Friday Talking Points -- R.N.C. Purge
This week President Joe Biden and Donald Trump both secured their respective parties' 2024 presidential nominations. Most Americans, if the pollsters can be believed (and they do all seem to be telling the same story), are not exactly thrilled with this rematch and would have preferred different choices. But we are where we are, so that's not going to happen for another four years.
Trump moved quickly to consolidate his power by installing loyal toadies (including his daughter-in-law Lara) at the head of the Republican National Committee. An already-existing exodus of people working for the R.N.C. then accelerated, as 60 staffers were shown the door. The R.N.C. is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Trump campaign, in other words.
The new ever-more-Trumpy R.N.C. stumbled out of the gate, as it was first revealed that they were shutting down their minority-outreach offices, but then had to backtrack and say that they weren't going to do that. But the message was pretty clear. Lara Trump has publicly stated that "every dollar" the R.N.C. controls is now going to go to one sole purpose: electing Trump.
This is somewhat amusing to watch, of course. What could possibly go wrong with firing all the people who know what they are doing and installing MAGA-crazed loyalists who only swear fealty to the Dear Leader? If the R.N.C. does focus exclusively on the Trump campaign, that means that they won't be paying any attention to any of the down-ballot races for House, Senate, governor, or statehouse. Several state-level Republican Party organizations are already melting down (see: Michigan, for one), so this could be the final nail in their coffin, at least for this election cycle. As one former Republican House member colorfully put it: "There are crazy people" running the R.N.C. right now, "and it's going to get worse." That's from a fellow Republican, mind you.
It all seems reminiscent of how George W. Bush's administration "rebuilt" Iraq. For those who might have forgotten, this effort was conducted as a neoconservative "nation-building" exercise and was staffed by people who had zero experience setting up a functioning society and government, but did have impeccable credentials as neocons. They were ideologically pure, in other words, even if they didn't know beans about what they were supposed to do. The result was an unmitigated disaster, as we all know.
To Trump, loyalty to Trump is all that really matters. And he learned his lesson from his first term in office -- he will not abide any more "adults in the room" (who have a propensity to tell him he can't do exactly what he wants to do). Instead he will surround himself with people who will carry out any order he gives (no matter how insane or unworkable).
Again: what could possibly go wrong?
Maybe the R.N.C. and the Trump campaign will implode from within, collapsing into a pile of dazed unqualified sycophants wondering what happened to their dreams. It's certainly looking like a distinct possibility, at this point.
Joe Biden, meanwhile, has hit the ground running after his memorable "State Of The Union" speech last week. Biden's been making campaign appearances, giving speeches on policy, and hitting the airwaves with his first campaign ad. The White House also released its budget proposal this week, which was more of a campaign document outlining what Biden would like to do in a second term, especially if the voters send him some more Democrats to Congress.
Trump and Biden both showed the voters what kind of person they truly are this week, as Trump mocked Biden for stuttering during his State Of The Union speech (which is a lie, Biden didn't actually stutter during it), in true schoolyard-bully fashion. Stutterers from across the country pushed back on Trump's cruelty, but Biden showed how to counter such things by meeting with a 9-year-old boy who had written to him about his own stutter. Biden even took the time to offer the kid a few tips on what has worked for him. The entire thing was endearing and showed Biden's humanity at its best. That is the clear contrast between America's presidential choice: cruelty and bullying versus empathy and support.
Need more proof? Yet another close Trump aide (former White House Chief of Staff John Kelly) said that he had heard Donald Trump praise Adolf Hitler. No real surprise, since we've heard similar stories from others before, but the staggering ignorance and dictator-love of Donald Trump needs to be pointed out as often as possible.
Trump casually tossed out the idea of cutting Social Security and Medicare this week, but then hastily tried to walk it back. The Biden campaign is not going to let him get away with it, however, as they're already using it as a major focus in Biden speeches.
In Trump legal woes news, there has been a flurry of activity of late. First up was Trump once again defaming E. Jean Carroll with the same lies he's been telling about her all along. Her attorneys pointedly mentioned that they could very well file another defamation lawsuit against Trump and that they were carefully monitoring his statements, which seemed to shut him up (for now, at any rate, until his next eruption of legally-liable statements).
One of the witnesses in the Trump national security documents case came forward of his own volition this week and told how he had personally loaded "10 or 15" boxes containing papers into Trump's plane right before Trump left for New Jersey, which means Trump still might have classified documents in his possession. Maybe it's time for another F.B.I. search? One that happens at all of Trump's residences, this time? Just an idea....
Trump is, if nothing else, the master of delaying legal cases. He got one such delay this week, as the prosecutors in the porn-star hush-money case had to ask for a delay of up to 30 days since the Justice Department had apparently just dumped a bunch of documents (over 10,000 of them) and more might be forthcoming. Trump also appeared in a Florida court in his documents case as his lawyers argued both for dropping all the charges or delaying the case until after the election, but the judge has yet to rule when the case will begin (she did shoot down several of his arguments for dropping the charges, however).
And Trump did score a partial win this week, at least for now. The judge in the Georgia election-interference case allowed Fani Willis to stay on the case (but forced her to fire the guy she had a relationship with), but he also threw out six charges, three of which were levelled at Trump. The charges were too vague, the judge ruled, but the prosecution will be able to refile them if they go back and make them more specific.
Peter Navarro lost his bid to stay out of jail until all of his appeals are ruled on, although he has now made an emergency appeal to the Supreme Court. Assuming it fails (appeals of this type almost never succeed), Navarro will be trading in his fancy suit for a set of jail clothes on March 19th, so we all have that to look forward to!
