Friday Talking Points -- Republicans Show Their True Colors
President Joe Biden gave a speech this week on the state of the American economy. On his watch, the economy has greatly improved as we all dug ourselves out of the pandemic recession together. So Biden deserves a victory lap. He also used the speech to draw a stark comparison between Democrats responsibly steering the economy and Republicans who apparently are salivating at the prospect of blowing it all up.
Biden pointed to many indicators that the economy is strong, including better-than-expected growth, all-time low unemployment levels, a manufacturing rebound, the fact that wages are now growing faster than inflation, and that inflation itself has been coming down for six straight months. Biden's big infrastructure investments are now being implemented across the country, in thousands of projects that will improve Americans' lives (including a whole bunch of them in red states and red districts). Biden's basic message: things are getting better and better.
So of course the Republicans now want to burn it all down. The big fight in Washington for approximately the next six months is going to be over the debt ceiling. House Republicans seem to think they got elected to hold the American economy hostage to force Draconian budget cuts on a Democratic president (they never scratch this particular itch when a Republican is in the Oval Office, of course). But the American people don't seem to agree -- a recent poll showed that 73 percent of the public did not agree with the House Republicans' priorities in Congress. Not exactly a mandate, is that?
Republicans don't seem to realize that they're picking a fight they're ultimately going to lose. They are going to be the ones the blame lands on, even as they assure themselves that the public will take it all out on Joe Biden. And so far Republicans don't even know what they're demanding, and probably won't be able to agree on much of anything. There's a reason for this, and the reason is that steep spending cuts in government programs are not popular, period. This is why Republicans don't even want to talk about what spending they are targeting -- because no matter what they put forward, it's going to annoy a whole lot of people.
Take just one measure the House worked on this week. It was really nothing more than Republicans venting their spleen on Joe Biden for effectively bringing the price of gasoline down. Yes, you read that right. House Republicans passed a measure that would have forbidden Biden from releasing gas from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which would have had the effect of hiking the price of gas another 40 cents per gallon. That is what Republicans want to do -- make you pay more for a gallon of gas in times of crisis. As we said, that's not exactly a popular position to take. Especially when a whole lot of Republicans ran on bringing the price of gas down, not sending it back up again. It's not just George Santos, there are a whole lot of bald-faced liars in the Republican ranks, it seems.
McCarthy was also forced to tee up a national sales tax of a whopping 30 percent, which would replace income taxes. This would be an enormous benefit to millionaires and billionaires and it would be an enormous hit on pretty much everyone else. Who wants to pay 30 percent more on everything they buy? Anyone?
Grover Norquist, whose credentials as a champion of cutting taxes cannot be questioned by conservatives, reacted to the idea of the 30 percent tax by writing an article for The Atlantic titled: "A National Sales Tax Is A Terrible Idea." Just in case that wasn't clear enough, the subtitle for the article read: "A handful of House Republicans want to force a vote on it. That's just a free gift to Democrats." Tell us what you really think of the idea, Grover!
As we said -- Republicans are much more interested in blowing the economy up rather than actually doing anything to help anyone. They also want to cut Social Security and Medicare, even if they don't come out and admit it.
This is, of course, nothing more than Kevin McCarthy desperately dancing while the MAGA brigade calls the tune. He had to promise them votes on all their pet crazy ideas, and now we're seeing the result. The House GOP can't seem to get it together on much of anything, as they scramble for votes on immigration, the new 30 percent sales tax, budget cuts, or even getting the promised vengeance of kicking Representative Ilhan Omar off her committees. They can't even manage to do mean-spirited things in unison anymore, which is a real measure of how discombobulated the party truly is in the House.
They've even already gotten to the point of begging Biden and the Democrats to save them from their own cluelessness. They're actually suggesting that it should be Biden who should suggest budget cuts to them, instead of the other way around. Which must have been on Biden's mind when he recently called the House Republicans "fiscally demented."
Biden, meanwhile, continues to show American leadership on the world stage, intervening in a stalemate over Ukraine to get some modern tanks to the battlefield in time for the anticipated spring offensive from both sides. Biden freed Germany up to send their own Leopard 2 tanks by promising to send a couple dozen M1 Abrams tanks from America. This defused the tension within NATO, and now the tanks should be on their way soon (from Poland first, most likely).
Biden's drip-drip-drip on the classified documents scandal added another drip this week, but it was completely overshadowed by the news that former Vice President Mike Pence also found some classified documents stored at his own home. This completely took the wind out of the Republicans' sails on the issue, since now any one-sided investigation into Biden's handling of documents will be met with Democratic questions of why they're not also investigating both Donald Trump and Mike Pence as well.
This led to an amusing little meltdown on Fox News, when the Pence news first broke. The on-air personalities (we simply cannot use the term "journalists" to describe them) were downright depressed that they had to report the reality of the situation, when they were having so much fun before the Pence news broke -- and no, that's not an exaggeration, here's an exchange between Jesse Watters and Greg Gutfeld:
WATTERS: I mean, Pence, seriously. We have this great thing going with Joe...
GUTFELD: Yeah, and he just ruined it!
WATTERS: He did!
GUTFELD: Come on, man!
WATTERS: Now what are we going to do?
