Party apparatnik C all T

22 Comments

1. 

   Oui on July 27, 2016 at 4:18 am

   Posted earlier in Arthur Gilroy’s diary –  Fools to the left of us, clowns to the right. And here we are, stuck in the middle and nearly broke.

   Excellent AG … much appreciated.

   In the country of the blind, cyclops is king.

   A two party system leads to apparatniks as we always witness in dictatorships. In the US? Democracy my a$$ …

   Integrity is the opposite of apparatniks who weasel out of responsibility by just obeying orders.

2. 

   Oui on July 27, 2016 at 12:23 pm

   1992 Campaign: Presidential candidates less favorable than U.S. Congress or how 25 years in history has deteriorated democracy as we knew it. Political machinations, corruption and the evil virus of voter suppression. A New York Times article from April 1992:  

   THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: Poll; Clinton Dogged By Voter Doubt, Poll of U.S. Says

   With only one Democratic opponent remaining on the field, Gov. Bill Clinton has gained the support of a bare majority of Democrats nationwide and his campaign continues to confront a cloud of doubts and reservations, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll.

   In a month of fierce campaigning that knocked three of his opponents out of the race for the nomination, Mr. Clinton’s support jumped to 51 percent from 28 percent among Democratic primary voters, the national poll found. But half said they worried that “allegations about Bill Clinton’s character” could cost him the election this November.

   Republicans have worries of their own. President Bush’s approval rating remains stuck at 41 percent and fewer than one adult in five approves of his economic stewardship. Moreover, enthusiasm seems strained even among his Republican supporters, with only a third categorizing themselves as “strongly favorable” toward the President.

   …
   Sixty-seven percent of the Democratic primary voters said they would like to see someone else enter the race for the nomination, up from 52 percent who felt that way in late February. And when offered a trial heat that included H. Ross Perot, the Texas businessman who is considering entering the race, 44 percent of all registered voters chose Mr. Bush, 31 percent chose Mr. Clinton and 16 percent Mr. Perot. Mr. Perot drew slightly more support away from Mr. Clinton than from Mr. Bush.

   Mr. Clinton has clearly broken from the pack in the public’s mind since his sweep of Southern primaries on March 10, followed by his big victories in Michigan and Illinois that drove former Senator Paul E. Tsongas from the race. Mr. Clinton is now the choice of 51 percent of the Democratic primary voters, compared to 30 percent who preferred Mr. Brown.

   But even as favorable opinion about Mr. Clinton grew in his party, so did the unfavorable: 33 percent of the Democratic primary voters nationally said they viewed him positively, while 28 percent held negative views.

   Among all registered voters, only 24 percent said they viewed the Arkansas Governor favorably, while 41 percent said they held negative views, a worrisome ratio for any politician. The view of Mr. Bush is evenly divided: 42 percent favorable, 41 percent unfavorable.

   Mr. Clinton is considered to be more caring than Mr. Bush “about the needs and problems” of average people, the poll found. But Mr. Clinton has clearly suffered from the months of controversy over accusations that he manipulated his draft status, had extramarital affairs and was involved in a conflict of interest because of his wife’s partnership in a law firm that does business with the State of Arkansas.

   Only 26 percent of registered voters said they thought Mr. Clinton had more honesty and integrity than most people in public life, while 54 percent said he did not. These are the kind of attitudes that trouble many political professionals in the Democratic Party, although Mr. Clinton asserts it is the inevitable result of months of bad press, and can be turned around.

   When offered a head-to-head match with Mr. Bush, 49 percent of registered voters chose Mr. Bush and 40 percent chose Mr. Clinton, about the same result as last month.

   Mr. Bush got some unwelcome news in this poll: 43 percent of the registered voters said they trusted Congress to best deal with domestic problems, compared to 38 percent who most trusted the Bush Administration.

   THE 1992 CAMPAIGN: Transcript of second TV Debate Between Bush, Clinton and Perot

   ○ Bill Clinton’s campaign strategy: The Southern Lock

   • 

     Marie3 on July 27, 2016 at 7:35 pm

     Good idea to often touch back in real time.  The reality is some much different than the myth that WJC was young, dynamic, exciting and a once-in-a-generation phenomenal politician and orator.  May tick him off that the ‘generation’ marker hadn’t passed before a candidate came along and received higher marks for dynamism, generating excitement, extolled for his political and oratorical skills.  The two may be comparable on one of those criteria/measures.  No question on the other three.

3. 

   Oui on July 27, 2016 at 12:33 pm

   Secrets of Past Elections Revealed (1992)

   I’D LIKE TO THANK THE ACADEMY

   After Bill Clinton won the election, the third call he took–after George Bush’s concession and Dan Quayle’s congratulations–was from Whoopi Goldberg. Still, you can’t accuse Clinton for being entirely a slave to celebrity–when Ivana Trump dropped by the Arkansas Governor’s Mansion to pay an unannounced visit to the President Elect, she was politely turned away.

   THE ORIGINAL FLIP-FLOPPER?

   

   Despite their dissatisfaction with President George Bush, voters still had a little difficulty getting on board with the Clinton campaign. Perhaps unsurprisingly, some voters felt that they couldn’t trust him and Clinton’s campaign knew it. Clinton’s handlers had conducted a covert operation they called the “Manhattan Project” in which they asked a series of focus groups what they didn’t like about the candidate. Reactions from Allentown, PA, included: “Two-faced” .. “He just goes with the flow” .. and, “If you asked his favorite color, he’d say, ‘Plaid’.”

    « click for more info
   For years, President Bill Clinton was the best friend Donald Trump always hoped to have (Photo Tampa Bay Times)

   ○ Once an ally, Donald Trump now heaps scorn on Bill Clinton

4. 

   Oui on July 27, 2016 at 4:58 pm

   Trump is much closer to the European view about economic cooperation with Putin …

   Hillary Clinton campaign blames leaked DNC emails about Sanders on Russia | The Guardian |

   Trump’s campaign has indirectly fuelled speculation that the Kremlin would prefer the businessman to Clinton as the next president. His campaign stripped hawkish language from the Republican party’s official stance toward Russia, removing a proposal to give weapons to Ukraine in its continuing struggle with pro-Russia separatists. The head of Trump’s campaign, Paul Manafort, was formerly on the payroll of Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, who was ousted twice for his attempts to draw the country closer to the Kremlin.

   Trump has suggested he would like to reconcile with Putin. Last week he said that as president he would not honor treaties and defend Nato allies from Russia unless they had paid the US.

   At rallies, he has repeatedly asked: “Wouldn’t it be nice if we could get along with Russia?”

   On Sunday, the Trump campaign rejected Mook’s allegations, Manafort telling ABC’s This Week they were “absurd” and “pure obfuscation on the part of the Clinton campaign”.  

   ○ Atlantic Council / NATO’s Yvo Daalder: Make Russia a Pariah State (2013)

5. 

   Marie3 on July 27, 2016 at 11:01 pm

   Ann Garrison – Rwanda.  So many deaths and so many lies.  And Americans have limited information on the former and are oblivious of the latter.  “We” didn’t fail to get on the right side — if there was any right side — but we were always and remain on a murderous side.

6. 

   Marie3 on July 27, 2016 at 11:39 pm

   Angie Beeman nails it in Why Doesn’t Middle America Trust Hillary?  (Except for at the end when she talks about what HRC can do to fix this.  She can’t fix it because she’s never been there and she’s far too old to get from a listening tour or summaries/talking points from her “help.”

   One possible misinterpretation from the piece is that working class classmates envied those like HRC.  Sure, some did and made an effort to be like them and hang around with the in crowd.  Most didn’t have the spare time to be that engaged in clubs, etc.  They had responsibilities at home and scrabbled for some jobs for pocket change or more.  But mostly, they found the cliques dull and superficial.  If anyone flip through my jr/senior high school yearbooks they would see that I too was on the student council or school newspaper.  Never both in the same year because that required more spare time.  And never any clubs or extra-curricular sports or activities.  I had too many other things to do.  Including reading other than “girl” books.

   Those roots (if respected) never leave one. A college education, a white-collar business, and a little suit aren’t off-putting to those that work physically more demanding and gritter jobs.  They can see through that if one is remains authentically with them.  They even like and respect those that managed to get more education and work with their heads as long as they can see that you’re still one of them.

   • 

     Deathtongue on July 28, 2016 at 7:47 am

     She can’t fix it because she’s never been there and she’s far too old to get from a listening tour or summaries/talking points from her “help.”

     I don’t think it’s anything having to do with being too old. My auntie is super-conservative and did a 180′ on war and gay rights a few years ago.

     A simpler explanation is that the Clintons are enamored with money and status. They don’t want to change because reinventing themselves to become trustworthy would require them to give up on those things for who-knows how long. If the path to money and status somehow involved embracing full-throated leftism (not liberalism) they’d be doing that.

     http://web.archive.org/web/20160106180231/http://mattbruenig.com/2015/11/08/hillary-clinton-is-a-gar
     bage-rich-person

     In addition to being an enemy of the poor, it’s also important to note that Hillary Clinton is a remarkably terrible rich person. I wouldn’t say that necessarily disqualifies her (unlike her anti-poor stuff) from support, but it does certainly gin up some ill will.

