To Far Away Times
Member
Steve Bannon and the KKKebler Elf are not worthy of serving in the White House.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Whitehouse issues statement after Breitbart (Bannon) goes to war with McMasters
- Thread starter Jackpot
- Start date
exmachina64
Banned
Bannon's 63; he's elderly.
Saint Gregory
Member
Is it because of the whole Rapture prophecy?
That's correct.
The darkly funny thing is that the right-wing Israelis who embrace support from right-wing evangelical Christians conveniently overlook the fact that the evangelical belief system necessitates that millions of Jews have to perish for the Second Coming to occur.
Most Republicans are pro-Israel. Trying to manipulate that 36% of Trump supporters against McMasters.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Bannon is orchestrating his exit to go along Trump's downfall. Nothing for him better than be kicked out as Trump tries to save his presidency. He'll say the establishment was the cause of all their problems, that they got to Trump, and go on and start his own little Tea Party 2.0, but this time with a lot of attention and backing he would have never had if he hadn't been part of the Trump campaign and administration. Trump's end is his beginning.
Saint Gregory
Member
I've been super confused by this ever since someone first brought it to my attention. But I suppose if that's part of your belief system then you also believe that all of the sacrificed Jewish people will have wonderful afterlifes in heaven so it's all good.
That's pretty frightening but yeah, I keep bringing up to folks I know rubbing their hands together waiting for Trump's demise that the 60 million-ish folks that voted for Trump aren't going anywhere. The nation has deep issues right now that aren't going to be healed by Trump getting impeached/resigning.
Reverend Funk
Comfy Penetration
I like how supposed "globalists" are for some reason anti israel
Jorok Goldblade
Member
Kelly's aiming for that chicken dinner
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Exactly, in those 60 million many voted for Trump simply because they didn't like Hillary or bought into the idea that things were going to be different, basically just giving it a shot, especially since the economy was doing well people felt they could afford change. A good part of them won't follow whatever mutation comes out post-Trump, but millions definitely will. So one way or another, there is going to be something ahead that will be representing them, as they won't be completely marginal anymore, and they will likely reach on both sides too. Bannon's desire to raise taxes somewhat on the rich to pay for middle class tax cuts, which was shot down quickly by the Trump admin and the GOP, is proof that having mainly support on the right is temporary for him. His viewpoint is more akin to the Nazis, which propagandized its support from the working class. There's fertile ground for his views.
Lol, being part of the Trump administration and campaign isn't going to be anything good for someone when this all hits the shit. But some of you are just so enamored by Bannon as some kind of master manipulator, as the dark mage behind it all, you can't see past that.
This feels like a perfect Trump tweet
Karsticles
Member
Letting the state shut down one organization is exactly how you open to the doors to state control of the media. Suddenly there's wiggle room, and you get a man like Trump saying the NYT is "fake news" that needs to be shut down. It may be frustrating to see bullshit masquerading as news, but the alternative is far, far worse.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
No, but he'll fuel the narrative for what will likely lead to the emergence of a third party within the next five years or so.
Do we know that for a fact? Does Bannon fall under Kelly's chain of command as Chief of Staff or does Bannon report directly to the President and therefore bypasses Kelly?
The people who follow him would come from republican ilk though. For this so called bannon revolution to happen another party would have to die. Never been room for three parties here.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
It doesn't matter how professional and stern you are, it's impossible to make this loony bin look good.
Widdle Puppy
Banned
I don't think it is possible for a third prominent party to emerge in us politics, just the alt right becoming a larger faction in the Republican party.
Bannon is so powerful, man, you don't even know. He can do anything, except all the stuff he's failed to do, and stuff he couldn't do without billionaires lining his pockets. But besides that, unstoppable.
TheCochese
Banned
Oh, I just thought he looked old.
Saint Gregory
Member
It already feels like we're in the middle of a democratic crisis as it is. Someone (most likely Russia) has taken advantage of our freedoms and constitutional protections to help install a white supremacist gov't in our country. We have to reexamine what we can do to prevent this happening again and I'm not sure how we do that without conceding some of those protections. It seems like other nations have managed to build in common sense protections against hate groups and speech into their constitutions without devolving into Orwellian states.
The actually problem was funding for public news or something like that which happened many years ago with a policy change by the government. It basically meant that news became about money rather than real news.
Several European countries actually have anti-hate speech laws and you can get hefty fines for doing stuff like that, and they manage fine really. People get super paranoid about doing it here, because it's possible for it to be abused, but it's something that can be done, you just have to make sure you define the laws on a specific level. But we fucked up years ago when the SC determined the Klan marching in a hate rally was protected under free speech, so we'll probably never get to that point.
Bannon may be 63, but he has the power of five 63 year olds.
Karsticles
Member
No state has done this, in my opinion. Some states are being seized by the Russians without even knowing, and others haven't been largely targeted yet.
Remember that conceding protections right now is conceding media control to Trump - extremely dangerous!
unless kelly is just a short term fix (as some chief of staff fillings can be) i can't see bannon sticking around much longer either way. even without controversy or scandal or anything
pretty clear he wants to turn the page on the first six months and trump is more or less complicit with it, so far at least
pretty clear he wants to turn the page on the first six months and trump is more or less complicit with it, so far at least
Saint Gregory
Member
It was Reagan and the Republican party getting rid of the fairness doctrine back in the 80's that set the stage for all of this. It's crazy how long term some of their strategies are. They've been laying the groundwork for their latest alt-right takeover since long before Obama was even elected.