So sad.
In other reality-obscuring news, Republicans in Arizona just decided to exempt themselves from their state's open-records law. Seems like they got caught red-handed, so they're going to try to avoid this in the future by burying their own communications:
Arizona Republicans shielded legislators from the state's open-records law this week -- a move that comes months after the release of thousands of documents detailing extensive efforts to undermine Joe Biden's victory here in the 2020 presidential election.
Documents that have surfaced over the past two years include correspondence describing the inner workings of a partisan review of the 2020 election by the Cyber Ninjas, as well as emails by Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, urging lawmakers to overturn President Donald Trump's narrow defeat in the state.
The new rules will greatly limit the public release of lawmakers' communications. State senators will not have to disclose any text messages sent on personal devices, even when dealing with state business. For lawmakers in both the Senate and the House, emails and other documents will be destroyed after 90 days -- in many cases, well before members of the public know to ask for them.
Speaking of folks who worked to overturn the 2020 election results, the chickens are coming home to roost for John Eastman, a California lawyer who was at the center of the fight for Trump to essentially just seize power. The State Bar of California has brought 11 disciplinary charges against Eastman, in an attempt to disbar him. And the charges are pretty serious:
Stephen Gillers, a professor at the New York University School of Law who specializes in legal ethics, called the set of accusations levied at [John] Eastman "scathing."
"[It] charges Eastman with knowingly or through gross negligence failing to support the U.S. and California constitutions, which he took an oath to do," Gillers said. "The allegation that Eastman is guilty of 'moral turpitude' is an attack on his very character, in other words that he is a bad man, not merely a bad lawyer."
The state bar's announcement came after an investigation that lasted nearly a year. [California Bar Chief Trial Counsel George] Cardona's office concluded that Eastman violated Section 6106 of the Business and Professions Code "by making false and misleading statements that constitute acts of 'moral turpitude, dishonesty, and corruption.'"
"There is nothing more sacrosanct to our American democracy than free and fair elections and the peaceful transfer of power," Cardona said in a statement. "For California attorneys, adherence to the U.S. and California Constitutions is their highest legal duty."
Eastman, Cardona added, "violated this duty in furtherance of an attempt to usurp the will of the American people and overturn election results for the highest office in the land -- an egregious and unprecedented attack on our democracy -- for which he must be held accountable."
One would like to think so, at any rate.
Speaking of moral turpitude, let's check in on Donald Trump, shall we?
It was a fairly quiet week on the legal front for Trump, but that may not last much longer. Fulton County (Georgia) District Attorney Fani Willis stated to a judge this week that decisions about whether to charge and prosecute Trump "are imminent." So we'll be watching for any breaking news on this front, and we are positive Donald Trump will also be breathlessly waiting to hear what's going to happen next.
One amusing Trump story ran in the New York Times this week, under the headline: "OMG. Trump Has Started Texting." It seems that since the start of the year, someone taught Donny how to send a text to other people's phones, which he had never managed to do before now. This is a fun article to read, for revelations such as:
The former president has long been constantly on his phone, but only to talk into it -- or, before he was kicked off Twitter, to send streams of tweets. (The former aide who helped set up his Twitter account once told Politico that when Mr. Trump, who initially relied on aides to write his posts, began to tweet on his own, it was akin to the scene in the film
Jurassic Park
when the velociraptors learned to open doors.)
For years, people corresponding with him sent him text messages, which always went unanswered. He was unreachable by email. He sometimes asked aides to send electronic messages to reporters, referring to the missives as "wires," like a telegram.
The article even saves the snarkiest note for last, ending on:
Still unclear is Mr. Trump's position on emojis.
We certainly could suggest a few....
And we'll end on even happier news. Finally, political unity has been achieved in Washington. Democrats and Republicans banded together in common cause -- raking Ticketmaster over the coals in a Senate hearing, for their monstrous SNAFU with Taylor Swift tickets as well as their dominance over event tickets in general. And you can bet all those "Swifties" were paying close attention.
Because it doesn't matter what side of the aisle you are on -- everyone agrees that Ticketmaster sucks. Voila! Nonpartisan unity achieved!
We have some Honorable Mention awards to hand out this week, the first two to Representative Ruben Gallego in Arizona and Representative Adam Schiff in California. Both men announced a Senate bid this week, Gallego to challenge Independent Senator Kyrsten Sinema for her seat while Schiff joined Katie Porter in running for Dianne Feinstein's seat. We feel that both of these Senate seats would benefit from some fresh new faces so we wish them both the best in their campaigns.
Joe Biden also deserves an Honorable Mention, for protecting the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness from mining (full disclosure: we have personally visited this area in northern Minnesota and it is beautiful and well worth protecting).
And one final Honorable Mention goes to House Minority Whip Katherine Clark, the second-highest ranking Democrat in the chamber. Her daughter, Riley Dowell, had just been arraigned on charges of assault and battery on a police officer, resisting arrest, and vandalizing a historic marker or monument. This all happened during a protest on the Boston Common.
