« Open Thread 26 April 2019 | Main | Fake News Media Suffers Body Blow on Case Linked to Seth Rich by Larry Johnson »

29 April 2019

Comments

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

turcopolier

walrus - If you do "back azimuths" on all the "resistance" phenomena of the period from early 2016 on, the lines all converge at HC's feet. she is waiting for the call.

JamesT

jdledell

In my opinion Tulsi Gabbard is the only one speaking sensibly about why it will be difficult to get a deal done with North Korea. Gaddafi did a deal with the US, gave up his nuclear program, and then died a gruesome death at the hands of US backed rebels. Then Hillary Clinton danced on his grave. Tulsi is the only presidential candidate talking about the deleterious effects of America's ongoing regime change wars.

Compared to Tulsi, I see no difference between Biden and Trump.

blue peacock

Col. Lang

I too share your admiration for Tulsi. I have contributed to her campaign and plan to contribute more. While she may have no chance as the Democrat primary voters are not mavericks, her voice is necessary as it is the only one so far in this campaign across both parties that points to the insidious hold by Saudi Arabia & Israel on our foreign policy and how destructive it is to US interests. Even Trump who campaigned against our endless wars that have cost us trillions turns out to be Bibi's bitch. While the NY Times cartoon was clearly inappropriate, the point that Trump is being led by Bibi was spot on. If they had removed the Star of David around Bibi's neck and the yarmulke on Trump would the cartoon have received as many denunciations?

Bill H

And once again I wish we still had the "like" button.

ISL

Bernie & Tulsi 2020? pass the popcorn.

rho

Interesting that Tulsi Gabbard gets mentioned several times by the commenters here. I think her foreign policy positions are so good that she could cut deep into the core of Trump's voter base and that potentially makes her a very dangerous rival - but her radical green economic policies are too far out to make her viable overall. And I doubt that she's just ticking boxes with those as "obligatory" when she run in the Democrat primaries, my impression is that she really believes those.

Ligurio

I hold a PhD and I support Sanders. I am a supporter of Sanders not because I agree with his policies, but because I know that his policies are *his* and are driven by principle and not big money. (Politicians answerable to big money can have no principled policy. This is an empirical observation.)

Most of the conservatives I am friends with don't like Sanders much, but understand that he *is* different because of his reliance on regular citizens as opposed to Zionists and Corporations. Zionists and Corporations are no more friendly to the aims of a principled Conservatism than they are to those of Social Democracy. So by all means find a Republican candidate not beholden to them and we can have a real debate, a real election, and a real republic.

Imagine that Ron Paul were twenty years younger and running for President as a Republican on a platform of non-interventionism and anti-monopolism. I think he'd be opposed by all the same powers who oppose Sanders but would garner a lot of actual grassroots conservative support. I agree less with Paul than I do with Sanders on economic policy, but--again--I would regard Paul as a principled candidate worth engaging and honorable enough to negotiate with. And I would support Paul over any Democratic nominee other than Sanders or Gabbard for these same reasons.

We need to stop thinking in terms of "Right" and "Left" and "Republican" and "Democrat" and start thinking in terms of real citizens vs. Zionists and Corporations. Regular citizens, even when they disagree on principle, can negotiate honorably on that basis and come to a more peaceable compromise--and one that I am confident would be much better for the country as a whole than any that would be allowed by the current powers that be.

Clwydshire

There is some point in Emma Sky's book "The Unraveling" when Joe Biden is visiting Iraq in August of 2010 and the results of the elections six months earlier come to a head, and in the middle of difficulties in forming a government, Odierno and his advisors, including, especially, Sky, believed that if Maliki remained prime minister, a large part of Iraq’s population would feel that the election had been nullified. Sky, Odierno, and a variety of people who spoke the language and understood the situation opposed Maliki, but Biden decided to keep Maliki on as prime minister. As he decided to do that, one of his complacent, throw-away lines, to Sky (Odierno was evidently there too) was the remark that there are often elections in the United States that do not bring about any change. Biden's remark seemed inappropriate in the setting in which he made it, and in Sky’s presentation, his decision to support Maliki appears as a kind of key moment in losing any hope of anything other than continued conflict and eventual partition.
Putting aside the question of whether Sky was a little naïve, Biden’s treatment of the efforts of the American officers seems, from Sky’s account, to have been blatantly disrespectful, I wonder if any of your readers with experience in like situations have read the book and have comments about Biden’s actual influence?

English Outsider

An AKA would be handy, leaNder, next time you switch. Regards.

English Outsider

It takes a lot to shift allegiance at the local level, if it's as in England; and reading of Obama's early career and a few hints dropped by Trump in his campaign it is. Patronage and the swapping of favours, particularly in planning (zoning) matters means that no matter what complaints and disappointments there may be with policy and personality the local level groups adhere to what they are used to and what works for them. Surely also the tradition of Congressmen being judged on how successfully they bring home the bacon, in the form of government spending and projects for their area, means not being judged on their political merits as long as they stay roughly to the accepted line.