The special counsel who investigated Joe Biden's retention of classified documents appeared before a House committee this week so everyone could perform some partisan politics for the cameras. Right before this happened, the transcripts of Biden's actual interview with the special counsel were released, and they showed that rather than the picture of senility the special counsel painted in his report, Biden was cogent and in one instance the special counsel actually praised Biden for his "photographic understanding and recall." This merely proves what everyone already suspected, that the over-the-top language in the report was nothing more than a partisan smear job. We lost count of how many times the special counsel himself responded to a question: "I don't remember," which just drove the point home even more.
What else? Congress is facing yet another budget/government shutdown deadline next Friday, but didn't noticeably make any sort of progress at all on the problem this week. So look for yet another frenzy of last-minute dealmaking all next week, we suppose.
And finally, an amusing note to end on. Robert F. Kennedy Junior apparently has decided that he needs to name an extra-macho running mate to balance his presidential ticket out, and is promising to let us all in on who he's chosen in the next few weeks. The amusing part was hearing the names of the two finalists for this position: Jesse Ventura and Aaron Rodgers. Hoo boy. That'll certainly liven things up for his campaign, we suppose.
This week, Vice President Kamala Harris became the first sitting vice president (or president) to visit an abortion clinic. Harris toured a Planned Parenthood clinic in St. Paul, Minnesota, in an effort to remind voters of the importance of the issue to her and Joe Biden in the election.
Her historic visit was a continuation of Harris being at the forefront of the abortion issue ever since the Supreme Court threw out Roe v. Wade. And the issue continues to resonate with voters, creating a big advantage for Democrats. Here is Harris, leaning in to the issue:
After the tour, Harris told reporters she had met with about "two dozen health-care workers who... really care about their patients." She said she saw "people who have dedicated their lives to the profession of providing health care in a safe place that gives people dignity. And I think we should all want that for each other."
Harris also said that, in the wake of the decision to overturn Roe, there has been a "health-care crisis" that included the shutdown of clinics across the country that provide reproductive health care, including abortions.
The situation, she said, has left "no options within a reasonable geographic area for so many women who need this essential care" at these clinics, which provide an array of reproductive services beyond abortions, such as cancer screenings and access to birth control.
. . .
Harris said Thursday that elections are "what has led to ensuring that these fundamental rights are intact" in states such as Minnesota.
We had already chosen Harris for this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week when we saw this late-breaking story today -- which we present just as "icing on the cake," as it were:
Vice President Kamala Harris called the current classification of marijuana under federal law "absurd" during a White House event on Friday, and said she is looking forward to seeing what the Drug Enforcement Administration decides about moving it to a different category.
"I'm sure DEA is working as quickly as possible and will continue to do so, and we look forward to the product of their work," Harris said at the beginning of a roundtable discussion on cannabis policy with Gov. Andy Beshear (D-Ky.), a handful of people who received pardons from President Joe Biden for low level cannabis offenses and rapper Fat Joe.
Can't argue with that -- federal cannabis law is absurd. We've been making the exact same case for years, in fact. But it is good to hear the vice president speak so plainly on the issue, since that is the clearest statement from the highest-ranking government official we have ever heard. So for not just one but two historic events this week, Vice President Kamala Harris is our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week.
[Congratulate Vice President Kamala Harris via the White House contact page, to let her know you appreciate her efforts.]
We're reaching back into the past for this one, as it has been a while indeed since we gave a Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week to Joe Lieberman.
But Lieberman fully deserves it, for being an integral part of the "No Labels" third party movement. This week the group announced it was going forward with its plans to name a presidential candidate, and they put together a small group to come up with someone, as well as a bigger group that would rubber-stamp the decision. But here's the part that qualifies Joe for yet another MDDOTW award:
[Joe] Lieberman said in an interview on Wednesday that the group would have the ability to stop a candidacy from moving forward after a few months if it failed to gain traction and appeared to be a possible spoiler that could help elect former president Donald Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee.
"We want to give the American people the third choice -- bipartisan, moderate -- that they say they want," Lieberman said. "But if for some reason after two or three months, they say they don't want it, we have got to be realistic and say, 'This is not the year.'"
This is meant to calm Democratic worries that they're really just working to elect Trump, of course. But it's utter nonsense. The group Third Way points out how it would be almost impossible for No Labels to "pull the plug" on a candidacy once it gets rolling (emphasis in original):
At a certain point, No Labels would be compelled to submit paperwork if they intend to go forward. Their CEO has suggested that even after that submission, they would still have the ability to pull the plug as late as August. But they would not, at least not where it matters most.
The crucial battleground states of Wisconsin and Michigan do not accept withdrawals after a minor party presidential candidate is nominated and paperwork is submitted. Nevada and New Hampshire do not accept withdrawals from the ballot after the filing deadline. And in other battleground states where this will matter most, withdrawal must happen almost immediately.
Let's play this one out: No Labels names a candidate in March but determines "the American people aren't coming out in droves" for their ticket in August or that their (mythical) "pathway to victory" has eroded. So, they decide to withdraw in states in which they've already submitted their candidates' names. But it would be too late, because as soon as No Labels submits nomination paperwork, they quickly lose the ability to withdraw. Regardless of the wishes of the No Labels Party or their nominee, those names would appear on the ballot in November. The off-ramps would be closed. Any claim that No Labels makes about having control of the ticket in this scenario is wildly fantastical.
No Labels played it cute by not registering as a political party but instead just some sort of advocacy group that happened to be working hard to get a presidential line on as many states' ballots as possible. By doing so, they avoided having to reveal who was funding the group. But now that they are going to launch a candidate, it means that once launched, the candidate will be in charge of the campaign, as a completely separate entity than No Labels itself. Meaning No Labels will have no control over anything after that point is reached.
For his attempt at fooling the public (or maybe he's just pulling the wool over his own eyes, we're not really sure), Joe Lieberman is easily the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week this week.