So Clark did precisely the right thing, and showed the country the right way to speak out about these things even when they happen from your own side of the aisle -- or from within your own family. Clark told reporters: "I condemn violence against everyone, whether that is against police or against community members as a result of any person or government entity." This is the difference between Democrats and Republicans these days, when it comes to either tacitly supporting or clearly denouncing political violence of any sort, by anyone. Which you've got to admit is not only principled, but impressive.
But to us, the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week was Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who had the most effective attacks on the House Republicans' plans of any Democrat. Schumer was out there in front, asking the pointed questions and framing the issue for all other Democrats with skill. Here he is on the Senate floor this week:
The House GOP is threatening spending cuts. Well, what are they? Why the evasion? Why is your conference hiding from the American people? House Republicans: Where are your cards?
He hammered this theme home after meeting with President Biden at the White House a day earlier:
Let's see what their plan is on the debt ceiling. Do they want to cut Social Security? Do they want to cut Medicare? Do they want to cut veterans benefits? Do they want to cut police? Do they want to cut food for needy kids? What's your plan? We don't know if they can even put one together.
And here was Schumer weighing in on the Republican scheme to tax everything everyone buys at 30 percent:
The so-called "Fair Tax Act" is unfair, unconscionable and un-American. It will impose a tax hike that is dramatic on 90 percent of the American people, working families, middle-class folks, seniors, and those who aspire to be part of the middle class, the poor, the sick and the afflicted.
Tell it like it is, Chuck! Don't let the Republicans get away with being vague, hit them on what they would actually do if they had their way. The American people need to see this and understand it, and the only way that is going to happen is if Democrats are relentless in pointing it all out. Schumer took the lead in doing so, right off the starting line, which is why he is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week this week.
[Congratulate Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on his Senate contact page, to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]
This didn't exactly disappoint us, but it must have disappointed someone somewhere. The Blue Dog Democrats are in disarray, as their ranks further shrink with every passing election. Which apparently wasn't happening fast enough, so some of them decided what they needed was rebranding. Which didn't go over very well, and let to a split in the already-diminished group.
Here's the story:
Congress' influential Blue Dog Coalition is getting chopped nearly in half after an internal blow-up over whether to rebrand the centrist Democratic group.
Seven of the 15 members expected to join the Blue Dogs this year, including Reps. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) and Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), are departing after a heated disagreement over a potential name change for the moderate bloc. For now that's left the Blue Dogs with seven, all male members -- their smallest roster in nearly three decades of existence. One freshman member remains undecided.
At the core of some of the breakaway Blue Dogs' demands was a rechristening as the Common Sense Coalition that, they argued, would have helped shed the group's reputation as a socially moderate, Southern "boys' club." Blue Dogs have long stood for fiscal responsibility and national security, issues with broad Democratic appeal, but some members felt the name had a negative connotation that kept their colleagues from joining. A majority of other members disagreed, saying they saw no reason to toss out a longstanding legacy.
Those tensions came to a head earlier this month as Blue Dog members met for a lengthy debate over the reboot that culminated in a secret-ballot vote to reject the new name, according to interviews with nearly a dozen people familiar with the situation, on both sides of the dispute. Shortly after that vote, Reps. Ed Case (D-Hawaii); David Scott (D-Ga.); Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.); Lou Correa (D-Calif.), Spanberger and Sherrill all left the group.
Again, this doesn't disappoint us personally -- in fact, the faster this group shrinks the better, as far as we are concerned. But the news must have disappointed some Democrats, so in the interests of fairness we're going to collectively give the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week to the Blue Dog Coalition, for being the only group within the Democratic caucus who still insists on perpetuating the whole "Democrats in disarray" storyline.
It was either that, or give it to Joe Manchin again, really.
[We tried to find official contact information for the Blue Dog Coalition and were led to a broken link, so we suggest you use their Twitter page to let them know what you think of their actions.]
Volume 692 (1/27/23)
A very mixed bag this week, with two of our talking points taken from articles in the media which framed the issues better than our humble attempts could have. Enjoy and, as always, use responsibly!
It's getting better all the time
Joe Biden's been increasingly pointing this out, and as more and more of the infrastructure and other projects are rolled out in the coming months, it'll just become more and more apparent that he's managed to get a whole lot of good things done for America.
"No economic picture is perfect, but what we're experiencing now is pretty darn good, you've got to admit. Growth is up -- and it is much higher than the experts were predicting. Pay is now increasing faster than inflation, so more people have more in their pockets. Inflation has gone down every month for the past six months and looks to continue dropping in 2023. Unemployment is at an all-time low. Jobs are plentiful, and they pay better than they used to. Manufacturing is enjoying a rebound. High-tech chip factories are now on the drawing board for many communities across the country. Gas prices are back down again. The economy has recovered from the dark days of the COVID-19 pandemic. And it just keeps getting better and better. You don't hear about this as often as you should on the news, but Joe Biden's been doing a pretty good job steering the economy."
Our demands
This idea (from a Washington Post article by Paul Waldman) is absolutely brilliant. Instead of falling into the negotiating trap Republicans have laid for Democrats, they should take the initiative and fight back. Go on offense! Change the whole tenor of the conversation!
