7 days 30 days All time Recent Popular
Insane! The @washingtonpost editorial board attacks @revolvingdoorDC research file on Jeffrey Zients for being fair enough to include the positive purpose of Zients in government (seeking efficiency) & ignoring and ignoring... https://t.co/FSktDrjT6p (1/x)

how we found out about Zients' purchase of a surprise medical billing operation. (btw, "long term holdings" wannabe Berkshire Hathaway funds like Cranemere engage in EXTENSIVE due diligence, they knew what they were doing).
https://t.co/9bXcWYhg0s (2/x)

How do you write about @revolvingdoorDC criticism of Zients without taking into account Zeints' leading role in NorthStar Anesthesia? (3/x)


Does @DaHalperin maybe have some thoughts about Zients, the predatory for profit Kaplan college empire, and the Washington Post???? https://t.co/u7UIKAZ2bF (4/x)

What did NorthStar -- that Zients buddies at the Post Editorial Board think is unimportant -- do? During Cranemere's due diligence AND post-purchase, they engaged in surprise medical billing. (5/x)
Thread:
When you see something like this we need to investigate a little and join the dots.
https://t.co/GIsIzIct4B


This guy always pops up somewhere along the way, so what is the true agenda here? Who are the players?
https://t.co/HOR94sif64


And now we tie George Soros to Lord Malloch Brown and the Privy council. Soros has just made Malloch Brown head of his Open Society foundation.
https://t.co/6ss7Brnzo4


Malloch Brown one of the heads of Smartmatic.
https://t.co/hvjUICnB3S


And of course let's not forget Domonion.
https://t.co/d3DlCLGoYO
I want to echo Ibrahim’s welcome for this engagement with Syrians by @AnnaMcMorrin and @WayneDavid_MP.

At the same time I am overwhelmed with how far we are from where we need to be.

I have such a flood of thoughts, it is hard to know where to


One difficulty is having too much to say. Another is that so many of my thoughts are by now steeped in bitterness.

I think it is very important to say that Labour’s problems on Syria don’t begin and end with Jeremy Corbyn and his associates.

There is too much bitterness on Twitter, but I think I need to write a little on mine here, and how it colours my view.

This year’s anniversary of the Srebrenica Massacre comes to mind. Labour leader Keir Starmer marked it here:

https://t.co/jaf27nIEuh

Inevitably some couldn’t help think of Corbyn’s record of siding with mass murderers.

The month after came the anniversary of the Ghouta Massacre. I don’t believe Starmer mentioned it. I don’t think @lisanandy said anything about it either.
Wonderfully refreshing
Lusk speaking about "the danger of Christians claiming privilege within the state and the persecution of Christians which that led to...
If you have a political system which gives privilege to Christians then that system have to define what a Christian is"


Paynter: "If Christians are pursuing political power, what ... they are essentially saying is that might makes right."

Lusk: 1/ "The basic problem w/a religious right is that it says that the state has been established by God to enforce law & all law has a religious basis."

Lusk: 2/ "And therefore whatever the state does must reflect a religious position. And therefore if there are diverse religious positions at work, then the inevitable result is that one will oppress the other."

Lusk: "To say we are post-Christian does not mean we are ex-Christian ... Although Christain belief is a small minority, certainly our culture, our values, our system- these are very much part of a Christian heritage and sensibility which is inherited."
I think it’s better if you don’t ask “why were other parties unable to stake out a position?” but “how were the two parties able to claim such broad swaths of the political landscape?” No easy answers here of course, it’s one of the largest questions in political history.


I think the electoral systems, more so first past the post than presidentialism, come into it, but they’re not the main factor. Most of it comes down to America’s, all together now, material conditions.

As @cushbomb has been noting a lot recently, America’s wealth of wide open land which you could keep settling allowed potential labour unrest to be diffused. There was always more to get.

So you don’t end up with a Labour party, and around the time other countries did, America was going through the progressive era, which both parties were flirting with. The Socialists and Communists were repressed, so they couldn’t be the left alternative either.

The Progressive Party probably came the closest of anyone to breaking the GOP-Dem dynamic but honestly if they did they probably would have supplanted one of those parties entirely, just as the Republicans supplanted the Whigs, so it would have just been another 2 party system.