"Don't Cry for me, California" (Page 2): Interesting analysis, lesdmd. Perhaps you are correct....but then again. Unless the details in this video were manufactured or falsified, I see...

Largobob

lesdmd wrote:

Ah, Infowars, the source of all my conspiracy theories. Take a dash of circumstantial evidence, a supposition that wealthy families always hang together to create corruption, a belief that all government is evil, and a large portion of bias and make a professional video with your obvious conclusions. The only surprise is that fans of Infowars do not apply the same rules to the guys they seem to adore.

Interesting analysis, lesdmd. Perhaps you are correct....but then again. Unless the details in this video were manufactured or falsified, I see it as simply a historical account of actual happenings.

You may not like the intent, the content nor the outcome....but unless you have evidence that the contents are false, it is as good as any "documentary."

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

A little loose with truth - but anything goes to get your point across. Pat Brown was elected governor in 1959. 2019 - 1959 = 60 years not the 80 mentioned in the video. Between 1983 and when Jerry Brown was re-elected in 2011 there were governors George Deukmejian, Pete Wilson, Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger. That is a 28 year span that is in the middle of the 60 year span mentioned in the video. This type of (mis) information works better in a setting where your audience is very receptive AND lazy. wikipedia.org can help if you want some facts.

I am not suggesting that the rich don't run the USA and the world. It is just that the wealthy are more often than not considered right wing than left wing by most observers.

Largobob

MichaelH wrote:

A little loose with truth - but anything goes to g... (show quote)

Thanks for providing detail to the video's narration, MichaelH....although sometimes wilipedia may not be the most reliable source, I'll accept your details as fact.

But, unfortunately, sometimes when we "cherry pick" details, we miss the forest for the trees. This may be the case here. That's why I am sometimes skeptical of Politifact and SNOPES. I find that if one word is wrong (no matter how insignificant the word may be to the general truth), they sometimes deem the entire event false or mostly false....even though the general tone of the event/issue is verifiable. I believe this may be the case with your comment here.

The bottom line (the take-away) has nothing to do with how many years a governor served. It is a historical view of the power-players during a period of California government. There are continued ramifications and implications of how these and other players, and the state of California, are forcing decision in our federal government today. I think that is the punchline here.

lesdmd Loc: Middleton Wi via N.Y.C. & Cleveland

Largobob wrote:

Interesting analysis, lesdmd. Perhaps you are correct....but then again. Unless the details in this video were manufactured or falsified, I see it as simply a historical account of actual happenings.

You may not like the intent, the content nor the outcome....but unless you have evidence that the contents are false, it is as good as any "documentary."

It always comes back to what sources you choose to believe. After some research on sites I trust (snopes, Wikipedia for the most part) the claims in the video are exaggerated, and distorted; and the conclusions based on bias rather than the facts. The devil is in the details. Stating that the Pelosi family was involved in the drug trade cannot be correlated with indictments. It is true that Nancy’s father hung around with some disreputable characters. I do not extend these facts to a condemnation of his daughter.

exakta56 Loc: Orford,New Hampshire

Hi Largo,
Yes you are right that neither Trump nor the election was mentioned. However it seems reasonable that the bias source is far to the right and uses nuance and inference to make its point. You may disagree. I enjoy hearing your views. Healthy debate is needed today.

Largobob

lesdmd wrote:

It always comes back to what sources you choose to... (show quote)

And your point? Waffeling, back peddling, hoping to defend the undefesible? Doesn't work for me...sorry.

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

Awesome video...........................

Largobob

Largobob wrote:

And your point? Waffeling, back peddling, hoping to defend the undefesible? Doesn't work for me...sorry.

My point is that right, wrong, or indifferent, these are the players who have/are guiding/forcing public opinion and federal legislation.

Anyone, besides me think this is scary?

exakta56 Loc: Orford,New Hampshire

It may be scary or not. What would you like to replace this large, unruly cast of players with?? If you think the current array is scary, then run for office on a platform which is just and fair.

Largobob

exakta56 wrote:

It may be scary or not. What would you like to replace this large, unruly cast of players with?? If you think the current array is scary, then run for office on a platform which is just and fair.

Sounds like a plan, exakta56. Unfortunately I am 70 years old, not charismatic, have no political aspirations, nor any desire to move to the dark side. I think our current president ran on a platform that he felt was just and fair for the majority of America. The voters, through our Electoral college, elected him president, based on his platform and our constitution.

Now, when he is attempting to do what he pledged he would do....the left is exploding, and attempting to block his every move.

'Isn't it too bad that so many people would rather see President Trump fail, then to see America succeed?...'

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

Largobob wrote:

Sounds like a plan, exakta56. Unfortunately I am... (show quote)

Sad to say though the right doesn't seem to be fighting too hard for him either.

Largobob

soba1 wrote:

Sad to say though the right doesn't seem to be fighting too hard for him either.

Yes, soba1. Very sad, indeed.

MichaelH Loc: NorCal via Lansing, MI

Largobob wrote:

Sounds like a plan, exakta56. Unfortunately I am... (show quote)

I remember in college that there is a body of thought that "the problem of the rich holding on to power" was a problem of all societies with the USA being included and was not just a problem in some locals.

And I also remember that in the 2018 election the PEOPLE (not the Electoral College) voted for those representatives who are now hindering President Trump's agenda - and they voted for those people because they would hinder his agenda and provide some much needed oversite. I don't see the problem with the voter's having their way. And well over 50% of US residents now see Trump's failures as America's successes.

And President Trump has proven himself to be very good at it - failing that is.

davyboy Loc: Anoka Mn.

MichaelH wrote:

I remember in college that there is a body of thou... (show quote)

Did you get a tax break on your check?

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

lesdmd wrote:

It always comes back to what sources you choose to... (show quote)

Old man Kennedy was never indicted for booze running, but everyone is well aware that he was.