The third episode of All-Star Tuesday features weekly news stories from TYT Network hosts: Cenk Uygur, Michael Shure, Brett Erlich, and Malcolm Fleschner.
It’s my view that the capitalist systems in place have the flaw of letting psychopaths excel and rise to the top. I think that cutting jobs is business and when those that lost their jobs could see that it has to be done for the business to continue, they’ll understand and know whether or not their bosses do so with a heavy heart.
I think capitalism has its place, but their should definitely be socialism layered in and given authority to weed out the cronies.
American Football story: The game is just not OK. It gives ppl brain damage. I would bet money brain damage is why OJ killed his wife and her friend. Its bad enough that the players will be damaged, but they will cause harm to others like OJ did. Why is it still OK for parents to let children play this, why isn’t that child support. The game needs to DIE. Yeah, everyone love it. Everyone loved the gladiator games in Rome. Its the same. It is not OK to make money and promote the worst part of humans animal brain. Yippi, lets watch violence and death, woot, gimma a beer.
American Football is not OK, its not OK to watch it.
“Terrorism is a strategy when the other side has way more power”
What could the definition of terrorism be for Brett’s analysis to be true? Suicide bombings and mass shootings are terrorism, nothing else? Any bad things that happen in the anglo-sphere are terrorism, nothing else?
Jesus, read some Chomsky, terrorism is not primarily a weapon of the weak unless you dont subject the strong to the same standards you subject the weak to, and you take terrorism to mean only the crimes they commit against us. If you use the definition given in, say government documents:
crimes that “appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping”
By this definition, a perfectly understandable one, terrorism is historically primarily a weapon of the strong against the weak. In fact, much of American “power politics” and the way we’ve interacted with essentially all “enemies” since WWII fits this definition – Therefore it is unusable in American discourse, apparently including the Young Turks. If you throw away the perfectly good actual definition (assuming of course, we cannot be terrorists, only things that happen to us are terrorism), then the concept gets tricky, and you have to come up with reasons for why it is that the weak are the only ones who perpetrate terrorism in the world.
Suicide bomb attacks are a weapon of the weak. One person committing violence against civilian populations is one way a weak side carries out terrorism, but attacking civilians to try to affect a political outcome is certainly not unique to weak combatants. If the difference is one comes on a vest attached to a desperate person, the other comes on a multi million dollar bomber or unmanned predator drone- for terrorism to have an applied consistent meaning, like a real word, that difference doesnt matter.
Think about any “super power” relations to “weak” states within their umbrella, the Soviet Union in eastern Europe, Imperial Japan in China, and you can just go through the list for the USA – Iraq, Afghanistan, the whole of the drone program, ongoing interventions throughout the “third world”, going back to Vietnam, all the Latin American interventions, case after case fits the actual definition of terrorism perfectly. I mean, you can go all the way back to the Melian dialogue, for textbook terrorism, “The strong do as they will” is the realpolitik that has functioned for centuries and continues to function, it is also an implicit acceptance of terrorism as policy of the strong. To say that terrorism is a weapon of the weak further erodes any ties to the real definition it has, and lends credence to the the USA public relations definition, thereby serving the propaganda machine. NICE WORK BRETT
I agree. I wish the media would come up with another word. If for no other reason, don’t give the ISIS types the credit of “terrorizing” ppl. Call them thugs, criminals, dirt bags. And I would put ppl making US policies that bomb civilians or sell weapons to the Saudis so they can bomb civilians , in the same “dirt bag” category.
Well, I am railing against part of human nature. In my dream world, there would never be any war of aggression and the strong would use their strength to help their neighbor up, not push them down.
All your arguments about Hillary missed one thing: The Dems decided a long time ago, perhaps even at the point in time when Obama was elected, that she would take the crown. I believe the decision was based on “corporate plan”, the right person had to be picked to continue their gig. Bernie was an outsider and wanting to do the right thing, absolutely not part of their plan. I think these decisions are made based on keeping the power and keeping the donors happy.
The concussion syndrome was the reason for the Benoit murders and why WWE do their Wellness program which is little more than a publicity stunt. The only way American Football will ever be safer is when they take away the suits of armor and the time outs, stop allowing different teams for offence and defense, reduce the number of games, and have regular brain scans.
LOL My thoughts exactly. I was just about to leave that comment. Cenk just steamrolls everyone else… this was pretty much like watching Hour 1 what with half the stories relating to the election, bleh. I like All Stars because it’s brought interesting stories to light that the main show wouldn’t bother even discussing.