With their demand for across-the-board domestic spending reductions, Republicans are in effect proposing cuts to education, health care, economic development, clean energy, infrastructure, enforcement of environmental laws and a great deal more. So here are some of our demands:
- A significant tax increase on the wealthy
- An increase in the minimum wage, including indexing it to inflation
- A national paid family leave program
- A program to extend the Affordable Care Act's expansion of Medicaid to the states that have refused to accept it
- Universal pre-K
- A permanent expansion of the child tax credit
That could be just the start. Republicans want to negotiate? Then let's negotiate! Democrats will be willing to take half a loaf on some of these items; for instance, they might be able to accept only a modest tax increase for the wealthy, or an increase of the minimum wage to only $11 an hour rather than $15. That seems reasonable, doesn't it?
Think about it this way and it's clear how odd it is that we're even calling the GOP demand a negotiation. The choices are (1) give Republicans all of what they want, or (2) give Republicans only some of what they want, with the hope that if the outcome is No. 2, then they'll be kind enough not to shove the U.S. economy off a cliff.
What are you going to cut? Say so!
As we said earlier, Chuck Schumer's already doing a great job of this, but it should be the go-to line for any Democrat whenever the subject of the debt ceiling and/or budget cuts comes up.
"So Republicans say they're going to hold the full faith and credit of the United States hostage in order to slash the federal budget. But what does that mean? They won't tell us. They are afraid to tell us, because then people would know what they are really trying to do. So I ask all of these budget hawks specifically: Are you going to cut Medicare? How many of your constituents are on Medicare? Are you going to cut military pay or the V.A.? How many of your constituents are veterans? Are you going to cut the Child Tax Credit? How many parents live in your state or district? This is precisely why Republicans are so far refusing to say what they'd cut -- because they know full well that millions of real people are going to be affected. They know that their ideas are going to cause some real pain out there. And they're afraid of people figuring that out. So they just stay silent. So any time a Republican opens his or her mouth to talk about the debt ceiling or the budget or 'spending' or just any of it -- ask them: 'OK, so what would you cut?' Because if they won't tell you that it means that you are not going to like their answer."
Thirty percent
Zero in on the figure, which they're already trying to lie about.
"Republicans now want to institute a national sales tax on everything you buy. And it's a doozy -- 30 percent. Because that is such a jaw-dropping number, they're even lying about it. By their figures, it's actually a 23 percent tax. But say you go to buy something and it costs $100. When they ring you up, you wind up having to pay $130. I don't know about you, but I'd call that a 30-percent tax. Anyone who tries to tell you differently is obviously trying to pull the wool over your eyes. So how many people support a new 30-percent tax on everything you buy? Anyone? Because that doesn't sound like a very good deal for the American consumer to me."
Don't forget to add in Pence now, too
This is (so far) the best way we've heard the differences laid out between what Joe Biden (and now Mike Pence as well) did, and what Donald Trump did. It comes from a very deep dive into the whole matter by Bruce Maiman in HuffPost.
If I'm renting a room in your home and decide to move out and I remove things from your home inadvertently but give them back, is that different from intentionally removing things from your home and refusing to return them? So much so that you have to call the police to get them back?
That's the difference between what Biden is dealing with and what Trump did. One person voluntarily notified the National Archives about the documents and arranged for their return; the other person fought the National Archives for months and refused to return anything, even ignoring a subpoena from the Justice Department. The Justice Department was left with no choice but to send the FBI to seize those documents.
97 percent!
Point out successes when they happen!
"Republicans simply are not serious about wanting to fix the problem at the southern border. They say they want illegal border-crossings to stop, but when Joe Biden does precisely that they sue him in court to stop it. Inside of one month, illegal border crossings from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela have dropped by an astounding 97 percent due to a new way for immigrants to apply online rather than attempting to make an illegal entry. You heard that right -- 97 percent of the problem was solved. So of course, 20 Republican states are now suing Biden in federal court to stop the program. Because they have no interest in any real-life solutions, they just love making political hay over the issue instead. The hypocrisy is just astounding, folks. They say they want illegal border crossings to end, Biden does just that, and they sue him in court to stop him."
They got the "dummy" part right
File this under "you just can't make this stuff up, folks"....
"A newly-elected Republican member of the House decided to pass out a free gift to his fellow members of Congress this week. And nothing could exemplify the House Republicans' strategy more, really. Because what Cory Mills decided to pass out was a '40mm grenade, made for a MK19 grenade launcher.' They even have cute little Republican elephants painted on them. They are, his office assured everyone, inert -- just 'dummy' grenades. But what better gift to kick off the GOP House majority and how they are going to operate than grenades? I mean, it just speaks volumes, really...."
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
Chris,
Biden, meanwhile, continues to show American leadership on the world stage, intervening in a stalemate over Ukraine to get some modern tanks to the battlefield in time for the anticipated spring offensive from both sides. Biden freed Germany up to send their own Leopard 2 tanks by promising to send a couple dozen M1 Abrams tanks from America. This defused the tension within NATO, and now the tanks should be on their way soon (from Poland first, most likely).
I've seen Biden show leadership on the world stage on countless occasions since I've been following his career for the last few decades, most notably on issues related to the US invasion of Iraq. His moves on the 'tanks for Ukraine' issue have demonstrated something far less than stellar leadership.
