« The "17 Intelligence Community Agencies" Canard on Russian Interference by Publius Tacitus | Main | Dumb and Dumber - by Richard Sale »

22 June 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Outrage Beyond


"They would rather screech insults at the other side while implying publicly that the Republicans would be Democrats if they were not so ignorant and deplorably Southern."

A lengthy article which delves into this point: https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-blathering-superego-at-the-end-of-history/


"BTW the Salman action making his young son crown prince may seem like a good idea now but there will be intense resentment withing the royal family over this violation of the principle that established the idea that the most able in the family should rule."

I think there are good odds that little Salman gets whacked by the growing crowd of unhappy Saudi Mafia family members. Or perhaps by a commoner; they are aware of the growing friendship of the dictatorship with Israel and they don't like it.


ex-PFC Chuck

re: " . . the national Democratic Party shows no sign of coming down from whatever kind of trip they have been on since November."

You should be more specific here, Col., and specify November, 1992. That's when the Democratic Party fully turned its back on what had once been its working class base. Over subsequent years the Party became adept at diverting said base's attention from the fact that the party had sold out to the financial oligarchy. The recently stood up Herbal Tea Party (aka " . . street jihadis . . screeching slogans in harmony, a chorus of secular maenads" LOL) is just the Party's latest tactic in the pursuit of service to its new masters. The PRIMARY PURPOSE of the the Herbal Tea Party, in the Party establishment's view, is to divert the attention of the rump of the Party's base from demanding a no-holds-barred analysis of why the its electoral performance has tanked and from demanding effective change, which as you point out is primarily one of economic advocacy. If Trump is brought down and/or chaos is sown in the opposition, so much the better. But that's just frosting on the cake. (For other elements seeking Trump's ouster, such as the CIA perhaps, said ouster is their priority.)

Ironically if the Democratic Party doesn't change, and soon, what remains of their legacy base will also drift away. They are the new working class although they don't view themselves as such. As they increasingly lose jobs and have growing difficulty making ends meet more and more of them will stay home from the polls since neither legacy party advocates for their economic interests. Some of them will be taken in by future analogues of Clinton, Obama and Trump with their bait-and-switch campaigns, but over time many of them will catch on to the scam. But some never will. When the Party has gone far enough down that slope Wall Street will no longer see a need to support it and the Democrats will be on its way to the ash heap of history.


Sir, you may or may not be aware of it, but you have a lot of fans among rightwing combat vets who believe that Donald Trump cannot destroy failed boomer conservatism fast enough.

Although your site here is not mentioned on this particular episode, you have been mentioned, by name, on the below, several times. They are listening to you. Some of them even comment here. Or try to. I challenge to listen to this all the way through. Just hit the blue arrow. Get some SA. Be the one guy over 60 that's not completely delusional about what is going on in country...

Think about it.



"In Syria he is being "advised" by neocons, Zionist operatives and jingoist generals who desire war against the SAG and Iran. The GOP has to find a way to get this man under control."

Col, if the standard issue GOP was in control (let's say Rubio or Cruz were president), would the foreign policy be any less belligerent? Perhaps the only difference would be confrontation as a strategy rather than whim.


On #2: I'm suspicious of any piece of legislation developed in secret.

The Beaver


It has started:

and from AngryArab this one:



I am a paleoconservative, libertarian, original intent constitutionalist and a combat veteran in SE Asia and several other SOF wars as a GB and MI soldier. My message would be to clutch the constitution and your oath to your bosom. pl



Would it be better with the standard issue Democrats like Clinton and Holder? pl


The Blathering Superego at the End of History, by Emmett Rensin, may not be interesting to this outsider alone. Well written, anyway.

Public America as Theater of the Absurd?

Urban Dictionary already offers the top definition for Covfefe.


I am not an enemy of neologism, quite the opposite. ... If this is not simply a matter for misspelling detectives.

Well yes, what I said, here it definitively gets absurd:


"People in covfefe houses shouldn't throw covfefe," she wrote in response to Trump calling her "crooked Hillary."