Michael Shure…you made Brett’s point! Rep Lewis could NOT possibly leave HRC hanging AGAIN (and certainly not for the old white guy). She phoned in EVERY favor that was owed to her and most made themselves believe in what they were supporting.
Really curious if Michael knows how much harm he does for Hilary among actual progressives by being such an apologist. Hardcore Hilary supporters make me want to vote for her less than Hilary herself.
Cosigning this! I like Micheal and his point of view, it’s just the condescending nature of his twists and turns to appeal to those not on the inside like him is a bit unbearable. Again, I appreciate his perspective but it’s heavy handed at this point.
Yea, I think he’s a smart guy with a good view on most things, but that actually makes it worse. Seeing stupid people spout stupid opinions is normal, seeing someone intelligent do mental gymnastics to support something stupid hurts me inside. Also, there is photographic evidence and an arrest record to show that Sanders was involved in the civil rights movement THEN and there is no argument that he is not involved NOW. Michael, just cut it out.
I 3rd or 4th. I don’t want a republican president so I will be voting for Clinton, but that doesn’t mean I like her or agree with her. Bernie was a better candidate but we can’t go back in time. Michael’s a Clinton supporter and that’s fine, but she’s just not a good candidate. I think he honestly believes his position. Also, at least he isn’t a neo-liberal
I’d say Ben seems more like he’s given up and reluctantly supports her over Drumpf, and that he makes well-formed rational arguments from that point of view. It seems like Michael is a hardcore Hillary shill though, seemingly trying to justify her every opinion and action, and that just makes him sound moronic and appalling.
Would love to see that panel though! Go Team Water! Aggressive Progressives kicks ass btw, watch it if you haven’t already!
Comments
It’s my view that the capitalist systems in place have the flaw of letting psychopaths excel and rise to the top. I think that cutting jobs is business and when those that lost their jobs could see that it has to be done for the business to continue, they’ll understand and know whether or not their bosses do so with a heavy heart.
I think capitalism has its place, but their should definitely be socialism layered in and given authority to weed out the cronies.
OMG. “Oil vs Water” panel!!! Best Idea EVER.
I second Tennesseehusky’s proposal. I think it would be a unanimous “YES” if TYT asked members.
Talk about All-star Tuesday Panel?!? What, are you kidding me?!?!?!
How can we make this happen? It would have something for everyone and I would be interested to see which team would come out on top.
American Football story: The game is just not OK. It gives ppl brain damage. I would bet money brain damage is why OJ killed his wife and her friend. Its bad enough that the players will be damaged, but they will cause harm to others like OJ did. Why is it still OK for parents to let children play this, why isn’t that child support. The game needs to DIE. Yeah, everyone love it. Everyone loved the gladiator games in Rome. Its the same. It is not OK to make money and promote the worst part of humans animal brain. Yippi, lets watch violence and death, woot, gimma a beer.
American Football is not OK, its not OK to watch it.
Perfectly stated
“Terrorism is a strategy when the other side has way more power”
What could the definition of terrorism be for Brett’s analysis to be true? Suicide bombings and mass shootings are terrorism, nothing else? Any bad things that happen in the anglo-sphere are terrorism, nothing else?
Jesus, read some Chomsky, terrorism is not primarily a weapon of the weak unless you dont subject the strong to the same standards you subject the weak to, and you take terrorism to mean only the crimes they commit against us. If you use the definition given in, say government documents:
crimes that “appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping”
By this definition, a perfectly understandable one, terrorism is historically primarily a weapon of the strong against the weak. In fact, much of American “power politics” and the way we’ve interacted with essentially all “enemies” since WWII fits this definition – Therefore it is unusable in American discourse, apparently including the Young Turks. If you throw away the perfectly good actual definition (assuming of course, we cannot be terrorists, only things that happen to us are terrorism), then the concept gets tricky, and you have to come up with reasons for why it is that the weak are the only ones who perpetrate terrorism in the world.
Suicide bomb attacks are a weapon of the weak. One person committing violence against civilian populations is one way a weak side carries out terrorism, but attacking civilians to try to affect a political outcome is certainly not unique to weak combatants. If the difference is one comes on a vest attached to a desperate person, the other comes on a multi million dollar bomber or unmanned predator drone- for terrorism to have an applied consistent meaning, like a real word, that difference doesnt matter.
