This post was published at The Young Turks
Al Gore was pure. George W Bush was a monster. John Kerry was pure. Bush was still a monster. John McCain and Mitt Romney were monsters. Barack Obama was pure. Trump is pure. Hillary is a monster. Round and round it goes.
Reverse the labels, turn them upside down, inside out, and you arrive at the same dead-end alley at midnight: none of the big-time pols are pure. Far from it.
Yesterday I posted my article on some of the upsides and downsides of Trump. Today, let’s take just a brief small peek at Obama.
Obama was close to purity, ‘though some of his policies may have been wrong headed.’ Really?
The leftist Guardian (1/9/17): ‘In 2016, US special [military] operators could be found in 70% of the world’s nations, 138 countries – a staggering jump of 130% since the days of the Bush administration.’
‘…in 2016 alone, the Obama administration dropped at least 26,171 bombs. This means that every day last year, the US military blasted combatants or civilians overseas with 72 bombs; that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.’
‘As drone-warrior-in-chief, he [Obama] spread the use of drones outside the declared battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq, mainly to Pakistan and Yemen. Obama authorized over 10 times more drone strikes than George W Bush, and automatically painted all males of military age in these regions as combatants, making them fair game for remote controlled killing.’
The champ of bombing. But ‘pure.’
This post was published at Jon Rappoport on December 18, 2017.
Roy Moore in the US Senate would be a stain on the GOP and on the nation. Leigh Corfman and other victims are courageous heroes. No vote, no majority is worth losing our honor, our integrity.
— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) December 4, 2017
Former White House Chief Strategist and Breitbart News Executive Chairman Steve Bannon ripped into former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and his family after Romney took cheap shots at Alabama candidate for US Senate Roy Moore, questioning his ‘honor and integrity’ on Tuesday.
‘What did [Mitt Romney] say yesterday? … That judge Moore lacked honor and integrity and that’s why he couldn’t vote for him?’ Bannon asked an audience of Moore supporters in Fairhope, Alabama.
Bannon referenced Romney’s unwelcome voice as he tweeted out, ‘Roy Moore in the US Senate would be a stain on the GOP and on the nation. Leigh Corfman and other victims are courageous heroes. No vote, no majority is worth losing our honor, our integrity.’
As for Romney, Bannon had strong words for his tweet.
‘Judge Moore is a graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point,’ he said. ‘Judge Moore served his country in one of the toughest wars we ever had, in Vietnam.’
This post was published at The Daily Sheeple on DECEMBER 7, 2017.
I took a week off from the milieu of political insanity to go out amongst the normals and chalk up another huge trial victory, and when I got back I was stunned – stunned! – to find that a consensus had formed that Nazis are bad. Beforehand, I had no idea where the establishment stood on Nazis, but now it’s crystal clear. They hate Nazis because Nazis are bad. Everyone from CNN to Mitt Romney hates Nazis. I couldn’t be prouder of an establishment that takes that kind of tough stand. They’re going to hate Nazis, and they don’t care whose jack-booted toes they step on!
I also learned that if you hate Nazis for being bad, you’re not allowed to hate anybody else who’s also bad, because Nazis are so bad that you have to devote all your hating capacity to hating Nazis such that there’s no room left to hate anybody else. Those hammer and sickle flag-carrying Communists? Well, you must love the Nazis if you hate them, because you have got to hate the Nazis with all your mind and all your heart since, as we learned this week, Nazis are bad. I’m so glad that our moral betters have this all figured out.
This new breed of Nazis – for whom breeding doesn’t seem to be in the cards – is less menacing that the originals. Instead of schmeissers they pack Tiki torches – for reasons no one seems able to explain. The old Nazis invaded Poland and wouldn’t leave; these invade their moms’ basements and will never leave. But apparently these 300 or so misfits and malcontents are a potent peril to our republic. I’m not sure if they themselves are a direct threat to anything besides the bottom line at a Golden Corral all-you-can-eat buffet unlucky enough to have them as patrons. The only thing scarier to its manager would be seeing Lena Dunham waddling in on a cheat day.