[Contact Joe Lieberman via the No Labels contact page, to let him know what you think of his actions.]
Volume 743 (3/15/24)
We've got a varied bunch of talking points this week with no central theme (and more than one grim overtone). So let's just dive right in, shall we?
End the both-sides-ism!
Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post wrote a great takedown of not just the mainstream media but all forms of "both-sides-ism" this week. Her launching point was the upcoming departure of Senator Kyrsten Sinema, but she really could have led into it with just about anything these days. So we present this (especially the second paragraph) as a handy retort for Democrats whenever they face inane questions about "extremism on both sides" (emphasis in original).
Oh, sure, it's fashionable, as departing Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) did, to blame both political parties. "Our democracy was weakened by government dysfunction and the constant pull to the extremes by both political parties.... The only political victories that matter these days are symbolic, attacking your opponents on cable news or social media. 'Compromise' is a dirty word. We've arrived at that crossroad, and we chose anger and division." Really?! Who is "we"?
The bipartisan border compromise -- her bipartisan bill -- was sunk by Republicans. Republicans in the House overwhelmingly opposed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, commonly known as the "Bipartisan" Infrastructure Bill (which President Biden modified to get bipartisan support); almost every Republican voted against the CHIPS Act, they all voted against the Inflation Reduction Act, and some even voted against the PACT Act, which would have helped veterans. House Republicans have launched phony, baseless impeachment hearings. Senate Republicans filibustered reenactment of a key part of the Voting Rights Act, blocked a bipartisan Jan. 6, 2021, commission and overwhelmingly refused to convict four-times-indicted former president Donald Trump. The assertion that hyper-partisanship, chaos and nihilism (e.g., threatening to shut down the government, egging on a default and refusing to even vote on Ukraine aide [sic]) is equally divided amounts to an outright fabrication -- or utter cluelessness.
License to kill? Really?
Speaking of extremism....
"Republicans are falling all over themselves trying to square what appears to be an unsquarable circle on in-vitro fertilization. They desperately want to appear supportive of I.V.F. -- because they know how popular the concept is to the vast majority of the American people -- but at the same time their previous moral-high-road stance demands they outlaw I.V.F. as soon as possible. The extreme anti-abortion organizations are already calling pro-I.V.F. laws -- like the one they had to hastily pass in Alabama -- giving doctors a 'license to kill,' and accused the lawmakers of approving 'thousands of dead human beings.' If life truly does begin at conception, then embryos can never be discarded or destroyed, period. That is extremism, folks, and yet that is exactly what some Republicans want to do at a nationwide level. Vote Democratic to show your support for sane I.V.F. laws instead of religious extremism."
Enjoying the purge
Everyone got their popcorn? Are we all ready for the next clownshow?
"I see that Donald Trump's daughter-in-law has been installed to run things after his purge of the Republican National Committee, and that the first order of business was to sweep out all the people with any experience running a national party organization. I would heartily applaud this purge, since Trump obviously needs to be surrounded by people who are so loyal to him they will never tell him 'No.' In fact, I'd encourage Lara Trump to go even further and fire everyone left at the R.N.C. and replace them with people Trump already knows well -- like the staff at Mar-a-Lago. All the bartenders and waitresses and pool cleaners are (one assumes) fully loyal to Trump and they should be given the chance to run the Republican Party because what could possibly go wrong with that scheme?"
Republicans in disarray
This one's just embarrassing (so point it out!).
"I see that Speaker of the House Mike Johnson held his annual retreat for all his fellow Republicans last week. What a fiasco! Not even half of his members showed up. There were supposed to be panels held on the second day to discuss policy and how to expand their majority, but they had to be cancelled due to lack of interest. Sounds about right -- that's par for the Republican course, these days, folks."
How many more does Trump still have?
After hearing testimony this week from the special counsel who investigated Joe Biden's retention of classified documents, it's good to remind everyone of the differences between what he did and what Trump did.
"When the question of having classified documents arose, Joe Biden immediately informed the authorities and consented to a search of every possible place there could be more classified documents. But that only raises the question -- does Donald Trump still have classified documents he's not supposed to? The F.B.I. searched only one of Trump's residences, in Florida, and when they found a locked closet they didn't even bother demanding it be unlocked or forcing the lock themselves. They just believed 'oh, there's nothing in there.' Even if there wasn't, Trump wasn't in Florida at the time, he was at his other golf club up in New Jersey. This week one of the witnesses in the classified documents case came forward on his own and told an interviewer that he had personally helped load '10 or 15' boxes full of documents onto Trump's plane, right before he flew off to New Jersey. So how many boxes of documents were in New Jersey while the F.B.I. was searching in Florida? Nobody knows. Why didn't the F.B.I. also get a search warrant for Trump's second residence? I have no idea. But it seems very likely that they missed some stuff and now I just wonder how many more classified documents does Trump still have?"
"So let me get this straight..."
This one is a talking point for President Joe Biden to use. Biden has, so far, not talked much about Donald Trump's legal problems, because doing so would be politically risky. Biden has decided to stay mostly mum on the issue, which is probably a good thing, but there's one part of it in particular that he could actually use out on the campaign trail. It comes from the appeal Trump is making to the Supreme Court on the subject of presidential immunity, and Biden could avoid talking about the underlying case and instead focus on what Trump's lawyers actually argued in court instead:
"Folks... do you think I should be able to order Seal Team Six to assassinate Donald Trump? And should I be able to escape all legal consequences for doing so by resigning just before a Senate impeachment trial begins? Because that is exactly what Donald Trump is arguing in court that I should be able to do right now. It makes no sense. It is abhorrent to American democracy and the rule of law, but that's exactly what Trump's legal team argued. Now, don't worry folks, I'm not going to do that -- because I am not insane -- but that's what Trump thinks I should be able to do, which is an absolutely frightening thought."
