commerce is going on all the time. Cliff brought up an example of a man boy -love club, obviously there are businesses that all parties want to ban. But in mainstream examples. It's much more desirable for private media businesses to regulate themselves involving matters of Free Speech, but if not, they go to the courts. But even in the land of the free, it's all out the widow if the political climate gets tenuous. A lot of people don't know but Lincoln shut down newspapers with Federal troops! But now 160 years later, when private media businesses regulate themselves, people cry bloody murder, when they don't agree. The arguments you're hearing here are that the tech companies are a big cabal controlled by the CIA , invoking age old nostalgic images of "Operation Mockingbird" while providing no real evidence, and I know you're an evidence guy. Even RFK Jr.,who is being given as an example , has never said he was booted off Facebook by the government, but in the clip I saw goes after Facebook, Google, Twitter and curiously Pinterest. But people here claim they know better than RFK Jr. However "regulating themselves" doesn't give license for industry cronies to occupy cabinet posts or as lobbyists, to wholesale write legislation for legislators that they've effectively bought. You'd be surprised at some even covering Wall Street saying that corporations should get out of staking the election process. Getting the money out of politics has support of people at both ends of the political spectrum and could do remarkable things, though the thought is inconceivable to some of the dystopian self fulfilling mindset here for example. It would seem to be the single most sweeping thing that could give the American public a sense of real power. What could they really do? Well over time they can try to maneuver around it. After all it is the right of everybody to have the ear of the congressman, and use the conservative courts, (that's why we have to get rid of Citizens United) It won't stop the corporate owned media from owning those corporations, but the corporations still wont be able to finance the politician's elections, and that's big. This thread became a joke, where people making the allegations are being evasive and won't submit to the basic questions to identify their philosophy and proceed from there. I assume a lot of it is because some are hiding but some don't know their philosophy and are just venting all their frustrations and suspicions, like a lot of them up on capitol hill. And some of that's ok. But one thing they do know is they don't like "the elites." But the truth is, a lot of the elites are grimacing, that this pandemic and matters such as the Texas disaster are happening because they exhibit the need for a strong centralized federal government response, at a time when things were going so well for them and they have been so successful at dismantling the" government administrative state" in their words, for many years. Unfortunately IMO, instead of being a rallying cry, the people's response are still fragmented, as you can see by the responses here, blaming the "deep state government" for everything under the sun and that specific scapegoating is exactly what the elites want, to get the other side to distrust their government to aid their plans to dismantle the government. JMO ****
  25. Steve Bannon believed Trump had dementia and plotted to remove him as president, according to new book I don't know what make of this. But according to former "60 minutes" producer Ira Cohen, this was before Banon got fired by Trump in 2017. But he went to Trump major donor Robert Mercer. The timeline is sketchy, but Banon thought he could assume the Presidency, which means he's also clearly delusional! Banon now denies it. Ira Cohen, in the "Skullduggery" apple podcast, talks about his career. All this stuff about Banon, Mike Wallace being a misogynist, being propositioned for sex by Ghislaine Maxwell in exchange for her revealing damaging info about Trump and Clinton? says Epstiens death was definitely not suicide. He talks about all we've known about Meyer Lansky blackmailing JEH with compromising photos of JEH with Clyde Tollson. He talks about the ethical questions about cultivating himself to a source. https://www.businessinsider.com/bannon-said-trump-had-dementia-and-plotted-to-oust-him-as-president-book-2021-2
  • Create New...