POTUS 2016, part 3

A place to bring a contemplative / Dharmic perspective and opinions to current events and politics.
Locked

Who would you like to see winning the presidency of the U.S.?

Hillary Clinton - (Dem.)
38
47%
Donald Trump - Mike Pence (Rep.)
21
26%
Gary Johnson - Bill Weld (Libertarian)
8
10%
Jill Stein (Green)
14
17%
 
Total votes: 81

chownah
Posts: 7265
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by chownah » Wed Aug 24, 2016 5:55 am

TRobinson465 wrote:I havent been on Dhammawheel very long so forgive me if this is a stupid question. But why is this topic on Dhammawheel? I saw it and i found it a bit strange lol. I have no objections to the topic i just think its an odd thing to put on a Buddhism forum lol.
Buddhists like to talk about politics and in that discussion sometimes elements of the dhamma come to light and are discussed. If you think politics is a strange topic to have on a buddhist forum you should check out the word association thread.
chownah

TRobinson465
Posts: 126
Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 5:29 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by TRobinson465 » Thu Aug 25, 2016 12:39 am

chownah wrote:
TRobinson465 wrote:I havent been on Dhammawheel very long so forgive me if this is a stupid question. But why is this topic on Dhammawheel? I saw it and i found it a bit strange lol. I have no objections to the topic i just think its an odd thing to put on a Buddhism forum lol.
Buddhists like to talk about politics and in that discussion sometimes elements of the dhamma come to light and are discussed. If you think politics is a strange topic to have on a buddhist forum you should check out the word association thread.
chownah
Cool. Thanks for the info.

Anyways, back on topic. Well i think proportion of donations isnt an equal indicator of generosity. If someone made $10 million and gave away 50% of it, he would still have $5 million. Whereas somebody making $30,000 and only giving $10,000 is arguably making a bigger sacrifice. The proportion is lower but considering there kind of is a minimum living expenses factor i would say the $30,000 guy made a bigger sacrifice.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism"

User avatar
cjmacie
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2012 4:49 am

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by cjmacie » Thu Aug 25, 2016 1:28 am

Politics makes for strange bed-fellows -- or maybe not:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-37177938

User avatar
rowboat
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:31 am
Location: Brentwood Bay

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by rowboat » Sun Aug 28, 2016 9:58 pm

The End Of A Republican Party
Legend has it that after leveling Carthage in the Third Punic War, Roman army generals ordered that the city’s fields be sown with salt so that they’d lie fallow for years, Roman generals not being particularly well known for their benevolence in victory.

Many Republicans think Donald Trump’s nomination is doing roughly the same thing to their party: destroying any chance for growth it once had and leaving the GOP to wither and die on Trump vineyard vines.

“My general sense, looking at this election, is that what we’re witnessing here is the end of something much more than the beginning of something,” Yuval Levin, editor of the conservative policy journal National Affairs, told me recently.

Moments of historical change in the course of a party’s life can be difficult to spot. In “Party Ideologies in America, 1828-1996,” political scientist John Gerring marks the beginning of the modern Republican Party as Herbert Hoover’s shifting campaign rhetoric in 1928 and 1932, when he talked more about the virtues of the American home and family than hard-tack economics. Hoover’s oratory about the progress of the individual being threatened by an overzealous government bureaucracy stuck around for the next eight decades, and the wisdom of generations has helped us discern that this was indeed the start of a new Republican era.

The shock of 2016, though, is just how self-evident the inflection point at which the Republican Party finds itself is; Trump is a one-man crisis for the GOP. The party has been growing more conservative and less tolerant of deviations from doctrine over the past decades, so what does it mean that a man who has freely eschewed conservative orthodoxy on policy is now the Republicans’ standard-bearer?

Racial and cultural resentment have replaced the party’s small government ethos
Rain soddens what is covered up,
It does not sodden what is open.
Therefore uncover what is covered
That the rain will not sodden it.
Ud 5.5

User avatar
badscooter
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:07 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by badscooter » Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:44 am

lyndon taylor wrote:One would think that Buddhism's emphasis on "seeing the true nature of things" would have some influence on political discussions, evidently not!!
Agreed!!! Seeing how many people actually want Hillary in office makes me lose hope for humanity
"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

User avatar
badscooter
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:07 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by badscooter » Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:54 am

Can someone show one thing that Hillary has done that would qualify her as being a good leader? Can someone tell me what strengths she brings to the table? Can someone tell why, given that it is the perfect time to introduce a third party when both the two major parties have the most unfit candidates in history running, people are not flocking to support one of the third party candidates?
"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

User avatar
rowboat
Posts: 700
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2010 5:31 am
Location: Brentwood Bay