Perhaps she was a little late to contributing to the Twitter chatter, but that's because she was busy speaking at Recode's Code Conference -- where she also mentioned covfefe.

"I thought it was a hidden message to the Russians," she said.

Crazy. Really crazy.


The problem with Team R getting Trump under control is that the Team R leadership shares the opinions of the worst of the neocons, Zionist operatives, and jingoist generals.

Incidentally, and apologies for the thread archaeology, but comparing Trump to Huey P. Long is an insult. An insult to Senator Long.


I have met many combat vets who shipped out to Iraq or Afghanistan as standard issue neocons, and who came back as something entirely different.



Could not say it better.

iowa steve

Would it be much different if Hillary were in charge?


About Saudi Arabia, there is a growing tension between Saudi society and Wahhabism:

"...remarks underlined just how much resistance Wahhabis face in a peninsula relandscaped as their own."

I don`t see much discussion of this problem. MbS does seem to want to loosen the Wahhabi grip. But can he do it successfully?

Do you have an opinion Pat?


If I were a Democrat I would drop Hillary down a deep dark hole as fast as I could. She may be the party leader still, but they need to tell her to go away and never appear in public again. Every time she opens her mouth she costs the party votes.

They also need to move off of the the "all transgender, all the time" policy platform. That is an issue that .0001% of Americans will care enough about to sway their vote.

The move to change the Senate rules is just going to lead to even more division in the country. If you hold the White House, Congress and the Senate and still can't get a bill with a 38% approval rating passed with out changing the rules is it really a bill that should be passed or should they put some water in their wine? This is an invitation for the Democrats if they ever get in power again to repeal, repeal, repeal just as the Republicans are currently doing. Some thing more middle of the road is required by both parties if you want long term government planning rather than endless chaos.

>"Even among GOP voters, a 54-percent majority wants the party to work across the aisle on the final product."


Changing the rules to jam it through really doesn't sound like working across the isle.

iowa steve

An apropos comment I read today describing democratic congressional leadership:

“We no longer have a party caucus capable of riding this wave. We have 80-year-old leaders and 90-year-old ranking members. This isn’t a party. It’s a giant assisted living center. Complete with field trips, gym, dining room and attendants.”

Sam Peralta

Col. Lang

The Democrats are becoming a regional party. A party of the PC crowd - a coastal/urban party.

In all their hysteria about Trump there is no reflection that they are the minority party in 32 state legislatures.

Unfortunately for the Democrats there is no movement within their party to challenge their statist party leadership. The so-called "Sanders wing" always toe the line when push comes to shove, unlike what the "Tea Party wing" did inside the GOP. They challenged establishment GOP candidates in primaries and their primary voters were willing to lose elections to the Democrats to challenge their establishment. One can argue about how good or bad the ideas of the "Tea Party wing" are but at least the GOP primary voters were willing to lose.


It seems that relentless negative campaign adds against Rep. Handel rallied the Republican base instead of depressing turnout.

This article about the South Carolina 5th district special election points to what the Democrats should be focusing on. Instead of continually attacking President Trump they need to create a coherent message about how they will help middle class America.
How Archie Parnell Ran the Best Democratic Campaign of 2017 - Politico Link

How did he do it? By staying out of the line of fire. He was positive. He was humble. ...

In a political landscape ravaged by vicious partisan warfare, Parnell spent more time mocking himself than attacking his opponent.

In a culture saturated in Trumpian bravado, he promised not to overpromise.



I think you pointed this out in 2008. Your post then pointed out:
“Regional parties that represent particular ethnic constituencies do not win national elections in the US….”

“The Democrats should look carefully at the results of this election. I do not see evidence that a general ideological shift to the Left is taking place in the American electorate. People were disgusted with what the Bush Administration, the "K Street Project" and the Jacobins had done to them. In retaliation they voted Democratic in great numbers. Blacks voted for a Black. Will they show up in the same kind of numbers to vote for a White?”