What is needed on the world stage right now is the kind of American global leadership that will bring this unnecessary and unprovoked and terminally stupid war to an end. But, up until now, there has been no sign that it will come.
Guys I just looked over a 22-minute police body cam footage from Memphis. Won’t repost it here — it’s THAT bad. I really want to see those Facist cops get crucified for what they did to a fellow Brother.
All parties involved were black so this is ZERO racism TOTAL facistic policing. Don’t go there, Elizabeth.
His moves on the 'tanks for Ukraine' issue have demonstrated something far less than stellar leadership.
Just WHY is that so? Please be specific.
Biden's leadership on this issue will just prolong war with no endgame in sight.
What is needed on the world stage right now is the kind of American global leadership that will bring this unnecessary and unprovoked and terminally stupid war to an end. But, up until now, there has been no sign that it will come.
So define WTF you think Joe or Europe or anybody besides Putin can do to end this war? Stop being a Putin apologist unless you can back your reasoning up. Otherwise I’ll just keep jumping down your throat when you blame EVERYBODY but Vladimir Vladimirovich.
You’re fucking pissing me off.
Say WHY Elizabeth.
Do you have a problem reading what I write so you just make up something that you think I wrote?
What is your fucking problem?
You’re been just saying the same stupid shit for almost a year now without justification. Nothing to back your assertations up.
Why WHAT!?
And, you would know stupid shit. Don't make me laugh.
What my fucking problem is that you have NOT written anything competent regarding this subject for almost a fucking year, now. I never miss a single post here so I didn’t miss anything you said.
So, why then do you insist on making shit up about what I said?
*smh*
What did I make up — I fucking copied and pasted your idiot quote!
You can't even do THAT right!
1- you say uninformed shit about Ukraine
2- myself and others point out our issues with your uninformed shit
3- you pull a Don Harris and utterly fail to address anyone’s point
4- wait, rinse and repeat.
So, you got nothin', honey.
Don't go all bat shit crazy on me just because Ukraine can't mount an offensive, okay?
Oh, let’s see...
Putin had to bail on Kiev. He got booted well away from Kharkiv. Then he lost the only major Ukrainian city he conquered early on, Kherson. The Kerch bridge had a mysterious truck bomb explosion on it and Crimea will prove to be a death trap for Russian military forces. The inept Ukrainians have CAPTURED more equipment than they started the war with.
Yep, the Ukrainians don’t stand a prayer, Einstein.
Let's hope they capture some more EQUIPMENT. ;)
Re: the 'honorable mention' for Mr Gallego, I certainly don't blame him for announcing early his candidacy for the U.S. Senate. However, it is too soon to know whether this will benefit the Democrats. Ms Sinema has not announced whether she will seek re-election. But if she does, let's imagine this ballot choice for the Arizona voters:
Gallego - D
Lake - R
Sinema - I
As in most states, Arizona doesn't provide for run-off elections, so the candidate receiving even 1 vote more than every other candidate is the winner. It is entirely within the realm of possibility that Kari Lake, who lost by a razor-thin margin, will become the junior Senator from AZ.
Setting aside your animosity for Senator Sinema, is *this* what you are rooting for in 2025?
@rusty,
The spoiler effect can cut both ways. It's certainly possible that sinema could split the sane vote and hand a Senate seat to the crazies. It's also possible she splits the conservative vote and facilitates a win for a non corporate Democrat. High risk, high reward.
@Liz,
What caddy is trying to communicate to you is that your argument lacks sufficient supporting evidence. You may legitimately believe you've provided it, but to our eyes you have not. If your goal is to convince anyone that a different policy might be wise, you'll need to provide some form of proof that your preferred strategy could realistically result in an end to hostilities. If you can't, you're basically shouting opinions at the wall.
JL
Joshua,
This is an opinion space, number one.
And, number two, the argument I am making - which I have obviously made about as clear as mud - does indeed lack sufficient supporting evidence and that is PRECISELY the point I have been trying to make!
Finally, and for the sake of clarity, my argument is that Biden's and NATO's stance on Ukrainian membership in NATO despite decades of Russian resistance to that notion, and their insistence on not allowing that discussion to even be on the 'negotiating table' before this insanity began was tantamount to inciting war.
Can I prove the corollary, that talking reasonably with Russia about their concerns regarding Ukraine's membership in NATO would have prevented this regional security crisis from becoming an international crisis on any number of fronts and all out war?
Of course, I cannot. Would keeping Ukraine's membership in NATO, it's economic relationship with Europe and its security arrangement with Moscow ON the negotiating table made any difference in the unwise calculations that Putin
took? Who the Hell knows! And, Biden and NATO made damn sure that we'd never find out, didn't they? THAT has been my point all along.
At least, I have not resorted to name-calling. When I start doing that, I am really out of here.
Guess I'll be here for a while ... :)
... because, after all, who else would run the CW Sunday Night Music Festival and Dance Party, right? Heh.
Yeah, well first let me apologize, Elizabeth. Being so passionate about the issue to start with and having done scores of hours researching geopolitics etc is no excuse for being a sick.
Finally, and for the sake of clarity, my argument is that Biden's and NATO's stance on Ukrainian membership in NATO despite decades of Russian resistance to that notion, and their insistence on not allowing that discussion to even be on the 'negotiating table' before this insanity began was tantamount to inciting war.
