text:
← Closer and closer to war …
US Navy DDG attacked in Bab al-Mandab strait. – Tidewater →
He saved himself, for now …
Posted on October 10, 2016 by Pat Lang
Trump's counteroffensive was ugly but IMO it was effective. The level of stress that he inflicted on the Ft. Brooklyn apparat was reflected in Little Donny Deutsch's hysterical performance at MJ today. After letting the man rave against Trump for a while Joe S. told him to "stop screaming." "Listen to me!" Listen to me!" Deutsch had yelled across the table. That must have been a deeply satisfying moment for the Trumpistas.
IMO the ruthless device of bringing forward three of Bill Clinton's women accusers to renew their calls for vengeance on the man from Hope worked very well. Juanita Brodderick's straightforward statement "Bill Clinton raped me and then Hillary threatened me …" must have had SOME effect. With regard to Kathy Shelton who had been brutally raped by a man named Taylor when she was twelve, I don't see anything wrong with HC's conduct. She was Taylor's court appointed attorney and successfully got the scumbag's sentence reduced. It was her duty to do that. Enough said.
The GOPers who deserted Trump over Pussygate now face a moment of truth. Will most of them re-defect to his camp? I think they will and that will be a mistake because IMO he is still going to lose unless Assange has some really good stuff in reserve. You remember him – "Can't we just drone him!"
For me the most ominous thing about the present electoral disaster is the level of perfection achieved by Ft. Brooklyn in the process of the industrialization of the political process in the US. Their willingness to twist, distort and flat out lie in pursuit of the end that for them justifies all means is frightening. The technique employed by their allies in "fact checking" Trump's opinions as opposed to HC's declamations ( "I support the Second Amendment") is amusing by any standard but it works with the semi-sentient masses. The puny Trump wurlitzer playing on and on from the golden chambers in the Trump tower is not well enough organized to compare its steam calliope hooting to the Robby Mook symphony. Mook's people actively and largely successfully seek to create public opinion using implanted memes and constant repetition from their media allies. IMO the success of such PR techniques will mean the end of actual democracy in the US if it continues.
I await the condescension of those who will now write to counsel me as to the non-existence of democracy in the US and/or the holiness of HC's Methodist utopian revolution to come. pl
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/10/10/trump_pounces_on_clinton_in_bruising_debate.html
218 Responses to He saved himself, for now …
Laughing here, can Trump and Pence still get along, can Hillary and Bill still get along? What an election, I just wish Ron Paul was the current President, I doubt we'd be having these shenanigans now.
Harper says:
Fully concur with the assessment of the debate, the large Hillary Wurlitzer and the likely election outcome. Hillary made it clear that she is prepared to ride a crest of anti-Putin, anti-Russia hysteria into office, and Trump's shining moment in the real-world fleeting moments of the "debate" was his refusal to jump on the anti-Russia bandwagon and his insistence that the priority is wiping out ISIS and the other jihadists, and that Russia and Assad are allies in that priority effort. Hillary's performance was worse than the first debate, for the reasons fully spelled out by Col. Lang, and Trump had only one direction to go, and that was upward, by better preparing to handle the range of questions. Clearly, the audience asked much more reality-oriented questions than the moderators in either of the first two debates. I am told that about 18 million undecided voters will determine the Electoral College outcome, and this is where the Hillary machine is far better organized, despite the fact that her message is profoundly flawed. The election day "ground game" is going to be decisive, unless, as Col. Lang notes, some bombshell tilts the public perception in the final days before Nov. 8. An all around shameful reflection of our sinking Republic.
"the most ominous thing about the present electoral disaster is the level of perfection achieved by Ft. Brooklyn in the process of the industrialization of the political process in the US."
Perfectly said, this must be billboarded at the entrance of next debate hall.
I wonder what happens if DT abandons the Republican Party and continue running as independent, if still time permits. Would that throw the election to House? if nobody makes it to 270.
I think you're probably correct. The linked article also has it right: "He endorsed one of the central arguments of Clinton's bid for the White House — and her campaign is guaranteed to exploit it. "She doesn't quit. She doesn't give up. She's a fighter,"…"
She won't quit on Open Borders. She won't give up on supporting al-Nursa as the new "mujahadeen". She's a fighter for intervening in Syria and Ukraine even though it will mean war with the Russia. Those points won't be brought up again nor her husband meeting with the AG while she was under investigation. The "vast right wing noise machine" that the Clintons complained about when they were in the White House the last time seems to have evolved into a bi-partisan establishment machine that is out to Tammany Hall the Republic.
HRC's continued insistence on a no-fly zone and special forces in Syria was troubling to say the least.
Her statement that she would appoint judges who would overturn Citizens United would be judicial activism at its worst and was pure mendacity on her part, as overturning that case might well put an end to her gravy train and her ongoing corruption and control of the political process in the United States. A constitutional amendment (or two) would be a constitutionally correct means of stemming the bleeding, imo.
Mook's machine is not too good at influencing the bitter clinger/deplorable/alt right demographic. In fact, it seems to almost have an inverse effect on them.
I suspect that if Trump does not prevail in November, that he will begin to construct Trump News. That will give him a potentially profitable venue from which to continue to propagate his message to the irredeemable citizens of the country. I think he likes be a high profile fly in Mook's ointment. I do not think he will just go away.
We will learn in Nov just how big of a market there is for Trump.
Can't think of better example to validate Col. Lang's argument than Martha Raddatz referring to SAA's reduction of East Aleppo Jihadi-land as a "holocaust."
The comparison is obscene. I don't remember the Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, disabled, and political dissenters who were sent to Hitler's gas chambers ever beheading children, refusing to let civilians leave their towns, or kidnapping and selling women in slave markets.
I hope I was not the only one offended by Raddatz's question.
Mook's memes and constant repetition is what he adopted from the FoxNews/Limbaugh/MichaelSavage/GlenBeck mighty Wurlitzer that has been going on since the nineties and even the 1980s in the case of Limbaugh. It seemed to work with a significant portion of the population, even my cat lady neighbor. So why not fight back with the same tactic?
Robby Mook by the way is from Vermont. I wonder why he did not support Bernie instead of Hillary?
BrotherJoe says:
At the risk of being labelled a "condescender" I will only reference Jimmy Carter's quote from 2013 that "America does not at the moment have a functioning democracy"
John Minnerath says:
I fear a continuation of the DNC machine and HRC so greatly I see no option but to throw in with Trump.
A vote for anyone else amounts to a vote for HRC and grave danger for our Republic.
Jim jordan says:
Trump will win because all the economic data confirms this. The BREXIT brigade won because the people who could not give an f about the EU turned out to vote to give the establishment a kick between the legs. The "post Fordian" settlement is not working for them. Ian Duncan-Smith was right on the money when he observed that the inhabitants of the s'hole public housing projects in his constituency were doing something they had not done in years, turn out and vote. Unless Americans are stupid they will do the same and vote to topple the status quo. Trump could be a syphillitic warthog (who casually uses the n word according to the rumour mill on the next revelation) but as long as he is not representive of the prevailing economic order, the people who are being crushed by it will go out and vote for him.
The problem is the proles just don't care enough to do anything about it. This is perhaps why Trump is seen as a protest vote against the reigning plutocracy. Trump, as reprehensible as he can be at times, is possibly the last hope for a peaceful change. I believe we can trust him to use whatever NSA collected dirt there is against anyone who opposes him should by some miracle he make it into the office. I believe he will lead Congress through coercion and threats. The same will be true for the courts and senior military.
I am leery about the actual process and believe it is already well rigged. There are now 2 confirmed reports of pre-filled out ballots for HRC in the 10,000 ranges in Virginia and Ohio. Assuming this is in fact part of a larger plan, plus the already established voting machine hacks, which are untraceable and unverifiable unless tested first with dummy ballots, then it is well rigged. It doesn't have to be much as the polls are more or less even. The election apparatus as you have described includes the MSM as well as the party machinery, and seems well aligned against Trump who represents a major change to their modus operandi and profiteering. Rarely have we seen the 0.1% so inflamed and it isn't just in the US but apparently worldwide. However, in the populations it is a different story. I have felt for quite a long time, and even more so since 2007, that the common man has been used and abused past the breaking point. But, just like as happened in 1929 they never revolted. But, a Clinton win just might be the necessary piece of straw. I suppose we'll just have to pop up some more popcorn and watch the show and see how it turns out. An awful lot is riding on this election and it extends far beyond the US borders.
"Trump's counteroffensive was ugly but IMO it was effective."
I think it was. … And that impression was surely enforced by responses to the last question.
Since we had the peculiar debate about Trump's suit last time, or some type of "clothes make men" (Swizz novel)/tell us all we need to know about the man, I tried to pay attention to his suit. Thus: For whoever cares about the subject, my take.
Admittedly I have no idea about present US fashion standards: I am more generally not a fan of padded shoulders, or maybe too padded shoulders. Could be, this was not ideally on the front side. But from the back it looked fine.
Besides: Maybe, not sure how much you have to take the setting into consideration, light, cameras, other matters used. I would avoid material that reflects, giving the appearance of lots of synthetics added. But maybe that's the last fashion right now. Who knows. 😉
I'm having a hard time believing there are any undecided voters. There has been unusual interest in this election. I've noticed in my travels around the country for the past year exceptional interest. What I find interesting is the inability of the Borg Queen and her Ft. Brooklyn wurlitzer to totally put away The Donald. Considering that the entire MSM is a campaign arm and the establishment of both parties as well as the majority of the big money is backing her and the perception that has been sold is that The Donald is an unhinged crazy loon who is a racist and misogynist, how come the Borg Queen is not running the table with double digit leads in the polls in all the battleground states? If the polls are reasonably accurate, then there's something odd that Trump is so competitive. Why?
This election is for all intents and purposes just a coronation of the Borg Queen. So, if Trump pull this off however improbably, then it's a veritable earthquake and the Borg will go into an epic meltdown.
I'm curious how many people here are going to deny HRC wants a hot war with Russia.
Pussygate was an overblown hysteria created by the media. Trump's coarseness was already factored in. Pearl clutchers were never going to have his back anyway. No movement in polls. If anything, more people were annoyed with the hypocrisy.