I demand satisfaction!
Hoo boy. Just when you thought politics couldn't get any stupider....
"A Republican in the Missouri statehouse has introduced a proposal to improve their state's politics by letting politicians challenge each other to a duel. No, really! Here's the actual text of the proposal:"
If a senator's honor is impugned by another senator to the point that it is beyond repair and in order for the offended senator to gain satisfaction, such senator may rectify the perceived insult to the senator's honor by challenging the offending senator to a duel.... The duel shall take place in the well of the senate at the hour of high noon on the date agreed to by the parties to the duel.
"Got that? Not only are we going back to the 1800s, but as one historian pointed out, at least back then they had the sense to perform such idiocy outside. I think Democrats should wholly support this measure, with just one small edit. Make the law only applicable to Republicans. As long as they give us enough time to clear the building before they try to shoot each other, we're good with it. I'd also suggest they allow television cameras to cover such duels -- just think of the ratings!"
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Cross-posted at: Democratic Underground
So much for the NY Jets' 24-25 season. jeez, couldn't RFKJ pick on a team that wins occasionally?
For Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s purposes, his running mate doesn't have to have any currently operative athletic abilities. He just has to be macho as all hell. Everything I hear about Aaron Rodgers paints him as a repellent human being, but when it comes to being handsome and macho, he can't be beat. If I can split my ticket, I'll vote for Biden for president and Aaron Rodgers for vice-president. Let's have a real stud in the White House.
Thank you, Chris, for noting this astounding consequence of the Trump makeover:
'If the R.N.C. does focus exclusively on the Trump campaign, that means that they won't be paying any attention to any of the down-ballot races for House, Senate, governor, or statehouse.'
We can only hope that Democrats at the state and local level take FULL advantage of this.
We are suffering the consequences of the Democratic neglect of state legislatures, resulting in the gerrymandering after the 2010 and 2020 censuses.
Most Americans, if the pollsters can be believed (and they do all seem to be telling the same story), are not exactly thrilled with this rematch and would have preferred different choices. But we are where we are, so that's not going to happen for another four years.
Yeah? Well, I'm guessing that, four years from now, most Americans will be harking back to 2024 and thinking about how lucky they were to have had the choice they had then.
I mean, seriously, who is on the horizon for both parties in terms of presidential material in the year 2028 and beyond? They can't even find a third party/no labels candidate worth his or her own salt for THIS election cycle. ;)
When you think about what the future holds for politics - and music, for that matter and, frankly, more importantly - it's hard not to become thoroughly depressed. Or, maybe I'm just getting too old. :(
It all seems reminiscent of how George W. Bush's administration "rebuilt" Iraq. For those who might have forgotten, this effort was conducted as a neoconservative "nation-building" exercise and was staffed by people who had zero experience setting up a functioning society and government, but did have impeccable credentials as neocons. They were ideologically pure, in other words, even if they didn't know beans about what they were supposed to do. The result was an unmitigated disaster, as we all
PRECISELY!!!
And, let's not also forget that these are the same people who were pushing NATO membership for Ukraine during the last thirty plus years and for the war in Ukraine and for continuing the push for both today - all, I might add, at the clear expense of Ukraine and its people. The Neocons have made it easy for Putin to do exactly what he is doing, in other words.
Joe Biden, meanwhile, has hit the ground running after his memorable "State Of The Union" speech last week.
But, he didn't get any sort of bounce from this memorable SOTU speech. In fact, the opposite has happened with Trump now leading in the latest polls in the battleground states!
andygaus,
If I can split my ticket, I'll vote for Biden for president and Aaron Rodgers for vice-president. Let's have a real stud in the White House.
Ha! I've heard Biden called a lot of things but I do believe 'stud' is a first! Heh.
Oh ... you weren't talking about Aaron Rogers, were you? Good God.
The judge in the Georgia election-interference case allowed Fani Willis to stay on the case (but forced her to fire the guy she had a relationship with)...
Which, I'm guessing, is something she was only too happy to carry out! :)
[5]
And, let's not also forget that these are the same people who were pushing NATO membership for Ukraine during the last thirty plus years and for the war in Ukraine and for continuing the push for both today - all, I might add, at the clear expense of Ukraine and its people. The Neocons have made it easy for Putin to do exactly what he is doing, in other words.
Wrong wrong wrong — stop apologizing for Putin, goddammit! Ukrainians voted overwhelmingly for independence in 1991 — in the lowest Oblast (think Province) it was still 54%. And no one made Ukrainians put their aspiration into joining NATO…
In their CONSTITUTION!
Make the case for “telling Putin that a NATO Ukraine will never happen isn’t a ‘help yourself — do whatever the hell you want!’” or puh-lease stop parroting Putin’s Russia.
It really pisses me off that you keep posting Russian propaganda without engaging with Weigantia to defend yourself.
Fucking knock it off if you won’t engage!
“In other words, please make your case or else kindly shut the fuck up!” said the second generation Ukrainian-American who was named after Taras Shevchenko the National hero of Ukraine who is on both their $1 and $5 bills. *smh*
And no one made Ukrainians put their aspiration into joining NATO…
Wrong, wrong and wrong again.
Caddy,
You are taking things too personally, number one; and, number two, stop telling me to shut up just because you can't handle the truth.
Make the case for “telling Putin that a NATO Ukraine will never happen isn’t a ‘help yourself — do whatever the hell you want!’” or puh-lease stop parroting Putin’s Russia. It really pisses me off that you keep posting Russian propaganda without engaging with Weigantia to defend yourself.