They are not utterly harmless; one of these cowardly morons ran over and murdered a woman, which fulfilled the media’s long-standing dream of being able to report on a terrorist who wasn’t a radical Muslim, a Black Lives Matter fan, or a Bernie bro. But the fact remains that this scraggly collection of polo-shirted dinguses numbering in the dozens is less of a threat to our society than the gleeful attempt by the establishment and its media puppets to use the looming threat of the Third Helping Reich to crush all opposition to the status quo.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 23, 2017.
I don’t think I have seen a better explanation as to why they hate Trump than this one prepared by Evan Sayet. Rarely do I agree with a piece as much as this one. Sure, there are some minor issues to quibble with (the so-called collegiality of John McCain and the failure to explore the reasons for the Republican #NeverTrumpers, etc.) but these are minor in comparison to the accuracy and clarity in which he dealt with the media and the Left. The Trump approach and its popularity is not difficult to understand when put into the context of Americans and their history.
Why They Hate Trump
The simple answer to why they hate Trump is that Trump fights. And that is the appropriate title for Mr. Sayet’s article:
My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are ‘beneath the dignity of the office.’ Here’s my answer:
We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency. We tried statesmanship. Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized ‘collegiality’ as John McCain? We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney? And the results were always the same.
This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.
This post was published at Economic Noise on August 20, 2017.
On Facebook this morning, Mitt Romney posted a rather forceful plea for President Trump to pursue “extreme remedial actions” regarding his Charlottesville comments saying that “whether he intended to or not, what he communicated caused racists to rejoice, minorities to weep, and the vast heart of America to mourn.”
Adding in a dose of dramatics, Romney explains that absent a forceful apology from Trump “there may commence an unraveling of our national fabric.”
But what we heard is now the reality, and unless it is addressed by the president as such, with unprecedented candor and strength, there may commence an unraveling of our national fabric.
In homes across the nation, children are asking their parents what this means. Jews, blacks, Hispanics, Muslims are as much a part of America as whites and Protestants. But today they wonder. Where might this lead? To bitterness and tears, or perhaps to anger and violence?
This is a defining moment for President Trump. But much more than that, it is a moment that will define America in the hearts of our children. They are watching, our soldiers are watching, the world is watching. Mr. President, act now for the good of the country.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Aug 18, 2017.
While former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was burnishing his credentials as a master of the corporate turnaround during the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, US intelligence agencies were testing out their capabilities for mass electronic surveillance according to a recent Associated Press report. Ex-NSA spy Thomas Drake has alleged as much in a statement filed in support of a lawsuit brought by former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson. Anderson has said that the lawsuit is designed to get more information about what he calls covert, illegal operations.
Drake wrote in the declaration, released Friday, that the NSA collected and stored virtually all electronic communications going into or out of Salt Lake, including contents of texts and emails, something which another famous NSA whistleblower and former senior NSA crypto-mathematician, William Binney, alleged back in 201, long before Edward Snowden emerged on the scene, when he explained how the NSA’s Utah Data Center soaks up and retains every form of electronic communication, also known as the NSa’s Project Stellar Wind.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 3, 2017.
RNC Chairwoman Ronna Romney McDaniel took Hillary Clinton to task for again refusing to take responsibility for her embarrassing election loss, telling Fox & Friends that the former secretary of state ‘seems to be totally unaware’ of how her excuses remind the public of why it rejected her in the first place, as the Hill reports.
“She seems to be totally unaware. She has no self-awareness. Maybe she needs a class or something that we can send her to,” McDaniel said on “Fox & Friends.” “Because there’s no accountability and it reinforces why she lost every time she goes out and does these interviews.’
McDaniel was blasting Clinton for a laughable interview she gave on Wednesday at Recode’s ‘Code’ conference, where Clinton blamed everything and everyone, from the FBI, to the DNC, to the Russians to internalized misogyny.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Jun 1, 2017.
A little over 4 years ago Obama infamously mocked Governor Mitt Romney for his assertion that Russia was America’s number one geopolitical foe…
“Governor Romney, I’m glad that you recognize that Al Qaeda’s a threat. Because a few months ago when you were asked what’s the biggest geopolitical threat facing America you said ‘Russia’. The 1980’s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the Cold War has been over for 20 years.“
…and while it was a very ‘cute’ line, 4 short years later Democrats are now the ones progressing the relentless narrative that Russian President Vladimir Putin is behind pretty much every international dispute or cyberhacking plot known to man.
But while most dismissed the left’s rhetoric as just a bunch of sore losers letting off steam in the wake of a stunning defeat in November, rather than subsiding, the left’s rhetoric seems to be escalating with several lawmakers, with no proof whatsoever mind you, looking to officially label Russia’s alleged meddling as a “act of war.” Per The Hill:
Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N. J.) most recently accused Russia of engaging in warfare.
‘I think this attack that we’ve experienced is a form of war, a form of war on our fundamental democratic principles,’ Coleman said during a hearing this week at the House Homeland Security Committee.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Mar 26, 2017.
The Gallup organization samples Americans’ approval-disapproval of Russia in February of each year, and the approval-figure for this year is only slightly more than half as high as it had been back in 2012 when Obama publicly mocked his Presidential-campaign opponent Mitt Romney’s famous statement that Russia, this is, without question, our number one geopolitical foe.
A Gallup poll released on 20 February 2017 showed that Americans’ favorability rating of Russia, immediately after U. S. President Barack Obama left office, is only 28%, which is just above Americans’ 24% favorability toward The Palestinian Authority, and just below the 31% favorability toward Saudi Arabia. Russia hasn’t always been rated down in that low league of American popularity.
Back in 2012, before Obama’s second term, that favorability rating toward Russia was 50%. The year before that, in 2011, it was 51%. It had been reasonably stable until Obama’s re-election (except during 1998-2004 when it gyrated wildly because of Americans’ uncertainty of what the post-Soviet, post-communist, Russian government was like).
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Feb 22, 2017.
Among the reasons Donald Trump is president is that he read the nation and the world better than his rivals.
He saw the surging power of American nationalism at home, and of ethnonationalism in Europe. And he embraced Brexit.
While our bipartisan establishment worships diversity, Trump saw Middle America recoiling from the demographic change brought about by Third World invasions. And he promised to curb them.
While our corporatists burn incense at the shrine of the global economy, Trump went to visit the working-class casualties. And those forgotten Americans in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan and Wisconsin, responded.
And while Bush II and President Obama plunged us into Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Syria, Trump saw that his countrymen wanted to be rid of the endless wars, and start putting America first.
He offered a new foreign policy. Mitt Romney notwithstanding, said Trump, Putin’s Russia is not ‘our number one geopolitical foe.’
Moreover, that 67-year-old NATO alliance that commits us to go to war to defend two dozen nations, not one of whom contributes the same share of GDP as do we to national defense, is ‘obsolete.’
Many of these folks are freeloaders, said Trump. He hopes to work with Russia against our real enemies, al-Qaida and ISIS.
This was the agenda Americans voted for. But what raises doubt about whether Trump can follow through on his commitments is the size and virulence of the anti-Trump forces in this city.
This post was published at Zero Hedge on Feb 21, 2017.
One of the most debated issues right now is Obamacare, and specifically whether and how the new republican-dominated Washington DC apparatus will repeal it – and when. Democrats are expectedly up in arms and fear any change to the policy, the suggested legacy of President Obama. Republicans are considering their options: whether to repeal parts of it or the whole thing, how to best do it, if it should be replaced by something else (perhaps Romneycare?), and how to deal with a repeal’s ‘millions of people losing insurance’ (to paraphrase Paul Krugman).
Many things enter the political calculus of policy change. It’s not easy to find a good solution within the State’s zero-sum (rather, negative-sum) game of economic planning.
From a more nuanced and better-informed, sound-economics perspective, the question of whether Obamacare ‘should’ be repealed also isn’t obvious. Some of course call for immediate repeal, and it is easy to see the benefits of this approach: it would potentially undo the many problems it has caused, including skyrocketing insurance premiums (and the eventual limited access to care). But – given that the health-care system was anything but free-market before Obamacare – repealing Obamacare is in no way the same thing as going back to a market order.
This post was published at Ludwig von Mises Institute on Jan 12, 2017.