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by rowboat » Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:56 am

badscooter wrote:
lyndon taylor wrote:One would think that Buddhism's emphasis on "seeing the true nature of things" would have some influence on political discussions, evidently not!!
Agreed!!! Seeing how many people actually want Hillary in office makes me lose hope for humanity
The implication is that you believe Donald Trump would make a more capable president than Hillary Clinton which is a remarkable and slightly bizarre self indictment.
Rain soddens what is covered up,
It does not sodden what is open.
Therefore uncover what is covered
That the rain will not sodden it.
Ud 5.5

User avatar
lyndon taylor
Posts: 1769
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 11:41 pm
Location: Redlands, US occupied Northern Mexico
Contact:

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by lyndon taylor » Sat Sep 03, 2016 10:24 am

badscooter wrote:
lyndon taylor wrote:One would think that Buddhism's emphasis on "seeing the true nature of things" would have some influence on political discussions, evidently not!!
Agreed!!! Seeing how many people actually want Hillary in office makes me lose hope for humanity
You have it all wrong, there is nothing "enlightened" about Donald Trump or his policies!!!!
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John

http://trickleupeconomictheory.blogspot.com/

User avatar
badscooter
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:07 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by badscooter » Sun Sep 04, 2016 1:47 am

lyndon taylor wrote:
badscooter wrote:
lyndon taylor wrote:One would think that Buddhism's emphasis on "seeing the true nature of things" would have some influence on political discussions, evidently not!!
Agreed!!! Seeing how many people actually want Hillary in office makes me lose hope for humanity
You have it all wrong, there is nothing "enlightened" about Donald Trump or his policies!!!!
I never said trump was enlightened!!! I never even said I was voting for trump!!
"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

User avatar
badscooter
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:07 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by badscooter » Sun Sep 04, 2016 1:49 am

rowboat wrote:
badscooter wrote:
lyndon taylor wrote:One would think that Buddhism's emphasis on "seeing the true nature of things" would have some influence on political discussions, evidently not!!
Agreed!!! Seeing how many people actually want Hillary in office makes me lose hope for humanity
The implication is that you believe Donald Trump would make a more capable president than Hillary Clinton which is a remarkable and slightly bizarre self indictment.
I don't want either of them in office.. I'm not voting for either of them.. As everyone else should be doing the same.. However I find Hillary more repulsive than trump.. When it comes to capability, Hillary can't even handle emails!!!!
"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

chownah
Posts: 7265
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by chownah » Sun Sep 04, 2016 2:56 am

Speaking of hilary's emails....I haven't been following all of the releases of her emails and mostly what I have seen is pretty unimportant stuff. Can someone in the know present here some of the really damaging stuff (from a national security or foreign policy point of view) that was contained therein?
chownah

User avatar
badscooter
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 1:07 am
Location: New Jersey

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by badscooter » Mon Sep 05, 2016 11:58 pm

chownah wrote:Speaking of hilary's emails....I haven't been following all of the releases of her emails and mostly what I have seen is pretty unimportant stuff. Can someone in the know present here some of the really damaging stuff (from a national security or foreign policy point of view) that was contained therein?
chownah
Everything marked classified... She was told not to have anything on her home server and she did it any way.. For some reason Hillary gets away with breaking the law... Hopefully they can charge her on perjury
"whatever one frequently thinks and ponders upon will be the inclination of one's mind"

Disciple
Posts: 356
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:13 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Disciple » Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:00 am

Trump is the least one backed by the Zionist lobby. That's enough for me to lend my support to him.

pulga
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by pulga » Tue Sep 06, 2016 2:56 am

It may be difficult to prove the quid pro quos of her pay-to-play schemes, but it's clearly apparent that she or those working for her destroyed evidence in the federal investigations of both her and the Clinton Foundation.
There's no doubt that Clinton intended to destroy her email archives after choosing which ones to send to the State Department. That's what Mills' December 2014 directive was apparently intended to do. Given that the Benghazi investigation was well under way and there had been multiple document requests and production agreements, the effect of Mills' directive, had it been carried out at the time she sent it, would have been to destroy the evidence that had not been handed over to the State Department before anyone knew to ask for it. But apparently the Platte River Networks staffer's carelessness led to the emails not being destroyed in December 2014, remaining in existence until March 2015, when their existence was publicly disclosed and another subpoena issued for them. Then they were destroyed.

From FBI fragments, a question: Did Team Clinton destroy evidence under subpoena?
Hillary had the audacity to think that she was entitled to pick and choose what evidence to provide the FBI. She claimed she only destroyed personal email, but from what the FBI has been able to retrieve such a claim has proven to be untrue.

chownah
Posts: 7265
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by chownah » Tue Sep 06, 2016 3:49 am

chownah wrote:Speaking of hilary's emails....I haven't been following all of the releases of her emails and mostly what I have seen is pretty unimportant stuff. Can someone in the know present here some of the really damaging stuff (from a national security or foreign policy point of view) that was contained therein?
chownah
Still wondering.
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by pulga » Tue Sep 06, 2016 4:13 am

chownah wrote:
Still wondering.
Don't you see the corruption in peddling access to the U.S. State Department for one's own personal gain? The Clintons are worth well over a 100 million dollars: much of that wealth was acquired after Hillary became Secretary of State. It was then that the "speaking fees" of Bill and Hillary rose exponentially and hundreds of millions of dollars flooded into the Clinton Foundation.