THIS IS ONLY TRUE if Russia gets to play by a different more imperialism-friendly set of rules than every other country on the planet. Russia doesn’t want [fill in the blank] in Ukraine? Tough fucking titties — Ukraine is a Sovereign nation!
…for being a sick DICK, even.;)
[1] Elizabeth Miller wrote:
"What is needed on the world stage right now is the kind of American global leadership that will bring this unnecessary and unprovoked and terminally stupid war to an end. But, up until now, there has been no sign that it will come."
That's exactly what we are seeing right now. American leadership. The best way to end the war as quickly as possible is to see to it that Ukraine is victorious as fast as possible. That will save the most lives without rewarding a Russian war of aggression in any way. Chamberlin tried a negotiated peace with Hitler, all that ended up doing was the loss of Czechoslovakia for nothing. A negotiated Ukraine settlement with Putin will only result in something similar in the long run.
[22] Elizabeth Miller wrote:
"Finally, and for the sake of clarity, my argument is that Biden's and NATO's stance on Ukrainian membership in NATO despite decades of Russian resistance to that notion, and their insistence on not allowing that discussion to even be on the 'negotiating table' before this insanity began was tantamount to inciting war."
1) It is a matter of longstanding policy that no outside, non NATO member can dictate or have veto power over NATO procedures and membership.
2) There is no proof that NATO membership was in any way responsible or the justification of war. In fact, the main reasons the Russians gave were A) to remove NAZIS from the government of Ukraine, laughable since Zelensky is Jewish, and B) to protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine. If that's the case, why wasn't the same action taken against Estonia? Can it be that Estonia is already a NATO member while Ukraine is not?
Russian interference in and designs on the territory of, and support for separatists, Ukraine, and Georgia, and what Russia likes to call the "Near Abroad" all pre-date the war and any possible negotiations with the West.
I might also point out: Russia itself violated the international agreement it had with the West, respecting the territorial integrity of Ukraine, when Ukraine agreed to give up nuclear ICBMs on its territory after the fall of the Soviet Union in exchange for security guarantees, when Russia annexed Crimea without Ukraine's consent.
Russian territorial wars of aggression:
1) Abkhazia (Georgia)
2) South Ossetia (Georgia)
3) Chechnya ( arguably an internal Russian Federation affair)
4) Nagorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan vs Russia and Armenia)
5) Transnistria (Moldova) - which has nothing to do with NATO membership at all, as Moldova declared itself officially neutral, like Switzerland and Austria.
6) Donbas and Donetsk (Ukraine)
7) and finally, Crimea (Ukraine)
Thank you, John M. No doubt you’re familiar with Peter Zeihan and here’s a 3:35 video of his that adds to your summary Russian geopolitical and demographic realities.
Caddy,
Apology accepted, naturally.
Yes, Ukraine is a sovereign nation. But, sovereign nations have never been able to do whatever they wish to do in their wildest dreams without severe consequences. Sovereignty is not absolute, in other words.
And, alliances such as NATO, also have the right to decide which countries it wishes to admit, taking into account the interests of its current members and what makes sense, geopolitically.
John,
That's exactly what we are seeing right now. American leadership. The best way to end the war as quickly as possible is to see to it that Ukraine is victorious as fast as possible. That will save the most lives without rewarding a Russian war of aggression in any way.
American leadership, as it stands right now, is only serving to prolong the agony of this war, with incrementally increasing support for Ukraine that is just enough to keep Ukraine in the fight and nothing more.
How do you define victory for Ukraine? And, what would the US and its allies have to do beyond what it is doing now in order to "see to it"?
I'm guessing that by victory you mean pushing Russia completely out of Ukraine, including Crimea and eastern portions it has controlled since 2014 - returning Ukraine to its full sovereignty and territorial integrity. Well, let's say they accomplish this feat, with a lot of help from their friends, and push Russia back to its own territory.
Now, once 'completely victorious', all Ukraine would have to do is prevent Russia from waging war on them in the future. I'm pretty sure there is no geopolitical analyst who would tell you that Ukraine would ever be capable of preventing Russia from waging war. And, so, the war footing never ends and you not only have a long war but you have a never-ending war. Which, by the way, is hardly in the interests of the United States.
And, let's say the US and its allies provide everything that Ukraine needs to be victorious - up to and including troops. Then what would be the real world consequences of such an escalation?
I think the only reality-based outcome here is for a negotiated political settlement that is durable and enforceable and takes into account the interests of all parties. I think that is also the quickest way to end this war and all of the suffering and loss of life it has already inflicted on the Ukrainian people.
John,
In fact, the main reasons the Russians gave were A) to remove NAZIS from the government of Ukraine, laughable since Zelensky is Jewish, and B) to protect ethnic Russians in Ukraine. If that's the case, why wasn't the same action taken against Estonia? Can it be that Estonia is already a NATO member while Ukraine is not?
(A) Not quite laughable when you consider that Ukraine does indeed have a Nazi problem with extreme far right entities like the Azov Regiment now fully embedded within government and military structures. Of course, Putin's claims of a Nazi regime in Kyiv are wildly exaggerated.