Way back Lincoln functioned very efficiently on this basis, if anecdotal evidence is to be believed, nurturing support by taking great pains with the allocation of low level government jobs even as President. Greater pains than he sometimes took with the execution of official business. I think it's possible that this great machine of influence and patronage right down to the local level accounts for the stability of the established parties even when, as now, those parties are not that responsive to shifts in electoral opinion.

Would this not mean that once a Congressman is dug in, he's got support all the way down the line and is therefore difficult to shift?

blue peacock

Rho

I'm far from socialism but what we have in the US is no longer competitive entrepreneurial capitalism. Instead what we have as another SST correspondent Jack says so well is the "symbiotic relationship between big business & big government". I suggest Jonathan Tepper's recent book "Myth of Capitalism" where he provides detailed research on the market concentration across many many industries from agriculture to airlines & media. Both parties endorse this relationship that stifles competition and a market economy where legislation is enacted that enables & protects this concentration.

As we saw with the mortgage credit crisis, there was privatization of speculative financial profits and socialization of speculative losses. Wall St gets bailed out with trillions while Main St got shafted.

We have spent and continue to spend trillions on endless wars that does not get invested in infrastructure and on the commons.

We also see the Fed create "money" out of thin air to inflate financial assets that only a minority own. Congresses & Presidents of both parties have added federal debt in the trillions. Trump will be adding a trillion dollars to the national debt in each year of his presidency. Both George Bush & Obama doubled the national debt in their terms.

These are radical economic policies!

Tulsi may advocate for the Green New Deal but at the end only Congress can appropriate. As President however she CAN end the wasteful trillions in expenditures on our endless wars. This is why I will continue to contribute to her campaign even if it is a lost cause.

JamesT

ISL

I am hoping for a Bernie/Tulsi ticket. Among other things - it will be hard to smear him with "Bernie bros" type foolishness with her on the ticket. The biggest thing holding her back is that the media is pretending she does not exist.

MP98

Remember:
Politicians are the obnoxious kids in high school who never got over the thrill of being class secretary.
Politicians running for high office are NEVER qualified to hold that office.

MP98

And they all run on a slogan of "White Men suck."
What will they do with Buttigieg - a white man who DOES suck?

MP98

Good thing that you're not negotiating with the N. Koreans.
Paying extortion money immediately marks you as a chump.
That's the kind of thing that the "brilliant, civilized" Obama would have done - see his so-called "negotiations" with Iran.
Dictators don't deal in honor, they deal in ruthlessness.

MP98

Define "better."
Swamp establishment empty suit?

MP98

Trump would probably make a contribution to a Clinton primary campaign.

Struela

Hi, this is Struela, which should be struela, where applicable, and fasteddiez, or Fasteddiez. Typepad seems to be more of a pain to transfer to from disqus, but who cares. on Biden, it's important to note that he has run for president twice, and did not make the cut. He must be destroyed politically. As for Tulsi, if she becomes less viable through the debates it will be the dems' doing through the trickery visited on the Bernmeister last time. When this happens, Bernie should announce that she should be his VP. She would definitively appeal to younger folks should they be alive and not piles of ashes. Plus, Bernie is getting on with age, though decidedly smarter than witless Joe ever was. One of his potential shortcomings is that he is a Jew, not an issue for the richest of the rich, unless you factor in his pronunciamentos on the Izzies'treatment of the Palestinians.

fasteddiez

That is exactly what he should be: A bidet installer, notwithstanding his lack of plumbing knowledge nor any other blue collar skills, with have largely gone to China; other low wage countries; traded in for Opioid know how.

Jack

BP

Ben Hunt, who is a game theory expert and financial market analyst has been studying narratives and the common knowledge game. This is an excellent note that gets to the heart of what economic policies are considered right in narrative world.

https://www.epsilontheory.com/this-is-water/

Corporate America spends more on stock buybacks that benefit insiders and management than on Capex - new plants and machinery. Notice that executives get most of their compensation from tax-advantaged stock-based compensation. IBM balance sheet is my poster child. Take a look at Apple quarterly results that were announced today.

https://twitter.com/pierpont_morgan/status/1123332467979583488

optimax

Yeah, but he didn't inhale.

JamesT

rho

Are you possibly getting Tulsi confused with AOC with respect to her "radical green economic policies"? From what I have seen I think Tulsi's positions are quite moderate on these issues and she is really trying to distinguish herself on the "regime change wars" issues. As time has gone on I have come to like Tulsi more and more and AOC less and less, because I think AOC is arrogantly overreaching while Tulsi is appealing to middle America.

Tulsi was raised socially conservative and is in the National Guard - she is not a typical lefty.

Fred

"I am a supporter of Sanders not because I agree with his policies, but because I know that his policies are *his* and are driven by principle..."

You don't agree with his principles, which are the foundation of his policies, but you're a supporter. That's some curious logic there.

Fred

EO,

Crowley brought home billions to NYC and he still lost a primary election. That's where the political race is in gerrymandered districts.

Fred

So does Trump sink her campaign with threats of an indictment or of a pardon?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

March 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 31        
Blog powered by Typepad