     In addition to their obscene level of wealth and the corrupt way in which it was amassed, the Clintons have also abused loopholes to avoid paying tax on it. As Bloomberg reported last year, the Clintons have created residence trusts that they’ve shifted the ownership of their houses into in order to shield the value of those houses from the estate tax. The apparent goal of this tax avoidance is to ensure that more of their ill-gotten fortune will pass to their daughter Chelsea instead of to the taxman. Why Chelsea needs some extra tax-free inheritance when she is able to collect so much “earned income” riding off the Clinton brand — such as the $27,000 per minute MSNBC paid her to be a “special correspondent” — is beyond me.

     • 

       Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 10:38 am

       Lots of “old” people have recently done a 180 on gay rights (same sex marriage has been the law of MA for a dozen years now and nationally since 11/14), including HRC, and lengthy and seemingly meaningless wars does push a number of “old” people to shift from their long held position (was seen during the later stages of the Vietnam War).  So, I wasn’t saying that “old” people are incapable of reframing on an issue by issue basis, and what prompts that change varies by individual (Sen Portman did a 180 on same-sex marriage).

       I was speaking of a more fundamental and complete change in orientation.  That’s not common for people of any age and becomes increasingly uncommon as one ages.  And that’s the level of change that HRC would require.  Otherwise it’s just window dressing and doesn’t alter her deficits with a large number of people across the political spectrum.  

       I could be wrong but money, per se, is not what I view as the impediment for HRC to change.  It’s power and status.  If she and Bill could get another eight years in the WH and end up with no more than their generous pensions, they’d take the deal.  Their foundation is also about power and status.  That requires hobnobbing with the super-wealthy and they prefer to hang with those like themselves and also get something in return for their donations.  A “feel good” payoff is enough for some.  Irrelevant to others.

       From an objective standpoint, the Clintons as private citizens were financially set within a few years after leaving the WH (a reality for all ex-presidents from Nixon on depending on how much they choose to milk it and how long they live).  That was the “thank you Bill” money.  Since then it’s been investing in a second Clinton presidency money.  “That’s what they offered” according to HRC. Their home trusts are what all wealthy people do on the advice of their financial planners; so, not unique to them and therefore, not a detail that I criticize.  It’s the money given to them personally and through the foundation that I take issue with.  (It’s even difficult for me to be critical of them for preserving a rarefied existence for their daughter.  Who hasn’t really known anything else.  Less Amy Carter and more Caroline Kennedy.)

7. 

   Marie3 on July 27, 2016 at 11:53 pm

   “Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she’s always been good to me. I like her just fine,” Reid said. “I know she’s tried hard, but as some people probably know, I thought Bernie deserved somebody that was not critical to[ward] him. I knew ― everybody knew ― that this was not a fair deal. So I’m sorry she had to resign, but it was the right thing to do. She just should’ve done it sooner.”

   (At HuffPo — not bothering with link for this one.)

   Hey Harry, how about you come clean wrt to how you and your buddies stacked/rigged the casino caucuses.  You did it because you damn well knew that HRC was in trouble in NV.  So, nice try putting the entire onus on DWS.

8. 

   Oui on July 28, 2016 at 6:11 am

   On foreign policy, HRC will be a disaster. On domestic issues and crucial appointments through U.S. Congress such as the Supreme Court, any Republican in the White House will turn back the clock decades on Equality and Freedom of the individual on women issues. As a male I don’t really know why the term is “women” issues, it’s important for society as a whole and especially for “family” values.

   It’s extremely difficult to tell whether Trump’s habit of breaking the china wherever he goes and whatever he says, will cause him to pay a price with the electorate.  So far, he seems far beyond Ronald Reagan’s Teflon president.  Rather, he’s the candidate who succeeds more the worse his mistakes are.  Democrats keep waiting for the other shoe to drop.  When will this election revert to form and when will Trump’s campaign finally fall to earth like a busted balloon.  It may never happen.  And that’s what’s scary.

   Not that I’ve changed my mind about Hillary’s candidacy.  I remain as firmly convinced as ever that she is not trustworthy, not progressive, not genuine.

   …
   The watchword of the Democratic convention is “competent,” as in “Hillary is the most competent candidate.”  If there’s a more boring word in the English language I don’t know it.  At least in the context of a presidential campaign.  Give me dreams, give me hope, give me a vision of a better future.  But competence?  What’s it good for?  What does it even mean?  That the trains will run on time?