There has always been some corruption in American politics, but it's a sad day when that corruption escalates to the level of Putin's Russia or some Third World dictatorship.

chownah
Posts: 7265
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by chownah » Tue Sep 06, 2016 6:37 am

pulga wrote:
chownah wrote:
Still wondering.
Don't you see the corruption in peddling access to the U.S. State Department for one's own personal gain? The Clintons are worth well over a 100 million dollars: much of that wealth was acquired after Hillary became Secretary of State. It was then that the "speaking fees" of Bill and Hillary rose exponentially and hundreds of millions of dollars flooded into the Clinton Foundation.
Can you read the english language? My post is in english. Please read it or get someone to translate it for you into something you can understand. Read it very carefully and try to discern what it is I am asking. Here it is again:
Can someone in the know present here some of the really damaging stuff (from a national security or foreign policy point of view) that was contained therein?
chownah

pulga
Posts: 1306
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:02 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by pulga » Tue Sep 06, 2016 10:40 am

The evidence that the U.S. State Department engaged extensively in pay-to-play schemes to enrich the Clintons explains such detrimental actions on its behalf as:

The reckless sale of arms to countries of the Middle East at an unprecedented level.
In 2011, the State Department cleared an enormous arms deal: Led by Boeing, a consortium of American defense contractors would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, despite concerns over the kingdom's troublesome human rights record. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, Saudi Arabia had contributed $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, and just two months before the jet deal was finalized, Boeing donated $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to an International Business Times investigation released Tuesday.

The Saudi transaction is just one example of nations and companies that had donated to the Clinton Foundation seeing an increase in arms deals while Hillary Clinton oversaw the State Department.
The sale of much of the U.S. uranium reserves to Russian interests.
The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain. But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.
The role it played in the squandering of financial aid that was meant to rebuild Haiti after its devastating earthquake.
In January 2015 a group of Haitians surrounded the New York offices of the Clinton Foundation. They chanted slogans, accusing Bill and Hillary Clinton of having robbed them of “billions of dollars.” Two months later, the Haitians were at it again, accusing the Clintons of duplicity, malfeasance, and theft. And in May 2015, they were back, this time outside New York’s Cipriani, where Bill Clinton received an award and collected a $500,000 check for his foundation. “Clinton, where’s the money?” the Haitian signs read. “In whose pockets?” Said Dhoud Andre of the Commission Against Dictatorship, “We are telling the world of the crimes that Bill and Hillary Clinton are responsible for in Haiti.”
These are just a few examples; there are probably many more. Remember Hillary destroyed -- or thought she destroyed -- over 30,000 emails. Piecing together the role Hillary's self-interest played in how the U.S. State Department was run during her tenure is murky and challenging. The FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation is still ongoing: it is having to forensically retrieve evidence that Hillary was subpoenaed to provide them. The key point is that it is this sort of corruption itself that is disconcerting and a threat when it comes to our national security.

chownah
Posts: 7265
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by chownah » Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:00 am

chownah wrote:
pulga wrote:
chownah wrote:
Still wondering.
Don't you see the corruption in peddling access to the U.S. State Department for one's own personal gain? The Clintons are worth well over a 100 million dollars: much of that wealth was acquired after Hillary became Secretary of State. It was then that the "speaking fees" of Bill and Hillary rose exponentially and hundreds of millions of dollars flooded into the Clinton Foundation.
Can you read the english language? My post is in english. Please read it or get someone to translate it for you into something you can understand. Read it very carefully and try to discern what it is I am asking. Here it is again:
Can someone in the know present here some of the really damaging stuff (from a national security or foreign policy point of view) that was contained therein?
chownah
So far no one has presented the contents of an email which was really damaging stuff from a national security or foreigh policy point of view. Perhaps there wasn't anything of that nature. If someone can bring the contents of an email which does contain this kind of damaging stuff I would like to see it and of course a link to where you found it. As I said before, I have not been following this very closely so I no doubt have missed alot but I just have not so far seen anything really damaging from a national security or foreign policy point of view.
chownah

User avatar
Bundokji
Posts: 1374
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2014 11:57 pm

Re: POTUS 2016, part 3

Post by Bundokji » Wed Sep 07, 2016 12:45 pm

Five Clinton nightmare election scenarios

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37290608
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"

This was the last word of the Tathagata.

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests