Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
PM Carpenter, your host. Email: pmcarp at mchsi dot com.
Screenshot 2024-05-27 at 11.05.06 AM
THE GREATEST

***

  • ***

********


« The nasty, brutish, short life of GOP unity | Main | Two summer shitstorms, Cleveland and Philadelphia »

May 08, 2016

Comments

David & Son of Duff

"The value in predicting a November Trumpian collapse lies in reassuring the broader American electorate that we, collectively, as a nation, are not nearly as lunatic as the mickey-mouse Trumpeteer Club might suggest. It's as simple — and valuable — as that."

You mean the poor little darlings are so sensitive that they cannot face the certainty that several 'zillion' of their "lunatic" fellow citizens will vote for Trump, and several zillion others would vote for the other loony, Bernie Sanders, should he decide to run as an independent. Even so, you may well be right that the vast majority will absolutely and definitely vote for a crook and a liar, although I am not sure quite what that says about current American society.

The Dark Avenge

I'm not sure you can form a rational thought without exaggeration when it comes to American politicians, David.

David & Son of Duff

And I'm not sure you can form a rational thought concerning American politicians today, with or without exaggeration.

David & Son of Duff

When I wrote "you", I meant the generalised 'you', DA, not you personally who is, of course, a model of restrained, detached and unbiased opinion!

AnneJ

I remember a year or so ago when Chris Matthews predicted with certainty that Rand Paul would be the Republican nominee. But of course that was before the Donald jumped into the race. And when he did jump into the race, no matter how many polls consistently showed him in first place, they refused to believe he would be the nominee. Maybe it was part denial, but I also think it's the inside-the-beltway media's never actually going out and talking to actual voters. They're all too happy to smugly talk among themselves about we, the peasants without ever bothering to step outside their fancy studios and "lower" themselves to get the voters' opinions. The elite pundits on the right are especially bad because throughout this primary they have lived and continued to live in denial of the part they helped play in the creation of the Trumpenstein monster that has risen to dominance in the Republican party. Maybe if they would have taken the time to get to know the villagers who are rooting for the monster. I think he speaks not only to the racism and xenophobia aggravated by an economic recovery that left them behind, but he is also the only Republican candidate in years who makes a point of promising to preserve social security and Medicare, something that is the opposite of the goals of the privatization hungry Republican elites. People like those programs no matter which side of the right/left line they stand on. Even George the Lesser understood this when he ran for reelection in 2004. There's a reason why he ran on a platform of being the only candidate who will protect us from terrorists, and promising a constitutional amendment stating that marriage is for straights only. I don't remember him promising in 2004 to privatize social security. If I remember correctly, he waited until after the inauguration to bring that up, terrorism and gay marriage be damned. His mistake was his hubris in believing that just because he won, he had a mandate to do as he pleased, but his privatization dreams quickly went up in flames within the first couple of months of his second term and in the market crash of 2008 proved why privatization of the retirement safety net was so unpopular in the first place.

Ken Hoop

Carpenter's wrong predictions are vindicated because they Served an (Elite) read"civic purpose." Kinda like Clinton's
havoc-wreaking in Libya and Syria is vindicated because she meant well.

What depths phony "liberal reformers" have sunken to when they rally around a woman who played a key role in destroying Libya and Syria, a not minor role in Iraq---while her fellow inter-Elite rival set about drone bombing the Middle East recklessly, helping destroy Yemen, and surged to more defeat in Afghanistan, the Taliban controlling more land there than at any time since 2004.

The same "liberal reformer" forgives Hillary's support of the bankster bailout and wholesale job outsourcing advocacy her entire career. And more than implicitly condescends to if not condemns those ruffian Anglo working class who don't.

The "world-improving" liberal internationalist/capitalist
Police State must be preserved against any wild card who threatens to actually reform (or destabilize) it, opening the world to a more healthy multi-polar balance of power, granted, which would be co-led by someone his heroine depicted as another Hitler.

Liberal capitalist internationalist world-improvers should be informed--the pose isn't working anymore. Not in Baghdad,
not in Berea, Ky.


Peter G

I would say the obvious reason Trump could not possibly win is that he will be running. American elections, as they are in many countries, are not won by majorities of the electorate but by either majorities or pluralities ot the people who vote. As tritely obvious as that is one need only observe that the most powerful tool of getting out your party's vote is usually who the other party selects as their candidate. The most powerful tool for getting out the vote that the Democrats have had at the disposal for generations is Donald Trump. There is no group that he would need to win that he will not deeply offend. Again and again.

Would I have picked Trump to survive the Darwinian process of candidate selection? Nope. Having watched the process in action am I surprised that he did? Not at all. it was pretty obvious that no one took Trump seriously even when it became evident that the slightest criticism invited a massive retaliatory strike. None were willing to spend anything to attack Trump until it was too late and I seriously doubt it would have made a difference to the plurality of Trump supporters. Then too they assumed they could count on the kindness of the despised main stream media to slay Trump for them as he violated presumptive political taboo after taboo.

I like to call this the revenge of the mainstream media. Can the Republicans complain that their candidates and Trump in particular did not receive far more extensive coverage than either Clinton or Sanders? No. For most of this process the democratic race has been largely a side show. That's over now. And all those lovely observations about the Republican winner, courstesy of the losers, as well as those of the candidate himself now come into play for the whole electorate. All of which makes Romney's lethally foolish 47 percent comment seem like a personal blessing from the Pope.