   While Obama didn’t end the wars he inherited and promised to end, at least he didn’t start any new wars.  I’m convinced that Hillary will pursue military solutions with abandon.  Her belligerent comments about Iran make me fear we might attack it during her term.  If not Iran, then Syria remains a likely second choice.

   I’m not even convinced that keeping Trump out of the White House is enough to justify a vote for Hillary.  I’m just sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils.  If I felt Hillary was benign, I might see a reason to break down and vote for her.  But I don’t see a Clinton presidency as benign.

   [Source: Tikun Olam by Richard Silverstein]

   ○ Cracks Showing in Democrats’ Stance on Israel as Many Back Push for Palestinians | The Forward |
   ○ Bill Clinton’s Hebrew Lapel Pin at the Convention
   ○ Hillary Clinton Instructed Advisers To Ensure Pro-Israel Democratic Platform

9. 

   Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 12:53 pm

   William K Black – Hillary-Kaine: Back to the Center .  (Wouldn’t agree that it’s “center,” but that’s how putting public policy issues on a simplified continuum distorts our reality.)

   …
   As Tom Frank’s new book Listen, Liberal documents, the DLC vilified the New Deal, financial and safety regulation, organized labor, the working class, opponents of militarism, opponents of the disastrous trade deals that were actually backdoor assaults on effective health, safety and financial regulation, and the progressive base of the Democratic Party.

   [important to know stuff at this point in the article]

   …
   And that’s just on the finance. On the economics, the choice of Kaine signals that Hillary Clinton is openly returning to her life-long embrace of the economic malpractice of austerity. Recall that Bill Clinton tried, in league with Newt Gingrich, to largely privatize Social Security. That is Wall Street’s greatest dream.

   The only reason it didn’t happen is that the Republican rebels asked for too much and that scuttled the deal that Bill Clinton was making with the Republican-controlled Congress. The same thing happened when the Tea Party sank President Barack Obama’s efforts to reach a “Grand Bargain” with the Republicans to adopt austerity and make cuts to the safety net.
   …

10. 

    Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 1:03 pm

    Micah Zenko tweet:

    Wow….a first. US military contractors now working inside Syria. DOD Press Release July 27, 2016

    Relevant excerpt from DOD release:

    Six3 Intelligence Solutions Inc., McLean, Virginia, was awarded a $ 9,578,964 modification (P00001) to contract W564KV-16-C-0058 for intelligence analysis services.  Work will be performed in Germany, Italy, and Syria, with an estimated completion date of June 29, 2017.  Fiscal 2016 operations and maintenance (Army) funds in the amount of $6,370,000 were obligated at the time of the award.  Army Contracting Command, Kaiserslautern, Germany APO AE, is the contracting activity.

    (Six3 Intell is a subsidiary of CACI

    • 

      Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 1:19 pm

      Trying to wrap my brain around the horror that we don’t experience here.

      Aleppo is the most populous city in Syria, with a population of 2,132,100 as indicated in the latest official census in 2004 by the Syria Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS). Its subdistrict (nahiya) consists of 23 localities with a collective population of 2,181,061 in 2004.[99] According to the official estimate announced by the Aleppo City Council, the population of the city was 2,301,570 by the end of 2005. As a result of the Syrian Civil War, however, the city eastern half’s population under the control of the opposition had plummeted to an estimated 40,000 by 2015.

      That’s 300,000 in esat Aleppo to 40,000 in four years.  That would be comparable to decimating St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati to pull just three cities from the list of those with populations in the 300,000 range.  

11. 

    Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 3:10 pm

    From a caucus99%diary

    Sometimes we have to sacrifice our values to do what’s best for the country.

    I’m sure I’ve heard variations on this before.  Where, when could that have been.  thinking thinking.

12. 

    Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 3:52 pm

    (a break from in one)

    The Guardian – Jeremy Corbyn fights off court challenge over Labour leadership ballot

    Glenn tweets:

    UK court rejects latest (desperate) effort to keep Jeremy Corbyn off the ballot for Labour Leader

    Man, that article must have pained The Guardian to report.  Several paragraphs used to explain something, something that the court ruling can’t be viewed as evidence that Labour was trying to fix the election.

13. 

    Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 8:03 pm

    Nice interview.  

    Rolling Stone – Jane Sanders: Why Bernie Voters Shouldn’t Get Over It.

    Nice lady.

    Okay, I’m going to say it.  Sometimes elections and momentum are lost by millimeters.  Who knew that Tipper’s rock music censorship project in the 1980s would cost Gore votes in 2000?  Possibly the critical votes that was he needed to win?  Similarly, when Sanders was unable to deliver his tax returns, he lost momentum.  Bernie and Jane really should have known that if he came anywhere close to HRC that their tax returns had to be released.  That he couldn’t dismiss it as Mitt did and Trump is doing.  His openness and honesty was his asset and not how much or how little he’d acquired in financial assets over his lifetime.  