The RNC betrayal makes Pussygate worth it. He is under no compulsion to make nice with the GOPe anymore. I hope he proscribed the whole lot.
eakens says:
All Trump needs to win is to get people who otherwise don't vote to come out. Judging by the primary he did that. Layer on top of that the fact that the polls are constantly changing methodology, and that there are relative to past elections, minimal bumper stickers/yard signs for Hillary. I think he will win.
Daniel Nicolas says:
Will the US make war with Russia before, or after the election if Trump is elected? If Clinton is elected, will they wait until January to make war, or will they jump right in?
I continue to pray for a nuclear exchange free 2016.
@Tyler – "I'm curious how many people here are going to deny HRC wants a hot war with Russia."
The question that should be asked is how many people here are going to deny that John McCain, Bob Graham, and Mike Pence want a hot war with Russia.
Former Senator Graham of Florida wants a war with Russia? That's a new one. The last I knew he was against Saudi Arabia for backing the 9-11 terrorists and not for intervening in Syria. The last press piece I saw was from September (see below) Do you have some reference to your allegation?
http://www.fox13news.com/news/politics/208489010-story
They're not running for President, and after Juan McAmnesty's shameful betrayal he has even less inclination to listen to anything that fool says.
Your attempt to misdirect and obscure the fact HRC wants a hot war with Russia is noted though.
I'm with you. The Borg Queen guarantees escalation with Russia. That is really the only existential threat we face. I'll take racist misogynist any day to a proven warmonger with a track record of poor judgment.
No one. The only candidate with a proven track record of warmongering and bad judgment on national security matters is the Borg Queen. McCain and Graham will support all her military escalations with glee. Pence would too if he were in Congress. Right now if elected he'll have no real power. Trump seems to get that conflict with Russia is not in our interests.
Yahoo was told to read through ALL its emails for the NSA + FBI. The gov't is also using gag orders on its requests. NSA also feeds its data uncombed to Israel. If a rabid fascist or a rabid Zionist were to come to power, the machinery is already in place for true police-state-level suppression.
jld says:
I am not of the "praying" kind but I wouldn't mind an extension to 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, etc…
Not only offensive on that count, what about her continued violation of the debate format as she interrupted, bullied and contradicted according to her whim? Donald could have gone farther calling her out on that, but probably wagered she was digging her own grave.
I believe that Trump won this election by promising to put Hillary in a jail cell. There are a great number of disaffected democrats out there who were going to sit out this election or vote third party. They will now vote for Donald in the hopes of seeing her in the docket.
The wild card will be those computerized election machines. Election fraud can win for Hillary by concentrating on just a few states.
I agree with Jim Jordan that many more voters will be at the polls in November. They came out in the primaries by the millions and they won't stay at home, unlike those who the democrat party who will stay home, thankful this embarrassing charade is over. Someone said last night that the "debate" was a cross between TMZ and Jerry Springer. I agree.
In latest news, Paul Ryan had a talk with House Republicans a couple of hours and,
"Mr. Ryan initially urged his members to focus on their own re-election campaigns and to make individual decisions about how to handle Mr. Trump, according to two people who were on the call, who spoke on condition of anonymity."
Reminds me of Heinlein in "Starship Troopers" (the really good book, not the not so good movie): Sauve qui peut!
Maybe a Kasich would require the Clinton campaign to distort, but you have to admit that Trump provides a lot of quality raw material. After the distortion field of the general election recedes, we'll collectively shake our heads and wonder how we ever nominated him.
Trent says:
Her hostility to Russia was clear, as was her willingness to avoid a discussion of how best to deal with radical jihadis in Syria. This is the small print that will be lost in the discussion until after her inauguration. In her her world Russia = Assad = bad.
Saddest comment so far, WikiLeaks is actually doing more good than harm.
Traditionally, our media would do the job of vetting candiates.
The current media is in the tank for Shillary, hence the necessity of WikiLeaks.
Actually, I am curious to see if the much vaunted ABM systems even work at all. The Daniel Cook was shut down completely nown in 2 separate incidents and is one of the Aegis ABM platform ships we are relying on for our ABM defense. Russia will not attack unless attacked first but will very definitely respond and overwhelmingly so. These nuts in the US leadership actually seem to believe their own hype. Russia may be relatively small, but they still have a debt free economy, and have much skill at defending against American soft aggression including economic sanctions. It isn't painless though but has served as a rallying point for Putin against a common and well understood enemy. But, they have been steadily upgrading everything and a complete reorganization to a smaller but better military. If needed though they can crank up the entire nation quickly. I doubt the children in the US would respond the same way. I hope we don't see it but I believe Russia might possibly survive more or less intact should we launch nukes at them. But, to think we would survive? Far less so. I find it amazing that this is actually on the table. We are in deep caca.
David Lentini says:
With regard to Kathy Shelton who had been brutally raped by a man named Carter when she was twelve, I don't see anything wrong with HC's conduct. She was Carter's court appointed attorney and successfully got the scumbag's sentence reduced. It was her duty to do that. Enough said.
Two thoughts. First, as an attorney, it is more likely that HRC should have quit as counsel once she knew the truth. And lying to defend a client is a huge ethical violation and would likely carry legal liability. Second, her behavior speaks for itself. Laughing? Come on. At least she could have kept a grim face.
Tyler: I wonder why Trump doesn't announce that he will ask people at his rallies to pledge not to vote for the local Republican candidate for Rep/Senator unless that candidate endorses Trump.
David Lentini
I am not a lawyer but used to be around them when I was doing expert witness work. I was unaware that it was possible for a lawyer who has been appointed by a judge to withdraw so easily. Did she lie in court? Tell me. pl
mike allen,
" Bob Graham" of Florida? Do you mean "Lindsey Graham" of South Carolina?
"holocaust" is a generic word meaning destruction or slaughter on a mass scale, especially caused by fire. It's a few centuries old.
Jews don't own it.
Trump could be a syphillitic warthog (who casually uses the n word according to the rumour mill on the next revelation)
Donny Deutsch said the opposite on Morning Joe a few weeks ago. Said he'd known Trump for a few decades, never heard racist talk from him ever. He asked people he knows who've known Trump as long, and all of them, he said, never heard a racist word come out of his mouth. Jes' saying'.
Generalfeldmarschall von Hindenburg says:
I have to agree that there are still the formalities of a democratic republic, representational democracy or whatever one wishes to call it. But they are tattered and under constant attack by authoritarians from right and left. The refinement and application of psychological warfare techniques are never spoken of in the Borgist media save for someone like Maddow to denounce 'conspiracy theories'.
I'm always having to ask myself if the kind of elections we're having are much different than the Tammany Hall orchestrated elections, or the kind of elections they had in Jefferson's day where the candidate rolled out a hogshead of rum and bought votes the old fashioned way.
And speaking of old time pols, how come no one mentions how the sainted Abe Lincoln threw habaeus corpus out the window? I see the appeal of Trump since at least he casts aside sacred cows from time to time.
Her behavior on hearing of the grim murder of Quadafi (a guy who had bent over backward to court the Empire's favor after the Soviet Union imploded)is a pretty good indication of her utter lack of empathy. Or worse, her delight in the suffering of others.
Yes, it was the cold-hearted laughing response that got to me. Not unlike the gleeful cackle at Ghaddafi's brutal murder.
Colonel –
The rapists name was Thomas Alfred Taylor, not Carter. He asked for a court appointed lawyer. Hillary specifically told the judge that she preferred not to defend a rapist but was given no choice by appointing judge, Maupin Cummings.
She did not get him free, but did manage to get him to agree to a lesser charge for which he was imprisoned despite the right wing wurlitzer's charges that she got him off free.
She did, to her shame, discredit the girl's story in court a la Julian Assange.
Yes, Lindsey. Sorry too much coffee this morning.
Lindsey!
Count me in as one of the deniers that Hillary wants a hot war with anybody. So what if she thinks Syria and Russia are war criminals for Aleppo City airstrikes. Apparently they think we (all Americans, you included) are war criminals for Deir ez-Zor.
Even they fail to produce the tape the slur is already out there http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/10/trump-tapes-british-apprentice-producer-under-pressure-to-releas/
Zachary Smith says:
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
The key part is the first minute. Hillay had the duty to do her best for her client, and she got him off. But as the audio clip indicates, she knew he was guilty. THAT may be standard lawyer stuff, but laughing about the event years later is beyond the pale.
ked says:
I'm w/ Bob on this one…
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/videos/a49437/bob-schieffer-debate-reaction/
MRW: I agree that Jews don't own it. But destroying Jihadis in Aleppo has nothing in common with the actual Holocaust or the (Khmer Rouge) Killing Fields of Cambodia, or the Genocide in Rwanda.
Raddatz's suggestion was cheap, dishonest propaganda.
Joe100 says:
I think the only path for a candidate who can depart from "party elite" views to have a shot at the Presidency may be someone:
1. Like Trump with name recognition and substantial personal wealth, at least enough to build momentum;
2. Who "gets" this country's core problems and recognizes that party/deep state conventional wisdom is not going to address our many problems and challenges; and
3. Who is not a career politician.
I think that those who dismiss Trump due to his manner and history (many of my liberal friends/colleagues) may be missing the point that if we really want effective change, more "polished" personalities are unlikely to be be able to deliver such.
I would also add that I live in a fairly liberal area of Mid-coast Maine where it appears there is close to zero enthusiasm for Clinton. I saw the first HRC bumper sticker about a week ago and two HRC yard signs three days ago. Driving to town there must be 30+ yards with a campaign sign for the democratic State senate candidate, but not one of these yards has an HRC sign. Interestingly, my local neighborhood is mostly working class but I have not yet seen a Trump campaign sign. I have seen (only) a few Trump bumper stickers.
Trump threw plenty of red meat to his core supporters, but he didn't exactly reach out to anyone else, to put it mildly.
I do not think publicly rubbing a woman's nose in her husband's old infidelities will prove a winning strategy among the larger voting public.
It was weird the way he kept pointing at Clinton and circling her as she was speaking, between sniffles and interruptions. As if he knew Laurence Harvey was up in the flies with a rifle and he wanted to make sure Harvey was clear on which candidate to hit.
I think Hillary will win as a result of the women's vote. After watching Trumps performance last night any undecided woman, decided. I also feel she won the debate as she was able to show calm under fire, with Trumps stalking, lurking behavior, threatening to have her investigated if he wins, and mud slinging.
His best show was when he discussed his position on Russia and Assad and his graciousness at the end.
Origin says:
If Trump wins, his win will be a result of the wreckage of the whole party system.
So many Republicans and "conservative" organizations have abandoned him, he will be able simply to reject the Republican Party and he will. The Republican establishment will never be able to constrain his immediate whim or early morning uncontrolled "tweakt" to the system.
A win for Trump will mark a voter repudiation of the progressive and borgist ideologies that have dominated and provided continuity and increasing betterment of our national life experience for the last few decades. We will have lost our ideological consensus that has protected our national continuity of experience and governance.
We may never recover the loss of the quiet consensus as to how we govern ourselves. The Republicans will be devastated and fully divided. The Democrats hate him and will put every roadblock possible in his tracks.
Trump's mandate will be change, yet he will step forward with no organizational machine or genuine ideas to implement it. Abroad, he will not be respected and universally considered to be some kind maniac clown with a sex fetish. At home, his promises to apply authoritarian tactics to get law and order will accomplish the opposite and will trend towards substantial losses of our freedoms.
His administration will be a festival of all sorts of opportunists out only for their own gain. My estimate is he will not be able to govern alone and there is no way accurately to predict what sort of coalition he will be able to cobble together.
With Hillary, at least there would be some sort of bureaucratic continuity. With Trump, how and whether he can govern is a total unknown. We all now have a pretty clear idea of who and what he is. In a functioning job market, only lovers of disruption would ever hire him to be President.
Here in the USA, we take the continuity of good governance much too much for granted. Unfortunately, good governance is a very fragile thing that can suffer a system breakdown much easier than most can imagine. The continuity is presently under great strain and has been for too long. If Trump wins, that continuity will be severely challenged as his election will the a reflection of a communal decision to throw the present system away. Times will become very interesting. We cannot know what genies will come out of the bottle if it is unplugged.
Perhaps, the political correctness of the current progressive borgist state is correct as a matter of practice and being "politically incorrect" is actually not correct, but folly.
Trump is a man of bad character, much worse than Hillary's. He should not be elected. We have all experienced his type and most of us avoid that type like the plague. If he is elected, little good or betterment will come from it.
It is factually conservative to vote for Hillary because that vote will tend to preserve and conserve the political continuity that has made this nation prosper for so long. Despite Trump's denials of it the USA is a great, brave, constantly improving nation. It has prospered for so long because it has been able to long maintain the structures of the two-party system Trump has so effectively disrupted.
Voting for Trump is just a leap into the unknown with a high likelihood of damage to the continuity. Trump's freedom from party will result in chaos, and, perhaps, even more of it than the system can endure without breaking apart.
Abstention is probably a silent vote for Hillary for those who cannot actually check her box on the ballot.
I will vote conservative, not radical. While not perfect, things are really pretty good here in the USA and I do not want to let the future be chancy by voting for the radical reality TV huckster disrupter who so often leaps and tweets without first thinking and who "loves war" without having any idea what suffering it entails.
Interestingly looking at the LA Times tracker Trump has been consistently several points ahead since Hillary had her collapse, which supports my belief the race ended then.
I feel the media are trying to do what the famous neocon quote said about creating their own reality. Reality is the Clinton team has given up on Iowa, Ohio, Maine CD2 and the early ballots in Florida, according to Floridian pollster Richard Baris, look great for Trump (Rs up and Ds ballot request are from the panhandle).
Nice that the media could get all excited about a recording no one cares about, but Trump put that to bed real quick, a brutal demolition of Hillary. Good that Trump was reminded not to trust the Romney and Bush cliques as well, don't make the same mistake Reagan did when he acquiesced to having the elder Bush as his VP.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/10/06/gen-mike-flynn-why-hillarys-record-on-libya-is-even-worse-than-think.html
Good piece by Flynn, seems to be still singing from the right hymn sheet.
The fly in the ointment, as I understand it, is her tsctics (badgering the witness and attacking her credibility) and then laughing about how she did it afterwards.
Matthew,
Because then the narrative becomes "TRUMP HOLDING THE PARTY HOSTAGE!" versus focusing on Hillary. The Wisconsin delegation got booed off the stage. Same with the Nevada Senate candidate.
The strategy is always this: first the infidels, THEN the apostates.
What a "deplorable" idea to have voters hold politicians accountable for their actions.
For some mysterious reasons there is no discussion on the importance of Israel's proximity to Syria in case the US decides to go nuclear against Russia. What would a modest preventive shot towards Israel (by cornered Russians) could produce in the minds of the Lobby' big wigs? Similar to how the US went circular from fighting the bad Al Qaeda to joining the "moderate" Al Qaeda, the grand design of Eretz Israel, which inspired and brought to power so many Israel-firsters in the US, could lead to the final undoing of the state of Israel.
"…cold-hearted laughing response…" – a standard reaction of a psychopath to other peoples' sufferings.
Mark Logan says:
I'll opine that barring some kind of miracle the only thing he saved last night was his post-charade radio talk show career and he probably knows it. The cost of retaining his base was extremely high. Either he thinks his base is large enough to win the Presidency or he has privately thrown in the towel. I'll put my nickel on the later.
Why does everyone think the Russian Federation would respond by attacking a US carrier or shooting down a couple of planes? I suggest there are many other potential attacks that send a bigger message with little probability of direct US casualties. One scenario: what is the cruise missile capacity of a current Russian nuclear submarine? How many missiles would be necessary to capacitance the switch yards of the electric grid feeding Ft. Brooklyn? What are the anti-missile defenses? If done at 3am NYC time in response to a US attack the strikes would in all probability have zero direct casualties. Would the message be heard loud and clear that the unprovoked attack by the US (or allies) on behalf of al-Nursa (mujahadeen 2.0) in Syria is going to be responded to on US soil and that we have no defense?; Would the people of the shining city on the Hudson demand an all out war on behalf of al-Nursa/rebels/"free" Syria? I think we already know what the Borg think. I don't think the people in NYC are willing to be targets of actual military strikes so the R2P crowd and polisci flaks can impose their vision on the world.
A bit OT:
Flamby is at it again.
Yep he was ready to bomb Syria back in Summer 2013 – after the Red Line issue- on false pretense and then chicken out since he knew who used the chemical weapons in Ghouta.
France gave arms to the "moderate rebels" aka head choppers
Now, he is after Russia at the ICC.
Quel c—–d!
Guess May is too busy with the hard Brexit, otherwise the UK would chime in.
Not sure about HRC lying in court, Colonel, since I can't recall all the facts at the moment. But I do know that a lawyer can't represent a client whom the lawyer knows is lying, and the lawyer, being an officer of the court, can't lie to the court. Generally, when a lawyer knows a client is lying, the lawyer is expected to counsel the client to tell the truth and then withdraw if the client continues to lie. Withdrawal is usually done in an anodyne way.
As to her lying, if she knowingly concocted the "Lolita" story about the girl, then she lied in court and should have been punished.
Jus'Thinkin says:
Frank Luntz thought the DONALD had crashed and burned after the first debate, but check out the focus group after last night's dust up (10-9-16):
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/10/09/luntz_tonight_was_so_significant_that_he_is_back_in_the_race.html
Signs of perfect possession.
Macgupta123 says:
snopes.com on "Can't we just drone him?"
http://www.snopes.com/julian-assange-drone-strike/
McCain actually wields a great deal of power on his own. He manages the Reagan creation of NED and its non-reviewed by Congress funding and galavants around the globe as an alternate Secretary of State often saying and doing things in opposition to the administration, at least as it appears. His steadfast compatriot is Victoria Nuland who also frequently says or does the opposite of what her ostensible boss Kerry says. I know living here in Hungary whenever McCain comes for a visit (4 times last year) trouble follows soon thereafter. The same thing happened in Ukraine before the US backed coup. I was in Vukovar Croatia taking my ICC certification examination (I passed thanks), and in our hotel was a group of Americans who looked a lot like spooky DoS people. I suppose they could have been CIA but they had the look of some kind of government project about them. Having spent over 15 years working on joint projects you kind of get a nose for them. The US is trying to promulgate another Kosova in Bosnia using the territory of Srpska as another thorn in the side of the Balkans. That is on top of the reports of US funded ISIS training camps in Bosnia. Sounds far fetched I know but the lions share of ISIS are persons from the former Soviet Union who will be unemployed soon in Syria so will be redeployed into Central Asia to attack Russia (and possibly the EU) on its flanks.
It is my prayer that someone with a tiny bit of sanity (perhaps Trump is not as bad as he seems) puts an end to all of these escapades towards American hegemony. McCain is IMHO one of the most evil men in America.
NSA also feeds its data uncombed to Israel.
True. Since late 90s.
true police-state-level suppression
They already have many local police forces covered. Every single police force in the cities that experienced race riots over the past few years was trained by the Israeli military and security forces either here or there.
Jeff Helper, American-Israeli activist, retired anthropologist, and co-founder of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, describes it in an interview in Seattle, February 2010.
Halper describes how Israel and the occupation has infected US Federal, state, and local governments with security politics, with no US oversight or permission from US citizens. He warns that what Israel is doing is an unexamined danger to America, and that it needs to be addressed. Starting about 10 minutes in (from memory) and continuing to about 26 minutes and beyond. Gets into it at the 17-minute mark. Quite chilling.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVa0QbH8YcA
HawkOfMay says:
Clinton never feared a Trump candidacy. They favored Ted Cruz, Donald Trump, and Ben Carson. These are the only candidates who even had a chance to lose Hillary Clinton.
From the wikileaks DNC Leaks, April 7 2015.
Pied Piper Candidates
There are two ways to approach the strategies mentioned above. The first is to use the field as a whole to inflict damage on itself similar to what happened to Mitt Romney in 2012. The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right. In this scenario, we don't want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more "Pied Piper" candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party.
Pied Piper candidates include, but aren't limited to:
• Ted Cruz
• Donald Trump
• Ben Carson
We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to them seriously.
