How that Bidenomics going. Not so good is it. The Biden economic clock winding down.

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/bidenomics-blowback-survey-based-sentiment-collapses-hope-evaporates

Bidenomics Blowback - Survey-Based Sentiment Collapses As 'Hope' Evaporates


Under the hood was even more problematic:

New orders fell at a faster pace; signaling contraction

Employment fell at a slower pace; signaling contraction

Inventories fell at a faster pace; signaling contraction

Supplier deliveries fell and a faster pace; signaling contraction

Production fell at a faster pace; signaling contraction

Order backlogs fell at a slower pace; signaling contraction

Worse still, Prices paid rose again!

So, in summary: slower growth, declining production, shrinking orders, falling employment... and accelerating inflation - is it any wonder that 'soft survey' data is collapsing - not exactly election-winning headlines.




Biden's foreign policy is just as bad--- a bad joke.

FJB MEGA 2024

Trump also supports Israel exclusively, and still does. He fully supports Netanyahu grabbing power and fully supports his war. Biden didn’t “do this”, Netanyahu did, but he’s continuing the policy that has been in place since the 50’s of blind support for Israel and turning a blind eye to their atrocities and illegalities while funding and arming them.

The UN, despite America’s obstruction and obfuscation, is finally waking up to the genocidal monster they helped create that is Israel, waking up likely far too late.

I actually agree with the second part, we should stop funding the Israeli/Palestinian war, and stop funding Israel. The blowback for our support costs us 10 times what we gift Israel to commit genocide.

A disproportionate number of the violent expansionist settlers, the main cause of continuing hostilities, are American immigrants, they should all lose their citizenship and be labeled as terrorists.

Yesterday IDF forces murdered 3 hostages who were shirtless with hands up (so obviously unarmed) waiving white flags and begging for help in Hebrew. 2 shot to death immediately, the third shot to death after cease fire was called by the commander.
This is conclusive evidence that the IDF is targeting any living person including surrendering unarmed civilians, not Hamas. In fact, over half the 30000 bombs they have dropped are dumb bombs, and the smart bombs target hospitals, refugee camps, and caravans of refugees (anywhere civilians can be found in groups) 100% intentionally.

The world needs to wake up and eliminate expansionist Israel and the terrorist Zionists, every single one is a fascist murderer just like the Nazis and they deserve the same treatment.

Sadly, a huge percentage of the terroristic murderous “settlers” are American Jews, so don’t let anyone claim America isn’t to blame here, we not only cause the conflict, we fund it and arm the murderous side.

We deserve any blowback we get, no matter how big.

No. It would not, imo. Mass shootings don’t help their positions.
Definitely not helpful to them if it sparked real political change.
It would only be “winning” for them if an armed civilian stopped the attack, but they don’t allow armed civilians at their events where they rally for the rights of any civilians to be armed anywhere but their events.
Edit: also, I don’t mind them “winning” if it means sensible gun laws that bar violent criminals and mentally unstable people from buying or carrying guns. I’m not anti gun, I’m anti unregulated guns.

My hatred is not their goal. If it were, they could save their money and pro-death stances, humanity as a whole did the job for them.

Their goal is to sell more guns. They’re an industry lobbying group, not a civil rights organization.
A little blowback from their own policies is exactly what’s needed to change some political positions. They’re cowards, but so far they’ve been safe behind their security, and the money is good.
Remember, the last meaningful gun control measure, background checks, came directly as a result of an assassination attempt against a pro gun Republican.

Hate to see the oil burning.
Love to see Russia get a little blowback.
I fully support expanding Ukraine’s border 100 miles into Russia to create the kind of “buffer zone” Russia tried to turn Ukraine into. 100 miles of no man’s land, all Russians must move. Ukrainians may settle there. Turnabout is fair play, and they deserve every inch of lost territory.
Then they should retake Crimea.

In a second story today, Russian troops are evacuating the Chernobyl area after poisoning themselves with radiation sickness by digging trenches, driving tanks, and generally disturbing the highly radioactive soil there. Those soldiers are in for a gruesome death, Russia can’t afford to treat thousands of cases of acute radiation poisoning.

In a third report, Putin’s ploy to demand rubles for Russian oil has already fallen apart on day one. They continue to accept euros…euros they can’t transfer to Russia because of banking sanctions!

It is MUCH more on point if you substitute "Biden" with "Conservative American Militarism."

To be fair, yes Biden pulled out way too hastily. He'll own it.

But it's always the GOP that starts getting American soldiers killed on foreign grounds and bleeding American people dry to feed the MIC, make an embarassment of itself abroad, dragging all its allies down along its military misadventures. And then it takes an Democrat POTUS to cut the lost -- at tremendous political cost (and courage to take the blowback) -- to free up the $$$ to rebuild America.