He doesn't have that already? All of these media companies (CNN, MSNBC, etc.) that seem to be railing against him are run by his close friends and allies. They helped him get elected and they continue to help him by focusing on stupid reality TV drama in the WH and not reporting important stories like the Bill Browder testimony last week.
I *believe* they created a position for him out of whole cloth to be co-equal with the CoS. I remember the unusualness if it being commented on when it happened, but I may have the fine details wrong.
This is factually untrue. There are countries with anti-hate speech laws, France and Germany I know of for sure, and I think there are others. And what do you mean Russians are seizing states without them even knowing? Who are you referring to?
It's owned by Robert Mercer who has enough wealth to keep it running without ad revenue if it fits their agenda.
Actually that sounds exactly right to me. He was given a role that would be equal to that of the late Reince Priebus thereby creating two competing power centers from the onset of the administration.
Bannon.
Bannon is pretty fat, but I don't know if I'd call him a state or country
Saint Gregory
Member
He may be talking about former Eastern Block countries like the Ukraine which Manafort (coincidentally) helped Russia infiltrate and turn public opinion in Russia's favor. You have people there celebrating the fact that they're being invaded and annexed.
LOL
Karsticles
Member
I am referring to the widespread attempt Russia is making on influencing public opinion through the media in the Eurasian region.
Anti-hate speech laws are fine - I would like to see them in the USA. I thought we were talking about the legitimacy of news organizations. I don't think anti-hate speech laws would solve the Breitbart problem.
Bannon is the one who siezes. Trump layed the concrete... it hardens under the bannon.
Saint Gregory
Member
Have you not seen their "Black Crime" news section? Trump has retweeted bogus stories and factiods from it :/
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
He's stated multiple times that his MO is to destroy the government.
It's a no-brainer.
Yeah, but that was a very public affair, though.
I mean, Russia has been doing this, but I don't know how you can say they are taking over without being known. Almost all of the efforts they've done has been fairly public and exposed in one way or another. Unless you just mean there are people who are unaware of this within those countries, that is probably fair to say
Bruh, we're talking about states and countries. Bannon isn't a state or a country lol.
Also, no. Don't get caught up in that narrative. Bannon is a dangerous man in some ways, but in the grand scheme of things, he's not really shit in comparison to much bigger players. He, himself, would be nowhere at all without the Mercer family lining his and Breitbart's pockets.
Vlaphor
Member
The problem with this idea of who deserves 1st amendment protection is that the people who decide that are the people in power. Do you really want Trump and his crew making laws based on what you are and aren't allowed to say. They're already trying to go after colleges that engage in affirmative action is being discriminatory towards whites, imagine what they would do if they could define what hate speech and illegal dialogue are.
TheCochese
Banned
Nobody likes you when you're 63...
Well, there was a press conference where they said all staff works for General Kelly... however this is also the trump admin, so I see your point.
I originally stated Bannon when you asked who was seizing states. Then I was still joking after. And to be a little more serious Bannon is a non factor inside the White House and outside of it. Why I thought it funny he'd do anything with Trump's base.
The thing about the internet though is even if we passed a law outlawing a site like Breitbart, they could just move their operations to another country and they'd still be online.
Saint Gregory
Member
They don't have to, Google, FB and others are already writing algorithms and policies designed to protect bigotry and suppress those that try to fight back against it. We're clearly not going to make changes to the constitution while they're in power but I hope that someday this country matures to the point where it can accommodate an amendment to the constitution that actually makes good on the word of its framers to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
If that means Bannon and co. relocate to Russia I'm all for it.
Karsticles
Member
I'm not seeing it presently. Can you screencap for me to help me find it?
But my point is that an anti-hate speech law would just lead to Breitbart to become more subtle in their approach. Which might be worse. In a way, I really appreciate Breitbart simply saying "We believe in X, Y, and Z", even if those are hateful things. That seems better to me than playing the game like Fox News, where you pretend you aren't constantly subverting racial equality but are.
Yeah, I didn't mean full 100% takeover, but more that it's a growing presence in the public mind. I wasn't very clear.
Saint Gregory
Member
I feel dirty now for giving them clicks: http://www.breitbart.com/tag/black-crime/
It's apparently a tag and not an actually tab on the site.
That was my attitude for the longest time but I'm no longer sure which does the most damage. We seemed to be doing better in the age of Fox News dogwhistles than the current alt-facts landscape to be honest.
Karsticles
Member
Ah, that makes a lot more sense. Still, the tag says enough, doesn't it? lol
I have to remain adamant that we can't compromise our fundamental liberties to combat these things. That's exactly what Putin wants.
Saint Gregory
Member
I understand that so whenever I get into these debates (mostly here) I try my best to respect the viewpoint of those (usually everyone) that disagrees with me. The real main point here is that Putin and others who see the USA and its influence as a threat aren't going to stop trying to tear it apart. Either we adapt to those threats or we collapse from within. Either way Putin wins.
Similar threads
- Locked