If and when Trump loses to Hillary Republicans need to reflect upon why out of a field of 17 potential candidates they did not choose one of the 14 who would have crushed Hillary in a general election.
walrus says:
"a la Julian Assange" – this is Hasbara stuff.
mike allen
I don't think you understand my major point in today's post from me. My worry is not about the content of her campaign but rather about the method involved. IMO this is a perfection of the concept of transforming electoral politicking into Marketing complete with incessant harping on brands and market shares. pl
Jus-Thinkin: There are two secret electorates in this race: People who won't admit they are going to vote for Trump and Republican women (and men) who will silently defect to Hillary.
I have no idea which group is larger.
Kert says:
Trump is a man of bad character, much worse than Hillary's. He should not be elected.
Yeah, but Hillary is batshit crazy and might trigger a nuclear war. How is dealing with Trump worse than dealing with radiation poisoning?
The only problem with that is that there probably were very few undecided women before this debate. This debate was won by Trump in that it will get people to come out to vote.
I've said it before going back to the first primary and I'll say it yet again….anybody voting for Trump isn't voting for Trump, they're simply voting against everybody else.
Tol Tapen says:
Well, here is my condescension whether it is wanted or not: Things are looking up already! Trump's campaign did a marvelous job in exposing the true "ruling party". George Soros congratulated Putin on his 64th birthday – "they" are scared and unsure as to what happens next. There is "mutiny" in old Europe and elsewhere. Old cliches are dying fast – Russians aren't the enemy. The opposite can well be true – Russians might need Americans as the only western country that has some guts left: China is by far the biggest economic powerhouse on the planet if bullcrap reporting is dropped. It will get bigger and more versatile in every way – financially, militarily, etc. One might think of Chinese as a kind of Martians – unbridgeable cultural and linguistic differences signify an alien civilization. Also, the old international payments and trading system is about to go down.
So… the time is short and an old patrician might still feel responsibility for his pilgrims.
I will bite.
I am in touch with person called Tofer Harrison who runs in FP circles in Washington. Ex Langley. I think he is characteristic of the thinking in Washington. It seems they believe Russia will fold when confronted.
I don't think they ever consider what is would mean if they got this one wrong.
So they don't want a hot war. They think they just need to grow a pair and the neoconservatives will be rewarded.
Raddatz's suggestion was cheap, dishonest propaganda
I agree. Part of the Putin-Is-The-New-Hitler theme the Alphabets are peddling.
Yes. This whole approach to the Russians is based on what I consider the false premise that the Russians will back away from us and that the subsequent effect in Moscow will be another maidan moment. I can't imagine how they got such an idea. pl
You should take a listen to Hillary talking about getting Taylor's sentence reduced. It's one thing to get his sentence reduced, it's another to essentially admit that you knew he was guilty and laugh about how you got his sentence reduced for raping a 12 year old.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2f13f2awK4
Tol Tapen
You are the "old patrician?" My joke about expected "condescension" had nothing to do with the points which you raise. I agree with your points, pl
Harry,
You better tell your friend to put a foot up the fundament of the FP clique because this is a grave matter and the next stupid move by them is the trigger for a New War in which they will be the losers one way or another.
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
You're also the guy making up stories about his neighbor for ecred so I don't expect a whole lot of rationality from you.
This place is going to be amazing after a Trump victory next month.
Mac,
Lol snopes. Run by two democratic cat ladies (one of which is swomam).
Google snopes bias.
Mark Logab,
Yeah last night looked like a man who has thrown in the towel?
What color is the sky in your world, moon man?
And I'm with you, Jack. My only real fear is WWIII. Russia isn't called the The Bear for nothing. They don't want war; in fact, I think Putin will bear any humiliation for the sake of his people to avoid it. But Russia has its limits, molded in cement with the nation's memory of WWII.
People here forget how big Russia is. The width is the distance from Seattle to Tehran. They have half our population, if that. Every religion. Countless languages. Cultures within the country that are as diverse as Miami Beach and Senegal. But the one thing that unites them all is Mother Russia, just like our Uncle Sam. Putin has to rule over all that. He doesn't have time to fuck around when internal dissension threatens the social order and peace, and every Russian understands that. Maybe not the group that is getting put in line; the rest do. But they all united when they think the world is trying to do what Hitler attempted over 70 years ago on the Eastern Front in the bloodiest war in world history for its sheer scale.
This Grandmother of Charlotte thinks she can threaten a repeat, and it's terrifying.
Have you noticed that everyone bellyaches that Trump doesn't give policy details when the only policy details Hillary cites is 'go to my website'. She doesn't remember them. I doubt she even knows them. People write them for her.
Which "… increasing betterment of our national life experience for the last few decades." would this be? The increased disparity of wealth by transfers to the top 1%? The destruction of the existing medical insurance system via Obamacare? The non-existant increase in opportunities in inner cities represented by a black poverty rate of 1 in 4?
"we take the continuity of good governance…" That is not the result of loyalty to political party but a commitment to civilization which includes the principle that no one is above the law. What "…. continuity of good governance …" did the Attorney General show in meeting in private with the husband of a political candidate under FBI investigation? What "…. continuity of good governance …" did the FBI show in providing many of Hilary Clinton's aides during a criminal investigation? If needed I'll be happy to cite a few more examples where loyalty to party is detrimental to our national life and continuity of good governance.
Correction: Jeff HALPER.
That method was treated by Joe McGinniss back in '69 (Selling of the Pres. '68), or dramatized in "Sweet Smell of Success" & "Face in the Crowd" from the late '50s. Like much in American culture, politics became monetized / industrialized in the modern sense in our post-Depression, post-WWII era. I don't quite understand why many are aghast about what has been fairly obvious for 60+ years. In much of what I observe, it's "my team vs your team, amp'd up by pros w/ $$$", clothed in ideological wailing.
Boston Bob says:
Our top dog, General Mark Milley (USA), has been talking some serious, Pyongyang-esque, smack and said it was directed at Russia.
"The US military… will stop you, and we will beat you harder than you have ever been beaten before. We will destroy any enemy, anywhere, any time."
All that was missing is Milley finishing with, "Yo, Zhukov was a li'l bitch. Peace out. Thug life." And flash some gang signs.
"Count me in as one of the deniers that Hillary wants a hot war with anybody"
Mike- are you also also guaranteeing this like the guarantee you have to Amir.
The way you throw those guarantees left and right behind hilly billy' actions, I am afraid it may make you become insolvent by election time.
VietnamVet says:
Industrial politics is an apt phrase. Clearly Hillary Clinton is the establishment candidate and they are lifting her by both elbows across the finish line by any means possible. This is a revolutionary election. The elites have lost control over the Irredemeables. They will vote for Donald Trump no matter what. There must be others besides me who voted for Al Gore, John Kerry and Barrack Obama but cannot vote for Hillary Clinton. The ultimate question will be the legitimacy of the election. If there is any doubt, the consent of the governed will be gone. The glue that held America together was the middle class and hope. Both are fading fast. The United States is unraveling.
It is beyond insanity for Hillary Clinton, John McCain or Lindsay Graham to propose a No Fly Zone over Syria to save Jihadist families in East Aleppo which will start World War III with Russia. Reality will not be kind to the instigators of a nuclear extinction event.
Fred, I do not know where you live or what your observation experience is, but here in the South, things have gotten a lot more prosperous in the last few years. My town in verdant with new minority owned businesses prospering all over the place. We have a very rich and educated minority middle and upper middle class here.
I am always amused by the claim that the inner city areas are festering. Perhaps they are in some cities, but not in all. Here in Atlanta, our inner city, populated by a lot of Blacks is booming. We have some poor areas, but none as hopeless as we had half a generation ago. Great improvements in public education really makes a positive difference. Here in Georgia, every public school student with good grades can get a tuition free college education through our Hope Scholarship program.
Just a single statistic is education. Since 2000, improvements in education in the minority groups is "yuge." Take a look at this https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=72 Looks to me like things are getting much better as more and more are educated.
I have recently traveled north, in upstate New York where things are really poor compared to the urban south and into Philly which is some of the poorest parts of the nation I have ever seen. By the way, Harlem is hopping.
I disagree with you on Obamacare that does have issues many of which exist because of Republican resistance to finding better solutions. Medical prices are going up, but primarily because with more people covered, there is more demand. This will work itself out if we can get the Republicans like Tom Price to get out of the way. What we need is for the AMA to get out of the way and let medical schools grow. It worked in Law, a ton of new schools, not a market glut and falling legal prices. Add 20 or 30 million to the market like Obamacare has done and rising prices is not unexpected.
You assert that the existing medical insurance program is busted, but the profits of the health care giants simply disproves that claim. Their business is booming. If Hillary was really going to help things she would go after rising concentration in the healthcare insurers and providers. The real truth is that during Obama's administration, tens of millions of Americans now have healthcare and a better quality of life than before. That means a lot more people are alive and healthier than otherwise would be.
Last year middle class incomes rose at a near record rate. Employment is at or near the full employment full employment. The argument that too of a percentage of people are not working or are on welfare is more a symptom of a society so prosperous that many, many can live on their wealth and generosity of those who live with them and choose not to work. If people were so poor as Trump would want you to believe, those not working would decide to work because they would have to and would not have the choice of not working because they would otherwise starve.
More income, more getting college degrees, and better healthcare is progress. Progress always leaves some behind, those who cannot adapt to changing resource demands and technologies, many who are old, and those unwilling to move to more prosperous areas. I trust you are not one of those. It used to be go West young man, now probably to South.
You are being deceived by a bundle of red herrings, the nation is not failing. Trump prays on those who have been left behind. Obama is correct, thing have gotten a lot better under his guidance.
My estimation of Trump is he is crazier than she is. She is a policy wonk and is subject to listening to advice and examining evidence. My guess is she has learned from her mistakes in Libya. I have no sympathy for Hillary or Obama on Syria. The whole foreign policy establishment has failed to discern that the true enemies are the jihadists. I think Trump is equally deceived on the issue and will just be careless and really anger the Russians.
He is the greater danger as I see it. He wants to shoot up the Iranians–that is really, really crazy!
Edward Amame says:
That was about as nasty a spectacle as I've ever seen on a pres debate stage. It may shore up Trump support with the base (not sure even about that, how did GOP women react to it?). It certainly can't have helped his campaign with remaining undecideds though.
I agree that the timing of the release of the tape was pretty politically masterful. I also don't think that's all the Clinton camp has. They could be saving the best for last.