(B) Ukraine has been the highest priority Russian foreign policy concern, especially over the course of the last few decades, and is in a league of its own in terms of how Putin sees Russia's very existence and what's in its national interest. You just can't compare that to Estonia!
John,
I might also point out: Russia itself violated the international agreement it had with the West, respecting the territorial integrity of Ukraine, when Ukraine agreed to give up nuclear ICBMs on its territory after the fall of the Soviet Union in exchange for security guarantees, when Russia annexed Crimea without Ukraine's consent.
Very true! And, that will certainly play against Russia in any political settlement that is reached - Ukraine's security arrangements with the US and NATO will be as critical as Ukraine's neutral status.
John,
It is a matter of longstanding policy that no outside, non NATO member can dictate or have veto power over NATO procedures and membership.
Completely and wholeheartedly agree - absolutely, positively, unequivocally!
That isn't what I've been advocating. What I have been trying to say is that Biden and NATO and Ukraine should have had the good sense to know that you can't always get what you want ... but, if you try sometime you might just find that you get what you need!
Good Advice!
[
I'm guessing that by victory you mean pushing Russia completely out of Ukraine, including Crimea and eastern portions it has controlled since 2014 - returning Ukraine to its full sovereignty and territorial integrity. Well, let's say they accomplish this feat, with a lot of help from their friends, and push Russia back to its own territory.
Damn straight! Anything less would be a spectacular blunder and you won’t see it happen because,
1- Ukrainian would fight with their bare hands if needed to repel this existential threat to its existence. I’m talking…picture Zelenskyy hanging by his heals from a lamppost for even entertaining anything less than total victory.
2- If Putin gets even that one square meter of Ukraine out of this he’ll simply pause, reload and resume invading his Sovereign neighbors.
Now, once 'completely victorious', all Ukraine would have to do is prevent Russia from waging war on them in the future. I'm pretty sure there is no geopolitical analyst who would tell you that Ukraine would ever be capable of preventing Russia from waging war. And, so, the war footing never ends and you not only have a long war but you have a never-ending war.
You are completely mistaken on this Elizabeth! No matter if Russia snatched victory from what is trending towards defeat Russia will never again be in a position to invade Ukraine nor anyone else again!
Will you puh-leeze just humor me and spend four minutes watching this video and tell me what he has wrong?
[33]
Yes, Ukraine is a sovereign nation. But, sovereign nations have never been able to do whatever they wish to do in their wildest dreams without severe consequences. Sovereignty is not absolute, in other words.
Indeed, Russia thought it could drive through Ukraine and subsequently into Romania, Poland and the Baltics to restore USSR-era strategic depth and place Putin up among the greats.
Also, here is the definition of “sovereign “
: possessing or held to possess supreme political power or sovereignty. : one that exercises supreme authority within a limited sphere.
[36]
Not quite laughable when you consider that Ukraine does indeed have a Nazi problem with extreme far right entities like the Azov Regiment now fully embedded within government and military structures.
Please cite your sources for this assertion of “fully embedded in government and military structures,” as neo-Nazis won a whopping 1.5% of the vote in the last Ukrainian election.
Also, Canada/America/Russia/Germany and the rest of the EU have the same problem — should they resign from NATO?
[37]
Very true! And, that will certainly play against Russia in any political settlement that is reached - Ukraine's security arrangements with the US and NATO will be as critical as Ukraine's neutral status.
You’re joking, right?
In 1994’s Budapest Memorandum Russia, America and Britain guaranteed Ukrainian territorial security in exchange for the nukes Ukraine inherited from the USSR. Ukraine remained neutral, got invaded nine years ago…and you expect Ukraine to go this route again? Even Finland and Sweden have stampeded into NATO, hello.
Hey Miss Elizabeth,
You’ve got an extreme right wing rapper from Vancouver —who’s politics I often disagree with but who’s art I enjoy.
He’s written exactly one song, Ghost. (3:21)
And it hit Billboard’s Number 1 although he doesn’t have a record contract as he’s not a fan of the industry.
It’s a love song with a lot of heart.
Please cite your sources for this assertion of “fully embedded in government and military structures,” as neo-Nazis won a whopping 1.5% of the vote in the last Ukrainian election.
I believe it was an article at the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace website...
Also, Canada/America/Russia/Germany and the rest of the EU have the same problem — should they resign from NATO?
What-about-ism doesn't work so well here and, no, it's not the same problem at all.
You told me about Ghost the other day, Caddy, and I told you that I loved it!
Caddy, I stopped joking about Ukraine a very long time ago. :)
If you think this is going to end with Ukraine in NATO, you might be dreaming ...
John and Caddy,
Now, there is talk of US fighter jets going to Ukraine. Care to guess where that will take us all?
Of course, the German Chancellor, the one who just decided to send tanks to Ukraine, calls all the chatter about fighter jets ah, frivolous. Yes, he said frivolous. Maybe something got lost translation?
Elizabeth, the West cannot and will not let Russian Irredentism stand! That would be Appeasement…Munich...1938…and just as disastrous. A bad peace is no peace at all.