You also need to stop getting your shirt all twisted up in a knot over something I have never said.
Help me out, Caddy, because I'm a little confused. How would you like me to, ah, engage? By 'engage do you mean that I should change my opinions to make my comments more palatable to you?
"engage" means either acknowledge or refute, rather than ignore and repeat your previous argument, as if the other person hadn't said anything relevant at all. the reason others may seem repetitive in their responses to you is that you repeat the same arguments in a limited context that doesn't make sense to anyone but you, and somehow expect others to reach the same conclusions with different evidence that you haven't addressed.
if you don't:
1. address other people's evidence directly
2. explain why you think it is either untrue, irrelevant, or somehow fits within your paradigm, and
3. change your paradigm to include evidence you can't refute or explain away,
then it seems like you aren't being honest with us or with yourself.
example: the argument that we'll never know what would have happened had NATO not expanded, and therefore it's biden's responsibility for failing to account for Russian sensitivity, is a logical fallacy with a name: appeal to ignorance (argumentum ad ignorantium). it is a fallacy because it improperly shifts the burden of proof from the person making the argument to the person charged with refuting it.
(panda #9 for those playing the home version)
having read and processed this, what argument is used next time? the exact same one, with no acknowledgement that it's fallacious, no explanation of how this time it's not, no additional evidence to support the actual claim, and no evidence of any kind to refute the counter-assertion.
even on a topic that's not particularly close to home for me, it's quite frustrating. shucks, I really should do what I was asked and stop reading.
JL
Yes, you really should because you just wasted a lot of your time and mine.
Joshua,
the argument that we'll never know what would have happened had NATO not expanded, and therefore it's biden's responsibility for failing to account for Russian sensitivity
That, by the way, is a silly and disjointed argument that I have never made.
It sounds like things are going well for Ukraine. Is this what you want to hear?
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-defense-lines-stem-russian-advance/32858322.html
And, here is a dose of reality.
This is what I've been focused on of late ...
The Diplomatic Path to a Secure Ukraine
...well, that and the fact that US/NATO have failed miserably in their always half-hearted effort to support Ukraine in a war they helped get Ukraine into. From the get-go, after all the egging on by the West, there has always been just enough military support to keep Ukraine from losing this war. If that isn't despicable behavior, then I don't know what is.
This is absolutely outrageous and I can't understand how the lot of you here who claim to support Ukraine aren't getting your collective shirt tied up in knots over this!
How much longer must Ukraine have to suffer in the great fight for democracy and security of Europe!
I know, Ukraine will prevail after the next great counteroffensive. Oh, wait ...
Or, the F-16s are coming and that will be the game changer.
Look, Russia and Putin aren't going away anytime soon. Better to face that dilemma than to ignore it, for the sake of Ukraine. The West has failed to stop Putin both with their half-hearted efforts on the battlefield and with their tough sanctions everywhere else.
Folks, you simply have to stop listening to the Neocons and stand up for the security and integrity of Ukraine, for once in your lives.
The Neville Chamberlain approach to Russia cannot be taken seriously.
The only way Ukraine loses is if we decide to have them lose, as we seem to be doing. Our weapons transfers to Ukraine have only been something like 10% of our overall weapons exports during the war.
There is no way that just giving Russia half of Ukraine will be anything but an invitation to take the other half.
Russia delenda est
Dan,
They wouldn't be getting half of Ukraine ... just what they had before this war and perhaps a wee bit more. What happens next in Ukraine is anyone's guess but there are ways to prevent such an invitation as the one you describe.
And, it looks pretty much like US/NATO have already decided to let the status quo ante in Ukraine, more or less, stand but, we'll see...
I'm guessing that Ukraine has become far more clear-eyed about what its friends and allies are willing to do - for Ukraine or for the security of Europe, for that matter.
The comparison of what is happening in Ukraine and what will happen to end this war, at long last, to a Neville Chamberlain approach to Russia is non-serious.
And, when it comes to artillery shells, the Russians are out-producing not only the US but all NATO countries combined!
Of course, what Ukraine is really lacking is in manpower. Which is why a diplomatic solution is not too far off, I surmise.
the QI article was very thorough, but when you're a hammer everything looks like a nail. they really didn't account for what ukranians actually want. As US support gets held up by trump/russia loyalists, Ukranians are switching to a guerrilla warfare model. in spite of everything, they want their liberty more than they want to be safe or gain a favorable settlement.
like israel, they will fight with or without our support, and win or lose, will not give in.
i guess the whole, "give me liberty or give me death" thing never really registered in canada.
Most Americans, if the pollsters can be believed (and they do all seem to be telling the same story), are not exactly thrilled with this rematch and would have preferred different choices.
"Most Americans" when polled will also tell you that "America is headed in the wrong direction," that they are "pro-life," and that the current "Congress" should be "voted out." What these type poll questions have in common is how the answers are generally so predictable and therefore (almost) practically useless to pollsters trying to discern the actual political "winds" here in the 21st century.
* Polling shows "most Americans" believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, which presumably/allegedly infers negativity on the incumbent president, but those of us who believe Donald Trump is largely the reason for that don't exactly fit neatly in that old narrative.
* Polling shows "most Americans" consider themselves "pro-life" so the GOP ignorantly believes they just haven't messaged it properly rather than drilling down to discover that "most Americans" also believe their government should not be in the business of forcing birth on rape victims or any other American or making health care decisions for anyone, which obviously includes making reproductive health care decisions.
* Polling shows "most Americans" think "Congress" should be voted out, but drill down to find that most actually like their representatives and think yours should be voted out. Not rocket science.
As for the polling regarding "most Americans" not being "exactly thrilled" with this rematch, drill down on that. In the polls that matter, most Democrats voted overwhelmingly for the reelection of the incumbent president, and Republicans voted for the criminal defendant, although not exactly by overwhelming margins in quite a large number of states... so it's a useless question to ask Americans whether they like the rematch. They each obviously don't like the other Party's candidate, and if Independent voters actually favored Trump, he obviously wouldn't be running in this election because of term limits.
This is somewhat amusing to watch, of course. What could possibly go wrong with firing all the people who know what they are doing and installing MAGA-crazed loyalists who only swear fealty to the Dear Leader?
Eight months before a presidential election. :)
Joshua,
i guess the whole, "give me liberty or give me death" thing never really registered in canada.
Heh.
Actually, that's not very funny, especially if you happen to be a family in Ukraine just trying to get by.
How long should Ukrainians have to suffer until this war ends the way it is eventually going to end - with a settlement?
As I have said, Ukraine has already won this war very early on by impressively pushing Russians back from taking Kyiv and the greater part of Ukraine. What is so wrong with a diplomatic settlement that ends the war with Ukraine in control of what it essentially had before the war began, starts the reconstruction process and allows Ukrainians to get back to making their country strong, secure and, ah, democratic and ready to fight - diplomatically speaking - another day?
Unless you think Ukraine can win this war with Russia - with or without NATO - and regain all of its rightful territory by force of arms (in which case you may be dreaming in technicolour) and unless you presume to know what Ukrainians writ large actually want, then you should be supporting a diplomatic solution to this mess before Ukraine loses any more territorial control.
End the both-sides-ism
I call the both sides bullshit the BSBS. :)
(panda #9 for those playing the home version)
The callword is (still) panda.
https://www.boredpanda.com/bad-argument-false-fallacies-dummies/
nypoet22
26
i guess the whole, "give me liberty or give me death" thing never really registered in canada.
You are absolutely 100% correct. In fact, Canada didn't adopt its own constitution and gain full sovereignty until 1982. Seriously. Canada did not become a completely independent country until 1982... not 1782... not 1882... not a typo... 19 effing 82.
AND
As we "speak," Canada is still today part of the British Commonwealth, and Charles III is King of Canada.
https://www.gg.ca/en/crown/sovereign-and-royal-family
So, to recap: Canada/Britain/Neville Chamberlain are synonymous with appeasement, and today's prattling never-ending right-wingnut bullshit dezinformatsiya narrative coming directly from Moscow and Putin (and in our case, regurgitated from Canada) that Vladimir's obvious imperial ambitions are somehow legitimate grievances is proof beyond all doubt that some fools never learn. Appeasement only encourages further Russian aggression. Those who will not, cannot or refuse to acknowledge the lessons of history are just dumber than a bag of hammers. :)
Elizabeth Miller
29
How long should Ukrainians have to suffer until this war ends the way it is eventually going to end - with a settlement?
It's going to end in a settlement (like all modern wars end) so why not end it now? We're all going to die eventually so why fight the SARS-CoV-2 virus? That is not meant to be an equivalency comparison... just meant to illustrate how dumb your question sounds.
As I have said, Ukraine has already won this war very early on by impressively pushing Russians back from taking Kyiv and the greater part of Ukraine.
Elizabeth Miller declares victory. Big whoop.
What is so wrong with a diplomatic settlement that ends the war with Ukraine in control of what it essentially had before the war began...
Nothing... as long as it's on Ukraine's terms and at a time of Ukraine's choosing.
... starts the reconstruction process and allows Ukrainians to get back to making their country strong, secure and, ah, democratic and ready to fight - diplomatically speaking - another day?
Today is already another day, and tomorrow will also already be another day, and as long as Ukraine is ready to continue to fight right now for its democracy and its survival as a sovereign nation against Russian aggression, then it's their call and so be it.
Your prattling spewing of the right-wingnut Kremlin propaganda that Ukraine is some kind of "Deep State" project of America is again duly noted. You should seriously consider taking MtnCaddy's and JL's very good advice... or keep regurgitating Putin's disinformation like a gullible rube.
Here, let me help you. You fell hard for the Russian propaganda and apparently cannot stop yourself from regurgitating the dezinformatsiya coming directly from Moscow as if spewing it ad nauseam is going to somehow change somebody's mind, and I'll give you two very good reasons why you're wasting your time:
(1) Repeating disinformation propaganda over and over only works on the gullible/uninformed... typically your right-wingnut conspiracy theorist or similar type.
(2) We're informed and not gullible.
@kick,
i think part of the trouble with Putin's mythological narrative is its internal consistency. If one believes that NATO expansion caused the invasion, it naturally follows that a negotiated NATO disengagement will prevent the invasion from continuing any further.
i have some personal experience with crazy people who believe a mythological but internally consistent narrative. it's very hard to counteract because there's an explanation for everything, even though it's false.
here's a reasonably good explanation of how that applies.
JL
Joshua,
If one believes that NATO expansion caused the invasion, it naturally follows that a negotiated NATO disengagement will prevent the invasion from continuing any further.
Is this supposed to make sense?
Kick,
Are you actually following what is happening in Ukraine?
Kick,
Your prattling spewing of the right-wingnut Kremlin propaganda that Ukraine is some kind of "Deep State" project of America is again duly noted.
You are free to duly note whatever you wish. But, please stop putting words in my mouth that I have never said, attributing notions to me that I have never put forth or propaganda that I have never parroted.
I have had just about enough of your special brand of nonsense but continue to hope for better from you. Call me a cockeyed optimist ... or a sucker for punishment. :)
Are you daring kick to quote you?
I wrote to Elizabeth,
Wrong wrong wrong — stop apologizing for Putin, goddammit! Ukrainians voted overwhelmingly for independence in 1991 — in the lowest Oblast (think Province) it was still 54%. And no one made Ukrainians put their aspiration into joining NATO…
In their CONSTITUTION!