At least the RNC is standing by the candidate primary voters elected. Not surprising though that candy-ass politicians would abandon ship if they think it will save them in Nov. It may not save them though. This really does look like a case of Washington DC GOP establishment vs the GOP base. The base may not look kindly on those candidates who do jump ship.
Former 11B says:
Exactly where my head is at.
He looked like a guy grasping to keep his base on board, not build on it. He doesn't want to get crushed.
Isn't HC's campaign manager Mook employing the same propaganda principles that Nazi Goebbels did, the big lie repeated over and over that is?
Yes, if he wins, it will be amazing to those out of touch with the entire populace in its great and wonderful diversity.
The half of the country that voted Trump in will be amazed to discover that there is a YUGE group of minority people, that is just slightly the minority, like more than a third, who will know that the majority totally disrespects them and want to re-impose some level of repression on them again. This time, those people are smart, educated, militarily trained, and really mad at the majority and will organize and be viscously unwilling to give up a century's gains without great resistance.
Add the great majority of women to the mix who hate being harassed and you will have some amazing dysfunction.
It will stop progress for years, if not a generation.
gowithit says:
"Trump News" profitable? Just like Trump Air was uh, "profitable" and crashed, just like Trump University turned into a scam? Just like his Atlantic City gamble ran him off the table? Just like he claimed nearly a billion in loses one year?
We have and 'either or" election and the choice is really "neither"!
Croesus says:
Belligerence toward Russia is certainly troubling; at least that's talked about.
What does Hillary mean by "taking US relationship to Israel to the next level?" Complete capitulation to Israel as against mere dominance of influence? Will she sign an actual treaty? Will the Senate approve (YES).
I'd also like to see more discussion of the Bridge of the Horns project. I think that looms large in State Dept. planning, and Israel expects to be a major player in what is expected to be a commercialization of Africa to rival the East India Company, and to edge out Iran by installing Mordechai in the place of Haman- Rohani. Don't forget: at the heart of the zionist ideology was the festering sore of Rome having defeated Jewish rebels in the first century AD; zionists want to BE the Roman empire, or the Persian empire, or both. That's not hyperbole, it's the stated mindset; so say H Sacher and Yossi Alpher.
I recall HRC mentioning the US "Silk Road" project once or twice, but the Chinese laid out "One Belt One Road" a couple years ago, http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2016/07/one-belt-one-road-fb-ali.html
As well, the Bridge of the Horns has been in the works since at least 2008. Some very wealthy Americans are involved in Bridge of the Horns —http://americanmei.org/news-story/madeleine-albright-to-speak-at-pittsburgh-middle-east-institutes-third-annual-conference/ the kind of folks that Hillary hobnobs with, now that she and Bill are no longer "broke."
Would a demonstration of capabilities, lent to willing actors around a Bab-al-Mendab, by second or third rate weopens and/or operators be a less dramatic and a more likely warning shot?
100% accurate.Nice call Tyler. It smoked out all the fakers.
Same can be said about keeping her composure when hearing of the raping of Gaddafi with a knife, by Al-awards linked rebels. At least she should have behaved like a statesman/woman and suppressed her psychopathic (not meant as an insult but clinical diagnosis of pleasure in another's suffering) laughter, in public.
You just gave the clinical definition of a psychopath
So you equate "raping a minor by a violent offender" to Assange's inability to withhold ejaculation during consensual sex, once the condom broke?
If that's the standard, the battles of Stalingrad, Leningrad, and Berlin were "holocausts" that make Aleppo look like a campfire.
Things are good for you. Not for me though and not for a whole lot of other people. And I am not down with borgiost agenda. Shining house on the hill we are not. Rather we have turned into a place where fraud is a business model and justice is only applied to proles. You think that's sustainable? The answer is yes with the condition that you have a police state. No thanks.
Hillary Clinton has several paths to 270 Electorial votes and Donald Trump has few. He does not seem to realize that he has to seriously expand support beyond his base to prevail. It appears that her contention that he is unfit for the office is gaining traction and unless he can reverse that, she will win.
I suspect that after the election there will be a lot of broken glass to deal with as all those crystal balls either implodes or explodes.
Do they pay you by the word?
The whole post is absurd.
Insanity – doing the same old same old and expecting a better result.
"Loves war" – where did that whopper come from.
The war lover would seem to be Hillary and yes she is the conservative choice , if a poor one.
Russia has no incentive to shoot at Israel and Israel has no incentive to provide the Russians one. Israel seems to be hedging their bets as to who can best serve as the outside power broker in the region. Russia has more to offer Israel in dealings with Iran than the US does. Even the US was bailed out by Russia once they'd painted themselves into the war corner over Iran's nuclear program.
All due respect, I think you are projecting far too much of what you want to believe onto them.
Trump did better than I expected and Clinton worse in this "debate" (it was anything but). Based on polling data to date, I change my prediction to Clinton winning by a plurality with 48% of the national vote, Trump 43% of the national vote, and 3rd parties/write-ins capturing the remaining 9% of votes. Clinton's ground game will eek out the win.
Trump succeeded in stopping the defections but will struggle to garner more than 3 percentage points of the remaining undecideds out there. Clinton will try to run out the clock. I expect one or two more videos to counter more Wikileaks releases, canceling out each other.
That's my prediction and I'm sticking to it (until other factors make me change my mind yet again!).
On a personal note, I found the whole thing last night incredibly depressing. Why oh why can't we go to a shorter campaign season? This ain't the 1890s when candidates crisscrossed the country by train to deliver their stump speeches.
Oh, and turnout of the voting age population will barely make 50%.
That's what we call a SWAG in Gubment circles.
Various talking heads are talking about using "stand-off weapons" to disable Syria's air capabilities. They seem to be not thinking about the capabilities of Russia's air defense systems, which as the centerpiece of Russian air strategy are beyond our own. I can think of no disincentive for Russia to deploy against such a standoff attack – downing missiles on their way to targets is not the same as downing aircraft. If Russia's air defense systems are successful against cruise missiles etc., it would throw the Borg's strategy into a crisis – either double down with much higher military and political risks or back down. I almost wouldn't mind it happening just to watch the ants scramble and to see the expression on Charles Lister's fat face.
"Stand by your Mad (eleine Allbright)"
"There's a special place in hell for women who don't support other women."
"500,000 dead Iraqi children — it's worth the price."
Not sure what you mean that a lawyer can't represent a client who is lying. If you mean that a lawyer can't put a client on the witness stand to knowingly lie, you are correct, at least in the sense that the lawyer would be guilty of suborning perjury. If the client insists on taking the stand and committing perjury, the lawyer then has a duty to inform the court that he can no longer represent the client.
For that reason, many criminal defense lawyers never ask the client if he or she committed the crime. Sounds weird, but it's true.
But, if a lawyer knows a client is guilty, there is no legal ethical problem with the client proclaiming his innocence in any manner outside the witness stand. And of course there is also no problem for the lawyer constructing a defense which exonerates his guilty client. Again, as long as no perjury is involved.
The only prohibited lie would be in court.
Loved this post.
The long penultimate paragraph is perfection.
I don't claim to be a typical undecided voter. I can't vote for Clinton mainly based on her venal political hypocrisy, her foreign policy leanings, and her plain disrespect for the intelligence of the American voter. I can't vote for Trump because he is a nasty human being and I frankly don't believe a word that comes out of his mouth or have faith that he would be a competent administrator of our government. But he still sorely tempts me because the entire political establishment in Washington is against him.
I've never not voted. My trouble is deciding to vote Green or Libertarian. Or might I just do the unthinkable and pull the lever for Trump. I don't know.
Tyler –
You still doubt the cat lady? She will be disappointed that your tent is not big enough for her. But I am sure she will vote for Trump anyway. This morning she was ranting an raving about what she calls "Hillary's smarmyness" at the debate.
As to making up stories I was never very good at it. But as I told you before I have read your online sci-fi here online, and would like to read more. Where can I buy hard copies? Will you autograph it for me?
But I don't always catch your code talk. What is "ecred"?
I thought you were.
The oligarchy which controls the US political establishment shall be severely weakened if its foreign dominion desintegrates. Therefore, the points that I raise have everything to do with the Americans getting control of their country back from…
This is my last comment in your blog.
But Tyler, you yourself have said on this blog in the past that the source of info should not automatically be ruled out, consider the info also. I believe Colonel Lang has said something similar.
Were you lying to me way back then? Or have you changed your mind? That is cricket I guess, if politicians and women do it, why can't you and I?
And what is wrong with cat ladies? If Snopes is run by a cat lady, then I would assume she must be a Trump supporter.
Castellio says:
In that particular group of battles you should add in the Battle of Kiev.
At various points in his campaign, Trump has said he will bomb Syria into the stone age, put 30,000 troops into Syria and Iraq, and put no troops into Syria. How do we know which of these is his real position?
used to be when a Dem candidate took a strident "conservative" position on foreign policy, it was so they couldn't be outflanked on the right. old habits die hard. anyway, I think Origin makes some good points. I live in the deep south and the economy isn't a disaster – I've seen worse in recent decades. however, extremism is gaining strength… as displayed by $55,000 coal-rolling pick-up trucks.
In olden days America, when things got hard, people picked up and moved on, tried something new somewhere different.. these days, not so much.
Col. Lang said… "IMO the success of such PR techniques will mean the end of actual democracy in the US if it continues."
Nancy K said… "I think Hillary will win as a result of the women's vote."
I hear a voice from the past saying that women should not be allowed to vote. Maybe that voice will prove right after all. Totalitarianism, courtesy of women's rights.
The country where women demand combat roles in war, but become hysterical because of mere locker room talk. It would be fitting should the last american president be the first woman to reach that office.
But I'm being evil right there. Fortunately it seems that many women will not vote for the criminal Kewpie doll anyway.
By the way, first debate, Trump let Hillary throw those inane accusations without retort, claerly intent on seeing how low would she go, setting the stage for a justifiable, in the eyes of the people watching the debates, unleashing of low level accusations at Clinton and Hillary at the next debate. It is interesting how some, like Origin, in lawyery fashion, no less, said that Trump had become dominated by Hillary, when it was clear that he was both lamenting the direction Hillary had decided to go and giving her rope so he would be able to attack without regret at their next encounter.
