Just an Objection, Don't Mind Me

[Eathray]

I don't usually do politics but...

I'm kinda tired of hearing the word, "collusion."

Improper secret agreement between two or more entities, to defraud or deprive others of their property or rightful share, or to otherwise indulge in a forbidden, illegal, or illegitimate activity.

Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/defin ... usion.html

The constant invocation of the word collusion at this point begins to feel like a form of slander. Let me ask a simple question:

Does anyone really believe, and has there been any evidence whatsoever discovered, that President Trump or anyone associated with him, ever gave any material support of any kind to any Russian operative anywhere to assist Russian agents in hacking a single election device to flip even one single vote, thus defrauding a citizen of his right to suffrage?

Now there's a new word being added to collusion, "obstruction." President Trump may have obstructed the investigation into a non-crime that never occured. Is it a good idea to investigate the obstruction of an investigation into a non-thing that doesn't exist?

I'm waiting to see how many hundreds of millions of dollars get spent by a special prosecutor to tell us that there was no collusion by Trump or anyone associated with him but he should still be impeached because he acted improperly even though he didn't do anything illegal... and he has bad hair.

[rockedge]

like the "war on drugs" the Russian vs USA relations is a self-perpetuating source of income for a lot of people.....an economy in itself.

[Eathray]

like the "war on drugs" the Russian vs USA relations is a self-perpetuating source of income for a lot of people.....an economy in itself.

You see a financial motive... interesting. Hadn't really thought of that.

[belham2]

..there is no excuse for our POTUS not understanding and knowing the rules of engagement concerning foreign nation(s) contact. Did he violate that during the election? Yes, in probably every way imaginable. Does it make him impeachable and/or a criminally negligent in any way. I don't think there's a ratchance of that. His current levels of idiocy and lack of Wash, D.C. "spit-and-polish" doesn't substitute for what the D.C-overall establishment is trying to pin on him with this Russia crap. They know, we know it, it's just hopeful Trump (and his team is trying mightily every day to do this) begins to understand it. Then he can step back, quit talking about it, laugh, and go on. The hypocrisy in our nation's capitol has long gone over the edge. They think the world revolves around them........at some point, it is going to crash in on them. Trump being elected is the first evidence of this. Forget the political affiliated party angle......politics overall is heading to the edge of a cliff, and our two dominant parties narrating those politics needs to be eviscerated and broken. They no longer represent America...they only represent themselves. The collusion? It's what they've done internally for decades now, and the boogeyman is coming to get them soon for it.

[Eathray]

..there is no excuse for our POTUS not understanding and knowing the rules of engagement concerning foreign nation(s) contact. Did he violate that during the election? Yes, in probably every way imaginable. Does it make him impeachable and/or a criminally negligent in any way. I don't think there's a ratchance of that. His current levels of idiocy and lack of Wash, D.C. "spit-and-polish" doesn't substitute for what the D.C-overall establishment is trying to pin on him with this Russia crap. They know, we know it, it's just hopeful Trump (and his team is trying mightily every day to do this) begins to understand it. Then he can step back, quit talking about it, laugh, and go on. The hypocrisy in our nation's capitol has long gone over the edge. They think the world revolves around them........at some point, it is going to crash in on them. Trump being elected is the first evidence of this. Forget the political affiliated party angle......politics overall is heading to the edge of a cliff, and our two dominant parties narrating those politics needs to be eviscerated and broken. They no longer represent America...they only represent themselves. The collusion? It's what they've done internally for decades now, and the boogeyman is coming to get them soon for it.

I'm not a party guy, i promise lol

[bigpup]

The Democrats have a play book.

Keep them talking about everything but the Democrats.
Make unproven statements and make the other person spend time, proving it is not true.

Again, keeps them from talking about the democrats.

They asked for a special prosecutor, to keep the lie going, that President Trump did anything.
Oh, the special prosecutor team is full of Democrats!

Now that the lie about President Trump is not going to produce anything to use against him.
Oh, lets turn it into what is President Trump doing to stop the Russians.

Again, not talking about the Democrats!

What are the Democrats doing about anything?????
Health care?
Taxes?
Economy?
Infrastructure?
Military?
War on terrorism?
Support for jobs in America?
Etc........................?

Oh, we cannot tell you that!
But, look at what Trump is doing
Are you looking?
Do you see?
No, not the good stuff, stop looking at that!!

Look at this stuff we want to keep you looking at, so you do not see what little the Democrats are doing!!
Or maybe, just what they are doing

[Eathray]

Bigpup sees a deflection angle... could be. I'll buy it.

[Burn_IT]

It seems that the US is bent on perfecting the art of forcing politicians to concentrate on disproving the negative rather than concentrating on positive things.
It is catching on in the UK as well.

[musher0]

Hi guys,

The word in my language (Canadian French) that comes to my mind now
when I think of your President Trump is "repoussoir":

in the figurative sense : a thing or person that gives importance to
another by contrast (in English, this translates as "foil", I believe?)

and also in the archaic sense of "monster" (so ugly that he is repulsive).

