We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, July 17. 2018
Toon via SDA
If you think that our current cultural warfare is nasty, just take a look at the Protestant Reformation as practiced in England in the 16th century.
The US is the leader in CO2 emissions reduction
A Union Scam Could Be About to End. Home health workers get ‘organized’ without their knowledge or consent. Janus makes that harder.
Yale Law School alumni rally to Brett Kavanaugh's defense
The Astroturfing Of Kavanaugh Opposition Has Hit Epic Levels
SOROS-LINKED GROUP WILL SPEND MILLIONS TO STOP KAVANAUGH
How can a Nazi collaborator have so much influence?
University Of Minnesota Further Beclowns Itself With Proposed Transgender Sensitivity Rules
Dershowitz on backlash after defending Trump: ‘I’m enjoying this’
America has a nobility problem, and it means our leaders don't pay for their failures
Trump’s failure at Putin summit will come back to haunt him
I am not clear on what failed or what succeeded.
Fox Host Trish Regan: The Word For That Press Conference Is “Unpatriotic”
Flashback Obama in 2016: Russian Hacking was Not Some Elaborate, Complicated Espionage Scheme
Thank the Lord Donald Trump Is Not an 'Intellectual'
Dutch moslems want the Dutch to leave Holland
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
"How can a Nazi collaborator have so much influence?"
Soros claims he was very young and, besides, he only helped the Nazis when property--never life--was involved.
And OJ Simpson never murdered anyone.
The over the top press hatred on the Trump Putin meeting, is mind boggling. The past two years we have witnessed an out rite coup from the deep state, which includes the CIA, and now Trump is the one accused of treason? Really! The CIA has caused more trouble in the world than we will ever know. Eighty-one times, that we know about, they have interfered with foreign elections, including, under Obama, with our closest allie in the Middle East, Israel. The CIA has been responsible for dragging us into at least two wars. These same lefties in the press abhor America, and they have no issues with people like John Kerry, practicing diplomacy without a license. Undermining the Trump administration. They support any number of politicians and celebrities, trashing America abroad. Now they have thier panties in a wad for Trump criticism of the ‘intelligence’ agencies? Get out of here.
Anyone who actually listened to the whole press conference is confused by this idea Trump did not something wrong or weak. WHAT? Shame on you, Maggies. That is just fundamentally NOT true.
I would also love to know why the press (and Maggie's apparently) missed the HUGE story revealed about Bill Browder directing millions to the HRC campaign...illegally. NOT ONE press outlet discussed it.
Not even to try to shoot it down.
That is why everyone is dumping on Trump. The swamp is terrified of what happened in that one-on-one meeting. OUR OWN GOVERNMENT intervened and meddled in the election more than Russia. Also ignored by the press and Maggie's.
I agree with you, MissT.
So do many others.
Seen Browder interviewed twice. Same "canned" response about Putin. No follow up questions about the Clinton campaign "contributions".
Agree as well. Browder was interviewed yesterday and referred to as a US citizen. He did not correct the commentator to say that he renounced his US citizenship to avoid paying income taxes. But we are to come to his defense?
Did you read the follow-on comment to BD's link?
Is that too much to ask?
I dunno, I guess all this might show how willing the 'general public' is to be duped, but I still think the Press is their own #1 customer. Here we have Presidents who come into office with a long history of measurable achievements. For Trump, a self-made billionaire, media star, owner of professional sports teams, flying his own Boeing 757, financing his own Presidential campaign. For either of the Bushes, or Reagan, portfolios of similarly notable achievements in public leadership that exceed those of 99.8% of the US population by leaps and bounds. So what are they, according to our Betters? Clueless, stupid morons. Then we have Presidents with, shall we say, more abbreviated lists of accomplishments on smaller pages, and the press coos "Genius!" for every imbecilic platitude that is emitted, with nose in air. Who believes this crap? Anybody? No wonder their ratings are below septic tank, Trump plays them like a cheap jukebox. They know it's his quarter, and they still can't help themselves.
They seem to think they can raise their ratings by going even FURTHER against Trump.
And they never seem to question whether what they 'know' so passionately matches up with reality, when it clearly doesn't.
(I was going to say 'passionately is true', but then I realized they don't care about 'truth' - they think they create what's 'true' and we're supposed to just follow along.)
Trump has more domestic enemies than any president since Lincoln. I hope he is as successful a president and makes it through his second term.
"Trump’s failure at Putin summit"
No president ever wins in a talk/summit with Russia. You cannot trust them even if they agree to do something we want them to do. So Trump's success or lack of success is no bettter and no worse than any past president. What is different is every past president knew that the purpose of the talk/summit was political. That is they knew they would get nothing useful and they were going to act strong or tough or perhaps even hopeful. Trump is different; to him it isn't about political perception but about winning. He intentionally offers praise and criticism of those that he negotiates with in a cat and mouse game that goes well beyond simple perceptual politics and often leads to success for Trump. The media has no idea what Trump is doing and likes to sit on the sideline and kabitz and criticize that which they do not understand. The left/opposition "may" understand what he is doing but they are so vested in him losing even if it hurts America that they too kabitz and complain relentlessly to prevent Trump from winning. In this both the press and the Democrats are playing into Russia's hand and against America. Some of them know this and don't care and others simply don't have a clue and don't care.
The bottom line is I don't think Putin will give us much at all but I do think stringing him along, as Trump is doing, is about the best we can get. No success, just talk and the appearance of getting along. Better than open warfare.
I agree with this, and would add that actions speak louder than words, especially with Trump.
How can a Nazi collaborator have so much influence? Because he has made billions by destabilizing countries and their currencies, and because he is a conscienceless, ruthless SOB.
I found it interesting, when the Soviet Union collapsed, to find that their intelligence apparatus were absolutely convinced that the United States was planning for first strike capability against them through out the whole Cold War. And we them. It would seem a relationship at some level of trust would be better than that.
Putin, in my opinion, is a very hard bargainer, knows exactly what he wants and is absolutely ruthless about getting it. I suspect he wants to MRGA. That seems reasonable to me and it seems we have exactly the right President in place to deal with him. The difference between them is that Putin will cross ethical lines that I don't believe we are prepared to emulate. He will, however, work with us on areas where there can be mutual advantages and I think when he makes a deal he sticks with it.
I am always left, in considering these diplomatic dustups, with the words of England's Viscount Palmerston: "We have no eternal allies and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and these interests, it is our duty to follow."
That, too, seems eminently reasonable to me.
"I found it interesting, when the Soviet Union collapsed, to find that their intelligence apparatus were absolutely convinced that the United States was planning for first strike capability against them through out the whole Cold War. And we them. It would seem a relationship at some level of trust would be better than that."
And yet throughout the Cold War, nuclear deterrence did exactly what it was supposed to do, notwithstanding that silly Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
"We have no eternal allies and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and these interests, it is our duty to follow."
Palmerston was on the money: sovereign states cannot have interests more important than their own. Not if they wish to remain sovereign anyway.
Alliances and agreements arise from mutual self-interest. They fail when participating sovereign states no longer regard it as in their interest to participate in them.
I'm not going to claim that Trump is at his best speaking ex temp, but remember when Reagan said "Tear down this wall"? Sure, we remember it as heroic today, but at the time he was throwing gasoline on the fire, threatening us all with nuclear conflagration, too unsophisticated to know you can't speak to Russia that way, and so on. Trump spoke harshly to North Korea not so long ago, and people went nuts. Then he spoke nicely to them and people went nuts again. Honestly, who believes there is any possible tone the President could have struck that would have satisfied the chattering class? AVI has it right: pay more attention to what he does than what he says, or what his critics say about what he says.