This is a no-brainer because Russia, not Al Queda or Daesh, is our existential enemy. Remember fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here? Thanks to Putin’s blunder we don’t have to fight at all — not a drop of Western blood required — all we need do is give Ukraine the tools she needs to restore her borders. See Budapest Memorandum, above.
While Russia is still dangerous (1:09:16 — did you look at the 3:35 video summary, above? This defense economics and logistics Aussie Perun goes into the weeds a little bit deeper haha) and past Ukrainian successes do not guarantee future success …
I think Ukraine will drive Russia out and yes, I’ve absolutely no doubt Ukraine ends up in NATO.
[46]
Yep, you can tell that I’ve managed to keep myself in weed despite the Great 2022 Canadian Package LOST in the Mail Catastrophe.
ukraine may not end up as nato members, but after the treatment they've been suffering for almost a decade they will almost certainly remain armed to the teeth in the forseeable future.
as john and caddy have already pointed out, ukraine WAS neutral. their desire to join NATO began all the way back in 2002, but it only became urgent for them in 2014 after they'd already been invaded in crimea, and was enshrined in their constitution in 2019 after that invasion had been met with precious little concrete action from the international community, and attempts by the trump administration to use their desperation as a tool for his domestic re-election campaign.
could the invasion of donbas have been prevented by forcefully denying ukraine NATO membership? to my mind, that's a unicorns farting rainbows type of what-if. the strategy of negotiating treaties of reasonable exchange with expansionist dictators doesn't exactly have a stellar track record. the only form of communication that type of leader seems to understand is the language of military action. i believe the only US/NATO response that could have prevented the donbas invasion would have been if President Obama had found the foresight to have all those tanks and jets sent over back in 2015.
JL
[48]
NATO jets to Ukraine is problematic because not only do you have to train Ukrainians on the equipment you have to set up the entire logistical structure to support this new weapons platform.
I’m not ruling such a thing out, but Soviet-era jets from neighboring countries would be far more useful.
For the record, Germany and America held hands and jumped together. (9:51)
FYI Elizabeth, American Football’s best day of the season has arrived. I find it ironic that John M and MtnCaddy and now nypoet22 l have piled on you regarding Ukraine. That’s three hard tackling men and it’s not even noon here in the Left Coast.
;D You know I Heart You!
Joshua,
as john and caddy have already pointed out, ukraine WAS neutral.
Very true, as far as it goes.
Because, the US has been pushing for many decades for NATO expansion as far into the Russian sphere of influence as they could possibly go, up to an including Ukraine. The US has been messing with Ukraine politics for just as long. And, here we are.
In an ideal world, Ukraine with the help of the West, will be absolutely victorious with the added, ah, prize of being a member of NATO. Russia will slide back to its own internationally respected borders with little desire to do anything to strengthen its own security. The West will be satisfied, waiting patiently for regime change in Moscow - change that will be more in line with keeping the international order in place.
How's that for unicorns farting rainbows theory!?
Is it Super Bowl Sunday?
Well, I'll be cheering for San Fran today, just because. :)
Caddy[53],
Bring THAT on, baby!
[54]
The US has been messing with Ukraine politics for just as long. And, here we are. Of course, that’s what Superpowers do, you thilly wabbit! Although I doubt nearly as much as Russia has.
In an ideal world, Ukraine with the help of the West, will be absolutely victorious with the added, ah, prize of being a member of NATO. Russia will slide back to its own internationally respected borders with little desire to do anything to strengthen its own security. The West will be satisfied, waiting patiently for regime change in Moscow - change that will be more in line with keeping the international order in place.
Close! Ukraine is being flooded with NATO equipment and every day is more integrated into NATO. Once Ukraine pushes Russia out Russia will be unable to invade anyone — see the Elizabeth’s Death March 3:35 video — there’s going to be a pop quiz!
So how do you see Ukraine NOT in NATO after winning the proxy war that Putin started? Ukraine is providing the manpower and suffers much destruction on behalf of the West, which includes the Canadian Armed Forces. Ahem.
[55]
Not Super Bowl Sunday but the Conference Championship games that select the two SB contestants. These are generally much better and more dramatic then many Super Bowl blowouts.
[53]
AH, well y’all play Hockey so I bet all you Canuck Gals like, er, contact sports!
Signed —
From Hockeytown and likewise has San Fran straight up
Gotta walk Husky Betty downtown and see if the damned beer place is open. It’s Church of Football and the Sacramental potion is beer.
Brutal combat, as it were ... :)
Have lots of fun!
You at the shop today, Full Contact Elizabeth? If you ain’t watching:
The 49er starting QB injured his wrist in warmups and will not play. Backup journeyman QB Josh Johnson season stats 1 - 2 for 10 yards…and just started out by being sacked for 9 yards…sorry for OUR loss, eh?
I'm watching and am amazed Philly is only up by a td!
Yeah, and that last Philly drive was aided by three SF penalties. Philly is in biiig troube in this game, methinks.
Heh.
Yikes — if it wasn’t for bad luck the Niners…
But Purdy was out there and we have a lot of football to go.
(fingers crossed emoji)
Better Man Pearl Jam.
Black Pearl Jam — Unplugged.
Well, I showed up. *sigh*