In the end, it is interesting that the one candidate that speaks the truth about the state of their country is the one americans think unfit for office. Perhaps, it is the office that has become unfit for the truthful citizen.
Hasbara? Do the Isaelis hate him too? About time those bastards got something right.
Doug Colwell says:
Mike allen, "if Snopes is run by a cat lady, then I would assume she must be a Trump supporter." Do you understand how stupid that sounds?
I cannot say for certain but I suspect our cat lady would support Hillary. She does not seem to have a firm grasp of what is happening in the outside world.
It may be that Clinton does not specifically want a hot war literally. It may be that she wants the fruits of victory without having to earn the victory ( actually without making other people have to earn the victory). It may be that she shares the DC FedRegime consensus-view mentioned above that the Russiagov will "fold" when its "bluff" is "called". In which case she would back the US into a war she didn't literally "want".
But whether a Prez Clinton would literally "want" a war, or merely create a war through making a bad bet . . . well, as the Clintron itself said in another context . . . " what difference would it make?"
Freudenschade,
Well . . . we'll collectively remember all about all the brand-name Republican nomination-seekers and understand all over again how we ever nominated him.
Earthrise says:
I wish ISIS/Al-Qaeda listened to your advice, then they would be liberating the ME from the Anglo-Zionists rather than killing their co-religious brothers and sisters for them.
My memory may be off, but what I remember is that it is our host here who has instructed us from time to time that the information-itself should be considered separately from the source-of-the-information. The information itself should be used as a kind of data-flashlight helping us to look for other data-bits to support or counter-support the info-bit which we are considering. (If I am remembering/understanding correctly what I have read).
One could go further and regard the source-of-the-information as being a piece of information itself. One could then try doing various kinds of kremlinology on both the source-of-the-information and the information-from-that-source as to what's and whose's agenda is being advanced or countered by pieces of information coming from particular sources at particular times.
I was merely assuming a tit for tat. But, didn't consider the cyber warfare aspects. I believe they would shut off the entire US infrastructure. Most of the very best programmers come from Russia or India. Many now work in the US and many of those are at DoD or in sensitive positions. I myself employed 4 senior Russia scientists in my biodefense program as an example. All Russians, just like the Chinese are loyal to Mother Russia. Ask any one of them (assuming you are close enough for honesty) and in a war between the US and Russia they would support Russia. Many are "Jewish" but that has no meaning as they are perhaps genetically descended but have zero religious affiliations. The same is true for the majority of the Russian Jews who emigrated to Israel and make up a large percentage of the population there. None are interested in the religion at all and just like in the US most would support Russia over Israel despite Israel having one of the strongest pro-Israel propaganda programs I have seen (similar to that we have in the US).
As for Americans response, it would be weak to minimal and consist of protests and even those only with the permission of the government in places far out of the eye of the press which we all now know is a unified propaganda instrument of the administration. Even Viet Nam protests took 10 years to have an effect so I wouldn't count on the American public giving a damn as merely 1% of the population is in the military and they are from the bottom 1/3 of the socioeconomic strata. Plus Russia is our historic boogeyman and the meme is easily re-energized. Americans need to always hate someone. ISIS wasn't sufficient so now we have the evil Russians (again!!).
Could there be a way to deny Clinton access to all her paths to the magic 270 Electoral votes? It is felt that Vermont will go Clinton. Could enough Bitter Berners vote some kind of Not Clinton to attrit her numbers below the Trump numbers in Vermont? Could the same happen in critical parts of New York City where people still remember the State Party DemoCrapparatchiks dropping people off the voter rolls or falsely changing their party registration to prevent them from voting in the DemPrimary? Do enough Bitter Berners remember versions of that sort of thing in California?
Do enough Massachusettsians think well enough of Weld so as to vote Johnson to "get" Weld?
In short, is there a path to "path denial" against Clinton so as to get the election thrown into the House of Representatives?
Apologies to my American siblings for what is to come. I want Trump to win for two important reasons. And before you say why should an Aussie have a say about who runs the US, remember my country is run out of Washington ("…nothing will save the Governor-General").
Firstly it looks like he will pursue an America First foreign policy. Not that we can believe a word he says, but I know what policies Shillary will carry out, I just have to look over my shoulder. The world needs a soft landing for Pax Americana, Trump could pull this off by reinstating the American nation-state.
And secondly, Trump's vulgar wedge politics will bring on more rapidly the 2nd American Revolution. This ties into my first point, we need a new American Republic to replace the one lost to power and greed. Easy for me to say all the way down here safe from militarised police, NSA surveillance and monstrous sociopaths. But the world will turn soon on your decision to support your government or not. And if the two on offer this electoral cycle are any indication, there is not much left to preserve.
"May our land be a land of liberty, the seat of virtue, the asylum of the oppressed, a name and a praise in the whole Earth, until the last shock of time shall bury the empires of the whole world in one common undistinguished ruin!"
― Joseph Warren
English Outsider says:
"While not perfect, things are really pretty good here in the USA .."
That's a relief. For a moment I thought there might be problems.
Things are pretty good here in the UK, too. I believe they're pretty good over in Europe as well. That is, as you say, down to the good governance and bureaucratic continuity we all enjoy. We only need to elect more of the same and things will remain pretty good.
Mr Origin, are you trying your hand at satire? We only need your confirmation that things are pretty good in the Ukraine, Libya and Syria and the satire will be complete.
English Outsider
Women consider this less important than their lurid fantasies about his leg humping???
Origin wrote: "She is a policy wonk and is subject to listening to advice and examining evidence. My guess is she has learned from her mistakes in Libya."
I believe that a majority here will disagree with this statement of yours. Speaking only for myself, I feel that she has learned nothing and will double down with similar actions and behaviors.
gowithit, I actually think Trump did comparatively well on the tax issue. Do you seriously feel the reduction of taxes via incurred and verified debts is the only tool in the tool box? Dream on. Some ways used in tax reduction could be politically more helpful then others?
I agree with Pat, this is a campaign largely about images. What is targeted via the tax issue is the deal-maker, the successful business man. Not that he invited it himself, somewhat.
I defer to your cred as a connoisseur of the wind-egg omelet.
https://goo.gl/seKl8Q
Babak Makkinejad says:
I read about a Southern matriarch who opposed women suffragists; she thought that the franchise should be confined to men since it gives them something to do, viz. Politics.
I imagine she did not think very highly of men and rightly considered woman's role to be superior.
Steve –
Trump's real position is the one that at the moment will get him the most votes. Or the most $. He is going to parlay his election loss in November into another reality tv monstrosity to scam the American people.
My take of the situation here in the South is that we are at a critical point. Substantial progress has been made on the issue of race to the economic benefit of all groups. If Hillary wins, that progress will continue. Trump brings out the worst side of the racism that has crippled the region for centuries. If he wins, the fragile consensus of increasing racial tolerance and mutual accommodation may be damaged. To this Southerner, Trump's speeches are loaded with very familiar and subtle racist code directed at the rascists who remain too abundant here. The choice is between someone who will encourage peace or someone who will inflame the primal sin of the region. No matter how it may seem from the vantage from afar, here it is really mostly about racism. Trump knows what he is doing and he is willing to destroy our progress for his personal greed for power. This is the reason Georgia at go blue and NC too.
No, Trump would bring out the worst elements of Americans and you would like what you would get much less than what you now have. Be careful what you seek, especially when you would invoke the darker side of the American character. We can be horrific and our history is really a struggle to keep that darker element in check.
Part of Podesta's advices ( Circa 2014) on Iraq/Syria/ISIS from Wikileaks- same rhetoric she said during the debate:
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3774
Let's hope she can learn, else things could get really bad. It is quite realistic to worry she can't and I do worry about it. I would worry more about the people around Trump. The neocon project has been a terrible mistake. Both of the candidates seem enamored with it, though with somewhat in different flavors.
I'm waiting for them put a Yemeni child on an orange ambulance seat. (I'll be waiting forever.)
Mike Allen: the internet provides us the perfect vehicle to echo the thoughts of those we already agree with.
As I posted earlier, I have not idea if the number of "secret" Trump voters will outweigh the number of Republican women who will vote for Hillary or just undervote the top of the ticket.
Watching CBS this morning, the anti-Trump theme today was "smart people know he's already lost." That theme is obviously contrived.
Origin,The NY Times has an Atlanta office? Good for you. Is Mike Allen sitting in the next cubicle on the row?
Trump has not been in office these past few years and we have race riots and assassinations of police on a regular basis by blacks who hate police and whites. We've got a university culture where being white is considered a shameful thing.
You write well, but not well enough to make us doubt what we see and hear with our own eyes and ears. Propaganda only impacts the weak minded. Kudos for trying it here though. Must be frustrating and maybe the lack of converts will impact your bonus. Sorry.
Origin: What you call "progress" is the reason Trump has a base. I live in a rich urban area. All I have to do is drive for 45 minutes I can find lots of my neighbors who are getting crushed by neo-liberal economics. America is not Manhattan.
Morongobill: As long as Hillary follows the advice of the CFR, her "mistakes" are irrelevant. Did any Iraq War supporter lose his/her job?
the above refers to "Well said!"
Babak Makkinejad –
Was that matriarch from one of Faulkner's works?
That brings to mind my years in East Asia: Japan, Phillipines, Vietnam, Taiwan, South Korea. The women there let the men strut and bloviate, but they typically ruled the home with an iron hand.
Doug Colwell –
It seems you are implying that only manly men support Trump. That has not been my observation of the Trump supporters that I have met personally. No aspersions on you or anyone else here on this blog. But those I have had face-to-face dialogue with, both men and many women, appeared to be very insecure.
Different Clue –
I believe you are correct. That was a much better explanation than mine. I have tried to follow those principles.
If you really think that, then you must be paying little attention to actual voting trends as they are playing out in this election. Because of Trump, Clinton is making inroads to what would normally be Republican territory, including demographics such as married white suburban women who often vote GOP.
I should also note that there is nothing wrong with "making up your mind before the election." Generally if you are well-informed and have well-defined political views, whether you vote Republican or Democratic not going to be a matter of great suspense. It is true Republicans face a special dilemma this year but not one that's overpoweringly difficult to resolve. A vote for Clinton over the Republican top three, Trump, Cruz, and Ohio's answer to Elmer Fudd, John Kasich, seems reasonable enough.