    Although spread out over a few week, it was almost like the moment in the 2003 Cubs playoff game when everybody “knew” that game and possibly the series had flipped.

14. 

    Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 8:50 pm

    ACLU – Chelsea Manning Faces New Charges, Indefinite Solitary Confinement Related to Suicide Attempt

    Let give one USG torture (those that approved it and those that administered it) a pass, and future USG torture is permissible.  Solitary confinement = torture.

15. 

    Marie3 on July 28, 2016 at 9:27 pm

    WaPo:  “By November, Russian hackers could target voting machines.” (1)

    If the intelligence community has indeed ascertained that Russia is to blame, our government needs to decide what to do in response. This is difficult because the attacks are politically partisan, but it is essential. If foreign governments learn that they can influence our elections with impunity, this opens the door for future manipulations, both document thefts and dumps like this one that we see and more subtle manipulations that we don’t see.

    Boing Boing (1)

    Voting machines are so notoriously terrible that they’d be a very tempting target for Russia or other states that want to influence the outcome in 2016 (or merely destabilize the US by calling into question the outcome in an election).

    Comment from MOA thread:

    So experts are saying our elections are not reliable and can be hacked. But only by Russians?

    Well, we could always go to hand counted paper ballots and defeat those darn Russkies.  Collateral damage for that fix would give us some of our democracy back.

    (1) References cited but no linkie to this crap.  Feel free to give them a page view that undeserved.

16. 

    Marie3 on July 29, 2016 at 10:36 am

    Almost missed the big brass that spoke on behalf of the MIC (the big bad wolf is coming to get us) for HRC.

    “We believe in her vision for a united America and we believe in her vision of America as the just and strong leader against the forces of hatred, chaos, and darkness.

    “We know that she as no other knows how to use all instruments of American power — not just the military — to keep us all safe and free.”

    Speech for those with a strong stomach or loves them some more war.

    Kevin Drum accurately described 4-Star General Opens Up a Can of Whup-Ass on Donald Trump and a thrill went up his leg like it was 2003 all over again when GWB was “kicking some ass.”

    Hoo boy. Tonight is national security night at the Democratic convention. Retired General John Allen just gave a stemwinder of a speech delivered in the tones of a drill sergeant and about as hawkish as anything you’ve ever seen at a Republican convention.

    This General Allen:

    In November 2012, he came under investigation for possible “inappropriate-communication” concerning his correspondences with Jill Kelley, the Honorary Ambassador to U.S. Central Command Coalition Forces.[17] In response to the investigation, Secretary Panetta suspended his confirmation hearing for commander of EUCOM and requested the U.S. Congress to speed the confirmation of General Joseph F. Dunford, Jr. to command of forces in Afghanistan.[18] On January 22, 2013, General Allen was cleared in a misconduct inquiry.

    Yeah, because there was nothing to see in a General engaged in email “sex talk” with an Army groupie and that was made an Honorary Ambassador to United States Central Command’s Coalition Forces for no discernible reason.  (Good thing he didn’t send dick pics.) Guess Petraeus wasn’t available.

    • 

      Marie3 on July 29, 2016 at 10:43 am

      “Stand with Iraq and Afghanistan vets who went there because they love their country”*  No they went there because of LIES.  Lies that the General Allens et al were too busy cheering cheering for a war that they publicly pretended that they weren’t lies at all.

      *not quite verbatim but very close.

17. 

    Oui on August 3, 2016 at 3:57 am

    Most famous, throwing softball questions …

    American media are lapdogs of political elites | De Volkskrant | [Dutch]

    WikiLeaks publication of email exchanges hangs as a dark cloud not only over the Democratic party, but also concerns the top US media. Mainstream media behave like lapdogs towards Democratic leaders demonstrated by revelations of Wikileaks. US media are no longer the mirror of society but have become ventriloquists of the political establishment.

     « click for more info
    Hillary was the darling of Al Jazeera and Erdogan - Qatar Wealth Fund and the Clinton Foundation

    In the presidential elections of 2012, two-thirds of the major newspapers gave a voting recommendation for President Barack Obama. In almost all magazines this was unanimous. The election result: 51 percent Obama and challenger Mitt Romney 47 percent. The electorate is clearly more diverse than the media. It is not new that massive media support Democrats, led by The New York Times and The Washington Post.

    ○ Townhall Meeting Ms Clinton with CNN’s Amanpour
    ○ Bloggers Call BS on NY Times Benghazi Article by David Kirkpatrick