Peter  G

Clearly the most noble and progressive thing a true hearted liberal can do in a case such as the last Balkan unpleasantness or Lybia or any such event is to stand by and watch the mass slaughter of civilians while tut tutting. One could ask the populations of those places who aren't in mass graves what they think because they are actually still alive. But I don't think you and so many of your fellow nobility would like the answers they would give you.

Peter G

It will not have occurred to David that the scenarios he envisions would effectively cancel each other out. Math, as he has often admitted, is not his strong suit.

The Dark Avenge

The term of art is dyscalculia, or innumerate. And only seen through the lens of the NRO(dot), a glass that is not only dark but upside-down.

Ken Hoop

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-boot-republicans-in-exile-20160508-story.html

Dual loyalist erstwhile Trotskyite (they always hated Stalin) neocon Reaganite comes out for Hillary. Of course.

You can usually tell when a Jewish guy at least attempts to put America the nation rather than Israel and America the Empire first. He's tagged a "self-hating Jew" or at the very least
"self-satisfied."

Ken Hoop

Iraqi majorities have consistently polled, while in blood-drenched anarchy, as saying the US had no right to overthrow Hussein, even majorities of Shias who wanted him gone. Sound unappreciative?
As for Libya, that accusation against Khadaffi was a bald lie. Told by the same Elite which lied about Saddam's WMDs.
Serbia? Research Chomsky on that lie.

Peter G

No doubt they had no right to do anything to Iraq. Other than maybe enforce a no fly zone to prevent Saddam's regime from committing additional atrocities against the Kurds. Or were those imaginary too? Frankly it wasn't getting rid of Saddam Hussein that was the problem. it was the thouroughly mismanaged aftermath that was the problem. As to lies against Ghaddaffi I'd consult some back issues of the news if I were you. His military was already engaged in a ground operations against he civilian population when he was stopped. And stopped by NATO. Chomsky is an idiot. That is the fundamental problem with your basic self declared progressive holier than thou nitwits. They are prepared to watch the worst horrors humanity can inflict on itself and make a virtue of inaction on the basis of the fact that the world will still be imperfect if anything at all is done. Needless to say I have little use for such heartless blowhards.

Peter G

Did you actually read that piece you linked? He didn't endorse Clinton over Trump. Your comment is revelatory comment any way you look at it. It is unclear whether your reference is to the author of the piece or to Bernie Sanders who has consistently voted to support every deal the American government has made with Israel.

Max

Is Chomsky still championing the Khmer Rouge?

The Dark Avenge

He never did.

""were engaged in the admittedly touchy business of distinguishing evidence from interpretations."[20] Chomsky and Herman have continued to argue that their analysis of the situation in Cambodia was reasonable based on the information available to them at the time, and a legitimate critique of the disparities in reporting atrocities committed by communist regimes relative to the atrocities committed by the U.S. and its allies. Nonetheless, in 1993, Chomsky acknowledged the massive scale of the Cambodian genocide in the documentary film Manufacturing Consent. He said, "I mean the great act of genocide in the modern period is Pol Pot, 1975 through 1978 - that atrocity - I think it would be hard to find any example of a comparable outrage and outpouring of fury."[21]"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambodian_genocide_denial

At least David Duff enjoys trolling here. You seem to do it out of some grim devotion to demonized anyone left of Obama.

Max

That guy on PM's site in the upper-right is my political hero, so that puts me more in his mainstream than yourself, who repeatedly demonizes anyone to the center of Chomsky.

The Dark Avenger

Have you actually read any Chomsky? Or have you found him a convenient progressive to bash?

Max

Actually there is much of Chomsky with which I agree.

Ken Hoop

Khadaffi was going to do what was necessary to do to eliminate the rebellion.

Your a priori trust of the American Police State's dishonest descriptions and the Elite Media's reporting of these kind of events nullifies the possibility you could help effectively on a consistent basis save objectively innocent life in foreign countries at any rate. Even were it logistically possible to do so, which it is not over the medium term, even were our Elite honest and well meaning.

Ken Hoop

Sanders has had to be pressured by members of his core to get tougher on Israel, I certainly agree with that. And he still
has a ways to go. Boot made it clear Clinton was preferable to Trump.

http://www.salon.com/2016/05/09/hard_line_right_wing_war_hawk_max_boot_applauds_hillary_clinton_in_op_ed/

Ken Hoop

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/war-on-is/2016/05/08/us-struggles-convince-iraqis-doesnt-support-isis/84110278/

Gee, the US STILL is not trusted in Iraq. It was getting rid of Hussein that WAS the problem. There is no way to build a stable government afterwards when the vast majority of the country realize your motives aren't pure, and will fight any government viewed as your puppet.

By the way, the US goal was to install a puppet government which would be friendly to Israel, unlike Saddam. No need to go further. That's a dealbreaker to secular Baathists and to Sunni and Shia religious parties.

The Dark Avenger

Since you made that moronic remark about the Khmer Rouge, permit me to have my doubts in this area.

The comments to this entry are closed.