Let me give you a clue about Trump that's easy to overlook if you're a half-planet away and prone to dualism as an outcome (rather than merely an analytical tool).
He's a lousy patriot to pin one's hopes upon. Yes, a 2nd Order consequence of a presidency like his might indeed be a revolution… but one more likely to end up like On The Beach more so than a More Perfect Union. He has temper without temperament, at heart a dictator and in mind a con-man. Impatient nihilists love him because they hope he does great damage to the USA.
Yes, I do. But its always nice to meet a fan. I should be in stores sometime in the next year, otherwise Amazon is the best place to buy me.
"Ecred" is slang for "internet credibility".
Edward,
I always appreciate you not having an original thought and cutting and pasting whatever the MSM spoon feeds you.
Because if the source has a history of being wrong, you can discount it.
Stop with the autistic parsing. You know entirely what I meant.
Anon,
Trump let them know, repeatedly, not to go low. The Clintons, with their typical hubris, thought they were dealing with another cucked Republican who would take the high road.
Trump was Liberty Prime, hucking nukes everywhere and making clear the sins of the Clintons.
I'm hoping the third debate is the one where he really opens up the flames.
I concur. Animus towards The Other is far higher than it has been in many years. I wish people could just focus on SEC football – collective hate for innocent individuals is best left to spectator sports.
To LeaNder, Agreed, Trump handling the tax issue re not paying went well..but still his refusal releasing current taxes due to "audit" not selling well with public. Now that public knows he has not paid Fed income taxes, why not release his last filing? How much debt, who holds his debt. After all, he ridiculed Obama for only paying 20%! lol
Here is a mirror from a prior posting of yours, "All due respect, I think you are projecting far too much of what you want to believe"
As is the Trump campaign! We are in this "either or" world of politics that results in "neither"! What a FARCE all the way around!
"My guess is she has learned from her mistakes in Libya. I have no sympathy for Hillary or Obama on Syria. The whole foreign policy establishment has failed to discern that the true enemies are the jihadists."
You contradict your own point. If she was a person who learned from her mistakes, she would not have made the mistakes she made in Libya, a result of learning from her support for the disastrous Iraq adventure. If she had learned from her mistakes in Libya, she would be able to accurately analyze the situation in Syria. My knock against her all along is that she is a person of incredibly poor judgement, who does not learn. Ascribe it to hubris or cynicism or whatever. Who knows why? Her track record indicates that she simply cannot get these things right. The fact that the people who surround and provide her with "evidence" and "advice" themselves display an even worse penchant for poor judgement and analysis only compounds the problem. She is hardly a mere policy wonk. She is a true believer in a fantasy world that will (already has) cost millions of lives in her and others' attempts to realize its fruition.
As to Donald angering the Russians, what past evidence supports this assertion? Moreover, angering them and shooting at them are two completely different propositions. We've already done a great deal to anger them. The real danger, one which Trump has disavowed, is shooting at them. She and her ilk have displayed an altogether cavalier willingness to take us down that road. I will not vote for him, but I can't for the life of me find a Hillary supporter who can provide me a compelling argument for why she won't take us to war with Russia. To a person, the responses have been to dissemble, to divert from the question, or simply to state, "Donald is crazier! He'd do worse!", as if it gets worse than a shooting war with a nuclear superpower. I wait with baited breath any solid refutations of Hillary's seemingly apocalyptic warmongering.
It wasn't a women who got us into a war in Iraq, remember Bush and Cheny and " they are coming to get us."
Whose leg and whose fantasies? Unsure of what you are referring to. I can't imagine any women having a fantasy that involved Trump, unless it is the one where after losing the election, he just disappear.
Dr Puck says:
There's a lot of circular arguing in these comments. The new example that is prominent describes the potential for the Dems capturing the vote by hacking the tabulating machines, and/or, hijacking absentee and early voting; and, crucially, this happening in a way that cannot be found out.
Thus, we know the election was stolen because HRC won it. This would be a perfect crime. It would make a lot of media pundits very rich for the duration of her gridlock-beleaguered first term.
Mr. Trump has already done a little paving in this direction, although his implying Black Americans vote repeatedly in urban precincts, ("that must be watched over!") is on a par with his wretched understanding about other stuff.
I doubt very much a hot war with a nuclear power is a good idea, and, I'm hoping HRC feels the same way.
On the other hand, knowing the details of Trump's biography, and, knowing just the several details about his economic plan, reassert for me that he's in it for his own pocketbook.
His plan to vastly cut the taxes of the very elites he is said to be fighting against for the sake of "unrigging the rigged system," remains for me the obvious sinkhole in the (preposterous) idea that he gives one whit about the working man.
Related to this is his embrace of standard GOP orthodoxies. Take healthcare for example, where he has promised that his health care fix will keep the people with pre-existing conditions insured, lower premiums and co-pays, and, reinstate the direct relationship between patient and doctor. He called his healthcare plan the "most beautiful plan." It assumes that a deregulated insurance market will cause insurance companies to fight over the sickest and non-profitable customers. Absurd!
nancyK
You are conveniently forgetting several key people, like C. Rice, Judy Miller and the Rajin' Cajun's wife, Mary Matlin. pl
He wants to shoot up the Iranians–that is really, really crazy!
Don't forget the Iranian Agreement is not an exclusive US deal. There were what? Six countries involved with that? If Trump blows it up, we've lost complete credibility with the other countries and all bets are off on containing anything.
Americans are stupid enough and entitled enough that a bloodless direct hit on the power grid would be enough to make them foam at the mouth. The Al Qaeda/ Saudi hit on 9/11 caused an activated populace that eventually resulted in Iraq. The Russians would have to pick a target innocuous enough to send a message that gets through even to the sheep, perhaps the inland Nevada target-proving-grounds desert. I think they'd be smart enough to do that. I see some kind of cyber pwning demonstration for 24 hrs, just as proof-of-concept, as more likely.
Once again, "a more perfect union" in the preamble referred to creating a more effective form of government, not the creation of an earthy paradise. pl
The country where women demand combat roles in war, but become hysterical because of mere locker room talk.
Feminist whackadoodle logic.
"Will most of them re-defect to his camp? I think they will and that will be a mistake because IMO he is still going to lose"
I'm not following, how is this a mistake? Is there some rule in the US where if you don't vote for the winner, you are fined?
His defeat may be so bad that her coattails will cause loss of the senate to her followers. pl
No, an actual human being.
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/09/01/friends-israel details a troubling incident in which Sen. McConnell, Reid, McCain, Graham, and …Kaine, got together (Aug '14?) to railroad through the Iron Dome funding for Israel in a 5-Senator roll call after everyone else had left for vacation. Hard to argue against ABMs, but is Kaine a zionist? Will he want to attack Russia as well?
(um, MapLight has Graham receiving $286,350, Kaine $283,271 from pro-Israel groups, seems low.)
If the Republicans repudiate Trump and run Pence for president alongside of Trump, would Pence make a better president than either Trump or Clinton? Would he try to get us into a shooting war with Russia, after being educated? He seems like a decent guy (from shallow first impressions). Pence over Clinton?
Absentee paper ballot is a safer way to go, in my view. With observers standing over shoulders while they are being counted. You can still change the count. Years ago, I downloaded Bev Harris' (the empress of uncovering voting machine fraud) copy of Diebold's voting machine software and saw firsthand how it was done. It was so simple.
Then I understood how I could go out for dinner at a quarter to midnight when Kerry was up 4% over Bush, with just a few urban precincts remaining, and emerge at 12:30 AM and Bush had won by 3%.
Wind egg omelet? Code talk again rjj. I lost my decryptor ring 63 years ago.
Those who discount all sources except their favorites end up in echo chambers and circle jerks.
I realize there are many Republican women who support the Repulican party and will vote for Trump to keep Republicans in power yet I imagine all the women you mention would much rather someone more dignified were running. I have several friends who are Republicans and the 2 things we do not talk about are Trump and Clinton because we value our friendship.
Mook got it from Fox, Breitbart, Limbaugh and others.
They may have gotten it from Goebbels.
@ColdWarZoomie – "Why oh why can't we go to a shorter campaign season?"
Agreed! One month for the primary, one more for the general election.
Getting to this thread late. Reading through the comments it should be clear there are no persuadable voters. Everyone is locked and loaded. Additionally, it should be clear from the comments that supporters of both major party candidates can't be on the same page. Their perceptions of the same issues are so different. Whatever the outcome half the people are gonna feel they got shafted. Our country is getting more ungovernable.
Folks like Origin believe life couldn't be better and the Borg is all peachy keen. Folks like me believe that the country is on the wrong path and the biggest threat we face is not race riots but war with Russia. Origin wants to keep the Borg's status quo with their the wars of choice and the bailouts of Wall St and the special interests running amok. I want no more wars unless we face an existential threat and no more kiting financial assets by the Fed to benefit the 0.01% and the government keeping their nose out of my personal life.
There no longer is a middle ground! Let the civil war begin so that we can end it sooner than later.
You are becoming unrecognizable in your partisan enthusiasm. the technique of treating a campaign as a marketing effort has little to do with your right wing enemies. it is a product of the PR industry in its modern memism evolution. pl
My briefest-impressions memory is that Pence supports Free Trade Agreements just like the Clintons. He also supports Assad-Must-Go just like the Clintons. He also supports war with Russia just like the Clintons.
I agree. We are all polarized. The end of the election will only start the next phase of the battle. The Borg vs The Deplorables. The fight must intensify before it can wane.
Pence is worse than Trump. He wants to turn us all into Evangelicals. Not that there is anything wrong with Evangelicals, I just prefer to worship in my own choice of churches.
Nancy K
The women I mentioned were directly participant and involved directly in selling the Iraq War to the American people. pl
I do not want you to use SST as a bulletin board and and free advertising for HC. How many times have you posted on your electoral concerns today? Understand? pl
You may be right. But then Trump has said he wants to bomb Syria. So you think Russia and Iran will stand for that? He also wants to put ground troops back into Iraq against the wish of their PM, their Parliment, their people, and their Iranian neighbors.
Trump is the war candidate.
I get it about his supporters wanting to close the border. I sympathize.