Make the case for “telling Putin that a NATO Ukraine will never happen isn’t a ‘help yourself — do whatever the hell you want!’” or puh-lease stop parroting Putin’s Russia.
It really pisses me off that you keep posting Russian propaganda without engaging with Weigantia to defend yourself.
Fucking knock it off if you won’t engage!
“Engage” means answer the boldified question above.
Caddy,
First off, you need to seriously chill out. You must be suffering from a lack of classic Canadian rock, or something. :)
So, you would like me to "Make the case for “telling Putin that a NATO Ukraine will never happen isn’t a ‘help yourself — do whatever the hell you want!’” or puh-lease stop parroting Putin’s Russia."
Should I make that case in bold print? Heh.
Well, I think Putin has found out the hard way that he chose very unwisely in starting this war and that he most decidedly cannot do whatever the hell he wants in Ukraine - not a NATO member - without facing the wrath of, ah, NATO.
How am I doing so far?
Joshua,
Are you daring kick to quote you?
Do you think Kick needs encouragement in that department? :)
rock and roll can save the world? The chicks are great? I sound like a dick!
You are a dick.
I never said that.
Maybe we just don't see ourselves the way we really are.
–almost famous
I love that movie!
[40]
Um, to be completely candid I may very well be suffering from lack of “Sunday Night Canadian Rock n Roll — and Other Nationalities Dance Party”.
And obviously I am hugely emotionally involved with the land of my ancestors, Ukraine. It’s my unknown (got cut off by the Bolshevik Revolution so my family tree only goes back as far as my grandparents landing at Ellis Island) DNA that’s been fighting and dying to keep Putin from establishing the USSR to create “strategic depth”.
This is the LAST generation of Rooskie military aged young men that’s BIG ENOUGH to recreate said “strategic depth”.
Russia has been invaded some 50 times starting with Ghengis Khan in 1250. Russia cannot defend its current borders it needs to expand to Warsaw and the Bessarabian Gap, well into NATO ally Romania. Just like in the Caucasus/Georgia 2008 and Chechnya and Kazakstan and others. It’s what Russians do…because their geography makes them do so. Putin was always going to try to finish off Ukraine (since 2014, ahem) so NATO was always an excuse.
But I’d still like your response to my boldified** query, above. Gaining understanding will be critical to our discourse on this matter.
So again, Miss Vancouver, please answer to my above boldified question. I want you to prove me wrong! Just like nypoet22 led me to switch from “Palestinian Sympathetic” to “Full on Fuck the Palestinians they want to destroy Israel so at this point a two-state solution would be INSANE.”
Hey Poet! I’d like to chat about your opinion as to where we go from this point that after 75 years the Palestinians have proven to be mortal enemies of Judaism.
**I’m kinda weird in that I love how language evolves and that includes turning nouns into verbs (e.g. “googling” or “zelling” or, in this case, “boldifying”.
Oh, and poet, I’m vastly more cognizant of the rampant anti-Israeli bias in the news. I mean, Al-Assad has killed 500,000 Syrians yet 30,000 in Gaza is somehow worse? Balkans? Rawanda? C’mon.
Poet your “they stole the Jew’s diamond it was just an excuse” really got my attention. I am not down with the three Abrahamic religions Judaism/Christianity/Islam (I read the Quran and a Sunni Hadith) but the only religious ceremony in which this Catholic/Athiest/temporary Morman has EVER “felt the presence of God” was a Bat Mitzvah and a two day observance of Yom Kippur, so go figure.
And “Break Fast” after 24 hours of fasting is exquisit, no?
Caddy,
So again, Miss Vancouver, please answer to my above boldified question. I want you to prove me wrong!
Did you not read my answer? Okay, okay ... here it is again but this time I'll boldify it. Ahem.
Well, I think Putin has found out the hard way that he chose very unwisely in starting this war and that Ukraine and its allies have clearly demonstrated that he most decidedly cannot do whatever the hell he wants in Ukraine - not a NATO member - without facing the wrath of, ah, NATO.
And, there you have it. Case made.
But, I hope you see that I don't really have to make the case for something that is already a fact on the ground! I mean, even Putin must know that he CANNOT do whatever the hell he wants in non-NATO member Ukraine! The West, that is to say US/NATO and their support for Ukraine, while not enough, have accomplished at least that much. :)
By the way, do you think Biden has a plan for getting more aid to Ukraine and fast so that it is better positioned for the coming negotiated settlement because I sure don't see one. Biden used to be all about these sorts of plans. Not anymore, apparently. :(
Oh, and ...Miss Vancouver ... I REALLY love the sound of that!
@caddy,
are you talking about the quote from spinning silver?
nypoet22
34
Great article... dead on accurate:
Exactly right. Why aren't the uninformed/misinformed who are regurgitating ad nauseam the Russian disinformation also blaming the United States for "pushing NATO membership" expansion into Norway and Sweden? Also, why can't those spewing the conspiracy theorist type drivel on all manner of subjects resist the urge that compels them to reduce the "answer" to so many complex things into a single simple one? Maybe they're just gullible or too lazy... or both.
It couldn't possibly have anything at all to do with centuries of traditional Russian imperialist policy and in more recent history the decades of Soviet Union/Russian aggression against Ukraine, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Norway, Sweden, etc.... had to have been caused by those darn Americans. /sarcasm off
Good read. Thank you. :)
nypoet22
34
If one believes that NATO expansion caused the invasion, it naturally follows that a negotiated NATO disengagement will prevent the invasion from continuing any further.
I know, right? Also, if one had (seemingly) more than one brain cell, they'd already know that Putin's demands were actually posted by Russia online (I posted a link) and far exceeded "NATO disengagement."