Source for these meanings :
http://dictionary.reverso.net/french-de ... repoussoir
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads ... soir.97520

~~~~~~~~~
As to the 2nd meaning, Trump is so ugly that I can't see him in a picture,
-- so that's just me.

As to the 1st meaning, I think Trump achieved a "foil" effect when he
withdrew your country from the Environmental Paris Accord. He achieved
the contrary of what he wanted by bringing together for the Environment
a large number of your Cities and States.

About the Russia thing, Trump's been painted in a pro-Russia corner by
various people and groups, and the only way IMO he's going to get out of
that corner is by taking a military stance against Russia. Then he'll be
able to say: "Look, if I had ties with them, I wouldn't be doing that."

Except taking such a stance would be very dangerous for the entire world.

US politics are pretty much a dog vs cat thing at present, because you
don't have "third parties" to give it "nuance" and dilute the current
bitching between Democrats and Republicans.

Also because the entire political spectrum is not represented in your
country: you have nothing to the real "left", nothing like Canada's New
Democratic Party or the UK's Labour Party. Were they in another country,
your "Democrats" would simply be a Centrist party.

That limited choice in your politics is in itself another source of danger,
IMO -- for yourselves. Your citizens who are neither Democrats nor
Republicans do not have a voice at present in your system.

Viewed from the outside, and only my 2¢ worth.

BFN.

[Burn_IT]

in the figurative sense : a thing or person that gives importance to
another by contrast (in English, this translates as "foil", I believe?)

It does, but "foil" in that sense is not in common modern usage. It is more likely to be seen in older literature.
Unfortunately foil has several other uses that are far more common though is usage as a verb would be more used ----foiled again----

[musher0]

in the figurative sense : a thing or person that gives importance to
another by contrast (in English, this translates as "foil", I believe?)

It does, but "foil" in that sense is not in common modern usage. It is more likely to be seen in older literature.
Unfortunately foil has several other uses that are far more common though is usage as a verb would be more used ----foiled again----

Thanks for the feedback, Burn_IT.

What would be a proper term for that meaning then, in modern English?

TIA.

If I may add a bit of a precision, what I mean is that Trump's positions
have the effect of outlining more clearly the opposing positions (analogy
with the literal "repoussoir" effect in a painting, for example), but also of
"gelling" his opponents together into perhaps a greater force than they
had previously. (This in civil society at large rather than in official political
structures.)

@all:
Some context:
An international meeting of mayors for the Environment just ended in
Montreal a few days ago, and the American mayors of New Orleans and
Chicago, among others, have said publicly that they will assume
leadership locally on this issue since Trump won't at the national level.

Again, only my 2¢!

BFN.

[LazY Puppy]

Hey Guys,

please, just don't take 'democracy' too serious!

If it leads to something like the election of Trump it isn't worth being a real democrat. Democracy is only worth to live and fight for if the lefties are elected.

Anything else is taking democracy very much too serious...

[Burn_IT]

I don't think there is a single word that descibes it any better than repoussoir which again is not in many people's vocabulary.
Your "If I may add" would be the way most people describe it thought they would probably use concentrating rather than gelling.
In general though, most foreigner's translation into English tends to use a larger word set than most English people do. The average English speaker's active word set is quite low at less than 2000 words (though they will actually know far more than that).
I like to use as many as I can mainly because I enjoy puns and that requires being familiar with a large numbr of words and using them in unexpected places.

[Moat]

I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Trump disliker, but not necessarily a "staunch" Democrat (i.e. - where the hell was Romney?). That being said, I do think the Dems may very well be shooting themselves in the foot, chasing this seemingly elusive and weak "collusion" tail.

Maybe...

But with that said - with such a blatantly inept, dishonest/lying and untrustworthy blabber-mouthed dolt in Office, how can one not expect his actions to come under a heretofore unseen level of mistrust and scrutiny?

Pretty simple as to why, then - understandable and somewhat warranted in this case, IMHO. Somebody's got to keep a close eye on this arrogant, out-of-touch, flakey creep.

Bob

[tallboy]

I have trouble understanding the hype about Russia from USA, you seem to forget your own silly actions up through history. Dare I whisper 'South America'? We norwegians actually have a border with our giant neighbor, Russia. We are also an active member of Nato, whose current leader is a norwegian. What some of you guys on the other side of 'the pond' don't seem to realise, is that such a close relationship demand a certain level of respect from both sides. We have never had serious troubles with Russia, maybe because we have always been consistent in our behaviour against each other, despite different views on many things, and also in turbulent times internationally. We also have a lot in common with Russia and russians, and we cooperate very well in many fields, in many cases because the Arctic is our common 'hood up north. But up through the years, the russians have always known where we stand, and respected us for that. You also seem to forget that Russia always had a mighty 'elite', very real and untouchable power, regardless of who ran the nation.

I'm afraid lots of people around these parts of the world see Trump just as a clown, and many are more afraid of 'friendly fire' than of traditional enemies. Trump's lack of knowledge and common decency also make us wonder what kind of people his followers are. I don't mean the common voters, but the politicians. Trump's retoric and actions is about to set you back 50 years as a nation, one simply cannot address issues and people the way he does, if you seek some international respect. That way, 'America first!' may sadly turn into 'America first out!'.