And I get it about his supporters cheering him for saying he will do away with all our current trade policy. I sympathize with that also. I go out of my way to buy made-in-the-USA, if I can find it, which is getting rarer and rarer every year! I and think the free trade line is globaloney BS.
But Trump is a huckster, he does not believe those lines, just uses them. He is just a promoter, not a doer. And even if he meant it, my fear of Trump's volatility and mood swings and lack of insight overides all else.
Aye aye sir. Heard and understood.
Thank you, Marine. I will apply the same rule to the other side. Remind me if I do not. Your father was at the Rapido? In what Regiment? pl
Combat Engineers, from Corps. He won a battlefield commission in North Africa.
He was the reason I signed up for a different service, as he always told me to never sign up as cannon fodder for a cretin like General Mark Clark. Plus my uncle,his brother in law, was a Jarhead and talked me into it.
I thought he had a chance at getting more than the 40% of the vote that's the GOP base. No more. Sad!
If this is meant to convince a life long Democrat he needs to vote Hilary because the billionaire buffoon is a Deplorable you'll need to try not to be so sanctimoniously condescending. That's a Yuge insult and not a persuasion technique. Your post as satire is C+ but then I'm not an English major.
"Trump brings out the worst side of the racism…"
When Mr. Roof shot those people in the Church in Charleston it was not Mr. Trump who equated all white southerners with that mans actions.
PeterHug says:
Here is what wikipedia thinks are the reasons a lawyer can withdraw from representing a client:
"Mandatory withdrawal
There are many circumstances which require that an attorney must withdraw from a case:
– The client fires the attorney.
– The attorney determines that he is not competent to continue representing the client in a matter.
– A conflict of interest arises under which the attorney's continued representation of multiple clients impairs the attorney's obligations to the individuals.
– The client insists upon advancing a frivolous claim.
– Continued representation would violate the rules of professional responsibility.
– The attorney is in a physical or emotional state that seriously impairs the attorney's ability to continue the representation.
– It is likely that the attorney will be called as a necessary witness as to a contested issue in the proceeding, and that testimony cannot be obtained elsewhere.
– The attorney discovers that the client is using the attorney's services to further a criminal act.
Voluntary withdrawal
An attorney may voluntarily terminate the attorney-client relationship at any time and without reason, if this will not have a material adverse effect on the interests of the client. Even if the withdrawal will be adverse to the client the attorney may still withdraw for a number of reasons:
– The client is engaged in illegal or fraudulent activity.
– The client fails to pay fees as agreed.
– The financial burden on the attorney of continuing the representation is too great.
– The client refuses to follow the advice of counsel, or engages in acts relating to the representation without informing the attorney or seeking the attorney's advice.
– The attorney is engaged with co-counsel of the client's choosing, and is unable to work with that co-counsel."
(I apologize for the horrible formatting – this may be easier to read at the original article – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_responsibility)
However, the bottom line is, any defendant in a criminal trial has a Constitutional right to representation, even if they're guilty. And even if they perjure themselves, and even if their lawyer KNOWS they're perjuring themselves. In this case at least, Hillary did what was precisely her job, and I don't see how any approbation should attach to her because of it.
"…nuking …" That would be a pretty damn dumb thing to do.
The Bush administration (with the help of the same MSM that is helping she who voted for the war in Iraq get elected) manipulated the US into that war. My question as posed does not have this come out of "nowhere" but be in direct response to US provocation by the killing of Russian and Syrian personnel.
Brunswick says:
Remember Nixon?
http://watergate.info/impeachment/articles-of-impeachment
I realize that but they did not initiate it. C. Rice has come out against Trump. I much preferred Bernie Sanders take on the ME and war. My feeling is the majority, definitely not all women, do not appreciate Trump and will not vote for him. They may not vote for Hillary but they will not vote for Trump.
No. These women were among the initiators and boosters of the war. I was here and suffered through it. pl
I well understand the Preamble & its meaning. "more perfect" in that time & context means improvement. We ought always seek improvement, aware that a perfect condition can never be achieved in this world. I should have been more clear. Anyway, my intended comparison was to an ideal that can never be achieved – certain, pure outcomes.
While I'm at it, I just read an article about hate for Hillary. The level of sheer unlevened hate that I am observing is beyond sad… it is detrimental to a civil society, to our values as a people.
"When we treat politics like sport or war, then we treat ourselves as fans or soldiers, cheering or booing or following orders…
When we treat politics like that, then those who hold differing views from us are not wrong, they are evil. They are not mistaken, they are enemies."
I reject the idea that the US is a vehicle for the perfectibility of humanity. For me it is a country like all others. The "shining city on a hill" meme is just that and it has become a theme song for aggression. The improvement that was sought was in governance and not more than that. pl
I agree about Mark Clark but then you have to deal with the memory of Rupertus. pl
Hillary not only endorsed Bush & Cheney's war, she convinced her campaign rival, John Kerry, to change his mind and vote for the war as well.
I was in Isfehan when, in order to corral Jewish votes in Pennsylvania in the primaries, Hillary told Iran, "We will obliterate you."
Yes Rupertus was a piece of work. Recruited by the Corps from the National Guard to be a team shooter because of his extremely expert marksmanship. Did a great job as a team shooter, but then good snipers do not always make good generals. He wrote the Riflemans Creed. A good creed perhaps, but thank God they did not put us through that recital nonsense that they showed in the film "Full Metal Jacket" when I was a boot in 1960.
On Pelelieu, I guess he must have thought that rifles alone could take down heavy weapons in well entrenched bunkers and caves with armored steel doors and interconnecting tunnels. Over 2000 KIA and 8000 WIA suffered between just three regiments.
Rupertus
The process by which the USMC acquired the senior officers who led it in WW2 is interesting and seems mostly to have been a matter of direct offers of commissions at various times. Often these were to National Guard people. At times there were competitive examinations at others active recruiting carried on by retired generals like Lejeune. There must have been USNA grad entrants as well. It is hard to compare the processes by which the Army and USMC acquired people who eventually were senior commanders. The Army was so much bigger that a comparison does not seem appropriate. Yes, Rupertus was a piece of work. Peleliu we have discussed before. IMO the island should have been bypassed since after the Philippine Sea battles there was no real Japanese air threat to the Phillipines Campaign. We have discussed before whether or not the campaign in the Phillipines itself was a good idea. I have come to think that considering the loss of life involved that maybe that whole thing was a poor idea. In any event Rupertus' insistence on capturing Peleliu solely with the much bled 1st USMC Division was pretty close to criminal malpractice. As you know the quite good US Army 81st Infantry Division were sitting on their hands on Angaur Island nearly within sight after capturing their island against much lighter opposition than on Peleliu. As I understand the story Rupertus refused to ask for reinforcements from the 81st until very late in the game when the 1st Marine Regiment had been virtually destroyed. Other commanders have done similar things. Luftwaffe general Heydrich (not the SS man) falsified his strength reports at casino because he did not want non-airborne reinforcements. This is just crazy. pl
In my reading of that history, Rupertus insisted on going straight at the Japanese dug in on Pelelieu instead of an envelopment. Madness IMHO.
Regarding the acquisition of officers, I believe Rupertus was a rare case although certainly not the only one. Prior and during WW1 the Corps took in some disaffected National Guardsmen that wanted to be in the Regular Army but could not. That was not for reasons of unfitness, but rather for red tape.
Generals Wallace and Greene, both later Commandants were Naval Academy grads, and I'm sure there were others.
BTW I note that General Vandegrift, CG of 1st Marine Division at Guadalcanal and later CG of the Amphibious Corps landings on Bougainville attended University of Virginia. He was a Charlottesville native and the first ever four star in the Corps.
Most of congress endorsed because they were lied to. Also she may have endorsed but she did not start the war. Both parties try and corral Jewish vote, what else is new. It wasn't Democrats who invited Netenyahu to speak to congress.
No. The Congress voted for war because they had been bulldozed into doing it in the same manner that she and her AIPAC/R2P/neocon backers are now bulldozing us into war with Russia.
There were a couple of VMI people who became Commandant of USMC. Pate and Shepherd come to mind . I think Greene was a later acquisition than the period 1900 to 1917 that I was thinking of. The "red tape" you speak of with regard to Army Commissions had to do with the size of the Army and the fact that all WP grads got RA commissions. The Army was quite small then although much larger than USMC. It is curious to me that with USNA as a source of commission that there were excess USMC commissions available that had to be filled in odd ways. pl
Pate and Shepherd were before my time. Pate had prior Army enlisted time before attending VMI. Shepherd, a Virginian, was a legend in the Corps, serving at Chateau Thierry, St Mihiel, Meuse Argonne, Guadalcanal, New Britain, Guam, and Okinawa. He was one of the old breed China Marines. Plus during his tours at Quantico he was said to be a damn fine instructor of tactics. Maybe the curriculum at VMI and their teaching techniques rubbed off on him?
General Shoup was Commandant when I enlisted in 60. He and later Commandants General Wilson and General Barrow that I served under were outstanding. None of those three were Naval Academy grads. Barrow was an LSU alumni. Shoup and Wilson went to small colleges, Millsaps in Jackson Mississippi for Wilson, and DePauw in rural Indiana for Shoup. Interestingly both Millsaps and DePauw have a Methodist Church heritage.
Regarding your curiosity on the USNA as a source of commissions for the USMC: I suspect the reason was that pre-WW1 Naval Academy midshipmen saw the Corps as a career dead end. Many Marine officers at that time never made it past Major, even the Commandant was only a two-star. That changed later. There were many USNA ring-knockers during my time.
There was no naval ROTC at VMI when I was there. Shoup was Commandant. I wrote him in the summer between my third and fourth year and asked if USMC would be interested in me. The US Army had made it clear that they wanted my company. I was invited to take a physical by headquarters USMC. The visiting acquisition team had all the papers if the navy doc cleared me. This O-3 put me through a regime of calisthenics for half an hour and then declared that I had a heart murmur, but said I could appeal his judgement. The chief of cardiology at Walter Reed thought that was funny when he listened to my ticker the next month and nobody has ever after said there is anything wrong with my heart. This made my decision easy. I suppose someone in the USMC thought Shoup was being overly generous. It seems to me that you probably right in thinking that USNA grads before WW1 thought the Marine Corps was a dead end. pl
Narcissists are seldom if ever contrite.