Not rocket science, I know you know. :)
Elizabeth Miller
37
You are free to duly note whatever you wish.
Yes, I'm well aware of that and need never to be reminded, although you are free to waste your time doing so, obviously.
But, please stop putting words in my mouth that I have never said, attributing notions to me that I have never put forth or propaganda that I have never parroted.
As a person on this blog once told me:
As for your pathetic plea to stop "putting words" in your mouth, I did no such thing. Do you possibly believe that the scare quotes around the words "Deep State" are actually meant to somehow quote you? They're not. You should educate yourself regarding scare quotes and how they are used to denote a writer's skepticism, among many other things.
What I did there was actually paraphrase your oft repeated prattling "parroted" propaganda. I'm surprised I have to explain this to a longtime reader, but when I wish to quote a commenter at length, this is how it will generally occur:
Oh, look. That quote there is exactly indicative of what I was paraphrasing when I said: "Your prattling spewing of the right-wingnut Kremlin propaganda that Ukraine is some kind of "Deep State" project of America is again duly noted.
Why else do you think JL responded at [38] the way he did? There are obviously a plethora of other examples I could have chosen, but I chose one from the same commentary.
I have had just about enough of your special brand of nonsense but continue to hope for better from you.
Like my Daddy always used to say: "Wish in one hand and shit in the other; see which one gets full first."
Call me a cockeyed optimist ... or a sucker for punishment. :)
Okay, you're a sucker... also gullible. If you're too much of a kitty to handle the truth, it might be best for you to avert your eyes away from my posts. :)
Kick,
Don't tell me I have to explain, again, the historical and geopolitical differences between Ukraine, Finland and Sweden vis-a-vis their relationships with the USSR/Russia. Because, that's pretty basic stuff and I've already used up enough of Chris's blog space on those particular distinctions.
Of course, if the basic stuff can't be understood I shouldn't be surprised by the lack of understanding and wrong-headed assumptions I've been dealing with here since this war began.
Kick,
...it might be best for you to avert your eyes away from my posts.
If your posts didn't distort or wholly obliterate reality, then I would probably do so. But, alas, I'll keep reading them, if only to set the record straight.
"if everyone else is always the problem, maybe the problem isn't everyone else."
Is there a problem?
Joshua and Kick,
I challenge both of you to find a quote of me where I have parroted Russian propaganda - historical or current - or where I have written something about this war that isn't a reflection of what is actually happening in Ukraine.
That should keep the both of you busy for a little while. Heh.
"if everyone else is always the problem, maybe the problem isn't everyone else."
That is generally a true statement.
I think Israel's reaction to the horrific Hamas attacks of 10/7 have been, predictably and despicably, over the top.
What propaganda am I parroting?
Or, is that what's called spreading disinformation around here?
It's hard to know what kind of distorted reality passes for real life here in Weigantia. ;)
...and getting harder every day, I might add. :(
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/unrwa-says-israel-will-no-longer-approve-its-food-convoys-northern-gaza-2024-03-24/
Oh, and the propaganda that I was parroting up in comment #60 ... well, that was US propaganda out of the mouth of none other than president Biden, it pains me to say.
Despite all of the handwringing and, ah, tough talk from the Biden administration over what Israel is doing in Gaza, the US has now extended the suspension of funding for UNRWA for a year at a time when the agency is trying to prevent widespread famine. This coming after Israel has made accusations that some Hamas attackers on 7/10 are UNRWA employees.
While the US is UNRWA's biggest donor, it is heartening to see that Canada, Sweden and Australia have resumed their funding to this critical UN agency at a time when that support is most needed.
This is just one more reason why the US is losing credibility and support throughout the world, particularly across the Global South. So much for Biden's dream of a new world order. :(
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/2024-03-23/ty-article/.premium/u-s-officially-bars-unrwa-funding-through-march-2025/0000018e-6cfb-d477-abbf-effb6e770001
"What propaganda am I parroting?"
Only every terrorism apologist ever.
Quote me!
Joshua,
Must everyone in Gaza starve to death in order to decimate Hamas?
Regarding unrwa, there are 450 Hamas agents in the agency, that they know of. Who knows how many more have not been identified, and what else beside food and medicine might they be bringing in? For the innocent civilians there's no doubting how much it sucks that the organization can't be trusted to just save lives instead of also trying to kill Israelis.
"quote me?"
I have neither the time nor the inclination to pore over your posts and reexamine your fallacies for you.
"Must everyone in Gaza starve to death in order to decimate Hamas?"
That's Hamas' decision.
Shocking. Positively shocking.
Try not to make expansive statements then that you lack the inclination to back up.
I'll make whatever statements I feel are justified by the body of facts of which I'm aware. If someone else lacks the wherewithal to examine those same facts without tossing half of them down the memory hole, said person has no standing from which to moderate even their own opinions, much less mine.
Well, this said person has had enough for this evening. Gotta get back to the music. Have some fun, Joshua!
Elizabeth Miller
54
Don't tell me I have to explain, again, the historical and geopolitical differences between Ukraine, Finland and Sweden vis-a-vis their relationships with the USSR/Russia. Because, that's pretty basic stuff and I've already used up enough of Chris's blog space on those particular distinctions.
Okay, you don't have to explain "those particular distinctions" again since you never really explained them to begin with.
Of course, if the basic stuff can't be understood I shouldn't be surprised by the lack of understanding and wrong-headed assumptions I've been dealing with here since this war began.
Well, you quite obviously have little to no clue about a plethora of history, and that demonstrably goes a very long way in explaining your near-total lack of understanding.
nypoet22
56
"if everyone else is always the problem, maybe the problem isn't everyone else."
Heh.