Oh, BTW: Someone mentioned the 'War on Drugs'. There have been american and coalition troops in Afghanistan for many years, a nation who's foreign income largely has been from exporting drugs. Have you ever heard someone say "We also destroyed all the poppy fields in that province, to prevent them from financing new weapons!" Naaah...

tallboy

[bigpup]

I have trouble understanding the hype about Russia from USA,

It is a very simple Democrat play book tactic.

Say something negative about a person, place, or thing, and make someone prove it is not true.

It starts with the all important statement:
A unknown source told us this!

With a majority of the US news, willing to support the false negative statement, it takes on a life of it's own.
A lot of US news organizations have stopped asking:
Who?
What?
When?
Where?
Why?

They start with a false statement of what happened and then go off into make believe world.

They just deal in statements of:
what if this happened?
It could happen.
If it did, this would or could happen.
etc..............

I am troubled by the US news not really reporting true and accurate news!!
Not all, but it seems to be getting more and more.

It became very clear to me, there really is a fake news in the US.
Example:
I watched an interview, on one news channel, of a person high up in the US government.
I specifically saw the person and listened to what he gave for answers to questions. It was him talking directly to the interviewer.
I switched to a different news channel.
Just so happened, they were talking about this same high up government person and things he said.
Not even close to what I just watched this person say

[Eathray]

Musher0,

I enjoyed your comments. I have a great dislike for my country's two-party system. I have been watching the Dems and Repubs point the finger at each other for decades while behind the scenes they work together through the campaign finance laws to prevent any viable third-party options from ever taking hold. It leaves independents like myself with a choice between 'bad' and 'more bad.' This past election was a very disatisfying choice. On one hand there was a consumate insider named Clinton who sneakily sacked her party opposition's ability to raise money while running a multiculturalist-minded campaign that essentially abandoned middle-class labor, which cost her the 'rust belt,' and hence the election. On the other hand the Republicans did everything they could to prevent an outsider like Trump from becoming their nominee without even realizing that their abject dismissal of their own base combined with their inbalanced devotion to corporate business without the most basic sense of nationalism is what led to the rise of a Trump they couldn't control in the first place; he is a monster of their own making.

It was a very dissatisfying choice between bad and more bad. I'll let you decide which is which LOL.

Meanwhile the two parties continue to centralize as much power as possible into the central government and away from the states and local communities because... well... we wouldn't want to trust the states and local communities to take care of their own business now would we? That might mean our politicians would have to start practicing limited government and remember that there is this thing in our Constitution called The Tenth Ammendment that is supposed to guarantee that non-enumerated powers stay with the states and the people rather than the federal government.

Meanwhile the American Presidency continues to grow into something far more powerful than it was ever intended to be. It is now commonplace to refer to our President as 'the leader of the country,' which of course he was never intended to be. The American President was actually intended to be the enforcer of my country's real leader... Congress. The will of the people and the states as represented equally by the two houses of Congress is supposed to drive the direction of the country and the President is supposed to act like an executor or administrator and enforce the will of Congress, in which case it really wouldn't matter all that much who the President was as long as he was a person of integrety and a decent administrator.

If one of my country's politicians were to read these thoughts, I'm sure he would have no idea what I'm talking about. Sometimes I wonder if my country's leaders have ever actually read the Constitution, or Madison's notes from the Constitutional debates of 1787, or the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers... Maybe they're too busy reading their party platforms.

Suffice it to say Musher0... I would love to have a third option... it's a pleasant fantasy of mine.

[Burn_IT]

I thought that was why the US went into Afganistan in the first place - to control and profit from the Poppy fields!!!

[rockedge]

Have you ever heard someone say "We also destroyed all the poppy fields in that province, to prevent them from financing new weapons!" Naaah...

Funny thing is...no never heard anyone mention that the poppy fields are anything but in full swing. Certain the US government has one agency that is actually flooding the USA with certain drugs using indirect means to raise money for doing things that the American people themselves have no idea is happening...and another agency fighting the import and selling of these same deemed illegal, drugs. So it is rigged, and some people are cashing in by double dipping. Making money selling and at the same time using billions of dollars of the tax payer's money (meant for making a better life for everyone) to basically fight a fake war since they themselves are both the dealer and the cops. Trump is a pretty good snapshot of what happens when you under educate and manipulate the population long enough. Just give us TV the NFL and the American flag and please nothing too complicated. USA....USA...USA... if you know what I mean.

[musher0]

Musher0,

I enjoyed your comments. (...)

Suffice it to say Musher0... I would love to have a third option... it's a pleasant fantasy of mine.

Hi Eathray.

Thanks for the feedback.

Yeah, I think you guys urgently need a 3rd or even a 4th political option.

BFN.