It's just a crying shame America can never win a war post WWII.

Concern about the Afghan people. What a laugh. Since when the Right ever cared about "People"? It's always money over people. The American Right doesn't even care about its own people, let alone a foreign people that the Right is extremely suspicious of (Any random Fox/OAN/Newsmax host: NO F***KING AFGHAN REFUGEES!!!! ALL THE AFHGAN THAT WORKED FOR US AS TRANSLATORS ARE TERROISTS, ALL THERE WOMEN & CHILDREN ARE COMING TO TAKE OVER AMERICA! BELIEVE YOU ME!!).

I believe this is what is called "blowback"

it over rover

"When is the last time Trump gave up."

not the last...but...when he lost the lawsuit for his university, or his charity, or his bankruptcies, or the dozen or so times during his presidency when he got blowback.

he's dust, vapor, smoke, gas.

be happy we've got someone capable, hardworking, honest, trustworthy...give sanity a chance.

BTW: what was it the orangettes use to say? something like..."you've never gotten over losing the election"?

sing it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75V3H-FXf78

I doubt it was simunition. I've never heard of it being used outside of training (not saying it isn't thought). Simunition only works in special modified guns because it doesn't produce enough blowback to cycle in a normal gun, and guns modified for sumunition can't load regular ammunition.

From the sound it made, it was more likely some sort of 40mm less-than lethal round fired from a launcher.

Either way, these should never be fired at anyone that is non threatening because although they are called less-than-lethal, they can still cause serious injuries.

Would it have any impact on my argument either way?
If you checked my DNA, there certainly would be African in it. Maybe enough to call me "black" in the south, it doesn't take much. That said, no, I don't check "black" on the census form.

I just believe it works best to exemplify the behavior you want from others, to lead by example rather than reaction, and treat others as you would have them treat you, not as they have treated you.

EDIT: I also think there's a huge difference between 'you shouldn't use that word, ever.' and 'you cannot use that word, ever, or I'll violently attack you.' I agree, white people shouldn't use that word or any derivation of it, and should expect blowback if they do, but if we want to live in a post racial society where people aren't discriminated against based on race, that means no one should use it.

Didn't call for censorship. I just find little benefit in singling out an individual with a very tiny platform for saying something dumb. The idea that her being singled out online to be inundated with death threats and vitriol for her and her family (her and her family were doxxed over this) seems to far outweigh the benefit of "stopping this woman going around the country"... seeing as how she's one woman with basically no following and little influence. I doubt she's done many of these talks at all or will do more. (Looked it up. This talk was the only one she'd given all year. Only one on a different subject the year before. Both locally in her area.)

Spreading videos like this after someone has already been doxxed and threatened only seem to help compound the injury. And it's not ideological to me. Justine Sacco said something stupid online and got a crazy amount of blowback and lost her job for it- I don't agree with that either.

If you want to call out what you view as racism, going after the little guys for saying something a little off isn't the way. Go after people with influence. Hell, a police chief in Oklahoma was just caught running a white supremacist website and record label. That guy has direct impact on the rest of people's lives and even if they get to keep their lives in some situations.

Ashleigh is an unemployed recent college grad. The most influence she has are the 15 or 20 people who were all adults that signed up for this particular seminar. I imagine they either agreed with or are old enough to make up their own mind on what was said.

The US misunderstood Putin when they backed the overthrow of a democratic Ukraine government, with the resulting blowback of Russia invading Crimea. Putin has had pretty strong words cautioning against the enlargement of NATO into new member countries with historical ties to Russia.

Some heads should have rolled at the CIA over this, it was absolutely foreseeable. Mitt Romney is actually looking pretty smart over his "Russia is the largest threat" comment that every Democrat laughed at.

Sadly pathetic that he is getting blowback on this. THIS is the new norm?

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/2/jimmy-kimmel-elitist-creep-who-needs-shut-up/

Inspired by the blowback from this video

*related=https://videosift.com/video/Exercise-is-NOT-the-Key-to-Weight-Loss

radical islamic terrorism is the usage of a rigid fundamentalist interpretation as a justification predicated on abysmal politics.

ill-thought and short sighted politics is the tinder.
hyper-extremist fundamentalism is the match.