Think about any “super power” relations to “weak” states within their umbrella, the Soviet Union in eastern Europe, Imperial Japan in China, and you can just go through the list for the USA – Iraq, Afghanistan, the whole of the drone program, ongoing interventions throughout the “third world”, going back to Vietnam, all the Latin American interventions, case after case fits the actual definition of terrorism perfectly. I mean, you can go all the way back to the Melian dialogue, for textbook terrorism, “The strong do as they will” is the realpolitik that has functioned for centuries and continues to function, it is also an implicit acceptance of terrorism as policy of the strong. To say that terrorism is a weapon of the weak further erodes any ties to the real definition it has, and lends credence to the the USA public relations definition, thereby serving the propaganda machine. NICE WORK BRETT
I agree. I wish the media would come up with another word. If for no other reason, don’t give the ISIS types the credit of “terrorizing” ppl. Call them thugs, criminals, dirt bags. And I would put ppl making US policies that bomb civilians or sell weapons to the Saudis so they can bomb civilians , in the same “dirt bag” category.
Well, I am railing against part of human nature. In my dream world, there would never be any war of aggression and the strong would use their strength to help their neighbor up, not push them down.
That X-Files bumper sticker Cenk mentioned is so relatable, man!
All your arguments about Hillary missed one thing: The Dems decided a long time ago, perhaps even at the point in time when Obama was elected, that she would take the crown. I believe the decision was based on “corporate plan”, the right person had to be picked to continue their gig. Bernie was an outsider and wanting to do the right thing, absolutely not part of their plan. I think these decisions are made based on keeping the power and keeping the donors happy.
I agree with what everyone commenting here has said already.
Michael Shure is doing some leaps and bounds in logic trying to defend Hillary.
The concussion syndrome was the reason for the Benoit murders and why WWE do their Wellness program which is little more than a publicity stunt. The only way American Football will ever be safer is when they take away the suits of armor and the time outs, stop allowing different teams for offence and defense, reduce the number of games, and have regular brain scans.
Isn’t the point of this show to have a panel WITHOUT Cenk on it, you know, not letting anyone get a word in edgewise? Oh well.
LOL My thoughts exactly. I was just about to leave that comment. Cenk just steamrolls everyone else… this was pretty much like watching Hour 1 what with half the stories relating to the election, bleh. I like All Stars because it’s brought interesting stories to light that the main show wouldn’t bother even discussing.
Michael Shure…you made Brett’s point! Rep Lewis could NOT possibly leave HRC hanging AGAIN (and certainly not for the old white guy). She phoned in EVERY favor that was owed to her and most made themselves believe in what they were supporting.
Tennesseehusky, I would love to see that panel you suggested
Okay, that was a really good show. All the hosts were good and I liked the mix of heavy and light stories. Many laughs were had.
Football is over. It might take awhile but it’ll be gone one day.
Really curious if Michael knows how much harm he does for Hilary among actual progressives by being such an apologist. Hardcore Hilary supporters make me want to vote for her less than Hilary herself.
Cosigning this! I like Micheal and his point of view, it’s just the condescending nature of his twists and turns to appeal to those not on the inside like him is a bit unbearable. Again, I appreciate his perspective but it’s heavy handed at this point.
Yea, I think he’s a smart guy with a good view on most things, but that actually makes it worse. Seeing stupid people spout stupid opinions is normal, seeing someone intelligent do mental gymnastics to support something stupid hurts me inside. Also, there is photographic evidence and an arrest record to show that Sanders was involved in the civil rights movement THEN and there is no argument that he is not involved NOW. Michael, just cut it out.
I agree on this one. Usually I appreciate Michael’s points, but the John Lewis thing made no fucking sense.
I 3rd or 4th. I don’t want a republican president so I will be voting for Clinton, but that doesn’t mean I like her or agree with her. Bernie was a better candidate but we can’t go back in time. Michael’s a Clinton supporter and that’s fine, but she’s just not a good candidate. I think he honestly believes his position. Also, at least he isn’t a neo-liberal
I nominate a Ben, Michael Shure, Jimmy and Steve O panel. Team “Oil” vs Team “Water”.
I can see why Ben and Mike would be “Team Oil”. They’re always going to bat for a pro-fracking candidate, after all. :)
I’d say Ben seems more like he’s given up and reluctantly supports her over Drumpf, and that he makes well-formed rational arguments from that point of view. It seems like Michael is a hardcore Hillary shill though, seemingly trying to justify her every opinion and action, and that just makes him sound moronic and appalling.
Would love to see that panel though! Go Team Water! Aggressive Progressives kicks ass btw, watch it if you haven’t already!