It’s almost a decade later and the regional (Coastal) party that represents particular ethnic constituencies didn’t win the national election. The Black vote didn’t show up for a White (Hilary; or for that matter Bernie). People seem pretty disgusted with the new speak neo-Bolshevik Utopia project.

The Porkchop Express

Reporting is from Fars, so skepticism is warranted but this would be mighty unprecedented, no?


Karl Kolchak

At this point, being a member of either party indicates a severe form of brain damage. The only people who make any sense these days are the ones who have freed their minds from the partisan lunacy in DC and the media.



I can’t argue with you. Even the Washington Post is aware of the imminent danger of a shooting war with Iran with the attempt to partition Eastern Syria at Israel’s and Saudi Arabia’s request. There is no way nuclear armed Russia can avoid being dragged into an Iranian War.

It is me or it is the media’s projection; but, the picture of President Trump glowering from the wall at the VA Hospital reminds me of Forrest Gump. I don’t put any hope the Republican Party. The Democrats are flailing around everwhere because they are Republican Lites who cooperated with the trashing of working America. If mankind survives the Forever Wars, the only way our fifty state Republic will be preserved is the rise of a Peace Party that supports job guarantees, Medicare for All, Free Public Education and a write off of Student Loan Debt.

In other words, America desperately needs a political party that will end the corruption and bring the money home from overseas and places the good of society above individual greed.

Sylvia 1

From what I understand right now: MOST of what the Republican health care “replacement bill” does is strip Medicaid funding “to deliver tax cuts". Republicans apparently can’t come up with a replacement because what “Democrats” passed in 2009 WAS the "Republican Health care plan”. Democrats are powerless to complain since Democrats went along in 2009 and now the party leaders do not have the guts to propose any thing that would be a real fix of our health care system because it would upset “funders” i.e. the people and entities who fund campaigns, set the national agenda, write the legislation, and run the country (into the ground). Meanwhile, the Democratic leadership continues to consumed by “Putin Derangement Syndrome” and their out of touch "leadership".
Here's Steven Brill in Market watch:
"Back in January, also as a guest on MSNBC, Brill had said he was willing to be that 10 years after the 2010 passage of the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, there would still be no replacement — in large part because Obamacare was a Republican-style plan at its inception, rendering redundant any Republican replacement."


In terms of Trump being a menace to the party's future, there's a few points to be made. Firstly, Trump used the GOP as a means to his own ends... Trump has no great loyalty to the party itself, and I doubt he thinks the party's future is particularly important anyway. From this perspective Trump is in it for Trump.

Secondly, Trump does have some love for his country (at least for his own vision of what the USA should be, and I know that's not the same for everyone), and Trump also wants to support the hard working "middle Americans" by offering them aspiration and appreciation, and most importantly helping them get their jobs back. We can argue about whether Trump's economic strategy will work (certainly I'm skeptical, but anyhow Obama's stimulus failed miserably so at least trying something else MIGHT work). From this perspective Trump doesn't really fit with mainstream Republicans, although I see President Trump as a somewhat rough-edged version of President Hoover.

Thirdly, if it wasn't for Trump the Republicans would have lost, and would keep on losing. Mainstream Republicans got into a narrow niche where their only supporters were big business, war industries, and globalization enthusiasts, and perhaps a few rusted on faithful gritting their teeth year after year. People like "Jeb!" or Rubio come across as hollow and unauthentic (because they are). Picking boring candidates like Romney just does not win elections. I think Romney is a very capable man, would have been a competent President, but incapable of attracting votes.

ex-PFC Chuck

According to the Asia Times piece linked below Iran launched six missiles of various types from its territory into the Dier Ezzor of Syria this past Sunday. I've neither seen nor heard anything about this on the USA MSM nor, for that matter, any mention of it here on SST. I must admit I've been away from the 'net quite a bit this week, however, so I may have missed it. Any thoughts, anyone?


The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

November 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30          
Blog powered by Typepad