ISIS would never even have existed without al qeada,who themselves would not have existed without US interventionism into:iran,egypt and saudi arabia.

and this is going back almost 70 years.

so lets cut the shit with apologetics towards americas horrific blunders in regards to foreign policy.actions have consequences,there is a cause and effect,and when even in the 50's the CIA KNEW,and have stated as much,that there would be "blowback" from americas persistent interventionism in those regions.which stated goals (in more honest times) was to destabilize,dethrone (remove leaders not friendly to american business) and install leaders more pliant and easily manipulated (often times deposing democratically elected leaders to install despots.the shah and sadam come to mind).

see:chalmers johnson-blowback
see: Zbigniew Brzezinski-the grand chessboard.

or read this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881

so to act like islamic radicals just fell from the fucking sky,and popped out from thin air,due to something that has been boiling for almost 70 years is fucking ludicrous.

radicalization of certain groups in populations have long been understood,and well documented.

and religion,though the most popular,and easiest tool to motivate and justify heinous acts of violence for a political goal,is not the SOLE tool.

nationalism is another tool used to radicalize a population.
see:the nazi party.

but it always comes down to:tribalism of one kind or another.

@transmorpher

so when you use this "ISIS themselves, in their own magazine (Dabiq) go out of their way to explain that they are not motivated by the xenophobia or the US fighting wars in their countries. They make specifically state that their motivation is simply because you aren't muslim. You can go an read it for yourself. They are self confessed fanatics that need to kill you to go to heaven. "

to solidify your argument,all i see is someone ignoring the history and pertinent reasons why that group even exists.

you may recall that ISIS was once Al qeada,and they were SO radical,SO fanatical and SO violent in their execution of religious zeal..that even al qeada had to distance themselves.

because,again...
religion is used as the justification to enact terrorism due to bad politics.
but the GOAL is always political.

you may remember that in the early 90's the twin towers were attacked and it was the first time americans heard of al qeada,and osama bil laden.

who made a statement back in 1993 and then reiterated in 2001 after 9/11 that the stated goal (one of them at least) was for the removal of ALL american military presence in saudi arabia (there was more,but it mostly dealt with american military presence in the middle east).

but where did this osama dude come from?
why was he so pissed at america?
just what was this dudes deal?

turns out he was already on the road to radicalization during the 80's.coming from an extremely wealthy saudi arabian family but had become extremely religious,and he saw western interventionism as a plague,and western culture as a disease.

he left the comforts of his extremely wealthy family to fight against this western incursion into his religious homeland.he traveled to afghanistan to join the mujahideen to combat the russians,who were actually fighting the americans in a proxy war.and WE trained osama.WE armed him and trained him in the tactics of warfare to,behind the scenes,slowly drain russia of resources in our 50 year long cold war.

how's that for irony.

osama was not,as american media like to paint the picture "anti-democratic or anti-freedom".he saw the culture of consumerism,greed and sexual liberation as an affront to his religious understandings.

this attitude can be directly linked to sayyid qtib from egypt.who visited the united states as an exchange student in 1954.now he wasnt radicalized yet,but when he returned to egypt he didnt recognize his own country.

he saw coco cola signs everywhere,and women wearing shorts skirts,and jukeboxs playing that devils music "rock and roll".

he feared for his country,his neighbors,his community.
just like a southern baptist fears for your soul,sayyid feared for the soul of his country and that this new "westernization" was a direct threat to the tenants laid down by islam.

so he began to speak out.
he began to hold rallies challenging the leadership to turn away from this evil,and people started to take notice,and some people agreed.

change does not come easy for some people,and this is especially true for those who hold strong religious ideologies.
(insert religion here) tends to be extremely traditional.

so sayyid started to gain popularity for his challenge if this new "westernization",and this did not go un-noticed by the egyptian leadership,who at that time WANTED western companies to invest in egypt.(that whole political landscape is totally different now,but back then egypt was fairly liberal,and moderately secular).

so instead of allowing sayyid to speak his mind.
they threw him in prison.
for 4 years.
in solitary.

well,he wasn't radicalized when he went IN to prison,but when he came OUT he sure was.

and to shorten this story,sayyid was the first founder of the muslim brotherhood,whose later incarnation broke off to form?

can you guess?
i bet you can!
al qeade

@Fairbs ,@newtboy and @Asmo have all laid out points why radicalization happens,and the conditions that can enflame and amplify that radicalization.

so i wont repeat what they have already said.

but let us take dearborn michigan as an example.
the largest muslim community in america.
how many terrorists come from dearborn?
how many radicals reside there?
how many mosque preach intolerance and "death to america"?
how many imams quietly sanction fatwas from the local IHOP against american imperialistic pigs?

none.

becuase if you live in stable community,with a functioning government,and you are able to find work and support your family,and your kids can get an education.

the chances of you become radicalized is pretty much:zippo.

the specific religion has NOTHING to do with terrorism.
religion is simply the means in which the justifications to enact violent atrocities is born.

it's the politics stupid.

you could do a thought experiment and flip the religions around,but keep the same political parameters and do you know WHAT we find?

that the terrorists would be CHRISTIAN terrorists.

or do i really need to go all the way back to the fucking dark ages to make my point?

it's
the
politics
stupid.