Patterico's Pontifications


Joe Scarborough: President Trump Worse For America Than ‘Any Foreign Adversary’

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:20 pm

[guest post by Dana]

[Ed.: I meant to have this posted this morning, but life got in the way…]

I suppose it was inevitable that some political pundit too big for his britches would eventually exploit the tragedy of 9/11 in a cringe-worthy display of hyperbole and bad taste to make the claim that President Trump poses a greater threat to America than terrorists. Joe Scarborough is that pundit, and his Washington Post op-ed chronicles what he views as the “strategic missteps” of the past 17 years:

[E]ndless wars abroad and reckless policies at home have produced annual deficits approaching $1 trillion. President Trump’s Republican Party will create more debt in one year than was generated in the first 200 years of America’s existence. And while the United States has been mired in endless wars and bloody occupations over the past 17 years, China has used that same period to aggressively develop economic partnerships across Asia, Europe, Latin America and Africa. Perhaps that is one reason China will soon overtake the United States as the world’s largest economy.

Any discussion of policy failures since 2001 must begin with George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq even though no evidence linked Saddam Hussein’s regime to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Even a majority of Senate Democrats voted for a resolution supporting the Iraq invasion, and more than 70 percent of Americans agreed. But we were wrong. That war cost nearly 5,000 American lives, $2 trillion and inestimable damage to America’s credibility across the globe.

The excesses of Bush’s military adventurism led to his successor, President Barack Obama, placing the United States in a defensive crouch for the better part of eight years. The commander in chief defined his foreign policy approach this way: “Don’t do stupid [stuff].” Even Democratic foreign policy experts would quietly complain that their president’s strategic retreat from the world would come at great cost. The ignoring of crossed red lines, the rise of the Islamic State and the deaths of 500,000 Syrians proved Obama’s Democratic critics right.

All of this bad decision making has led Scarborough to conclude that:

Sixteen years of strategic missteps have been followed by the maniacal moves of a man who has savaged America’s vital alliances, provided comfort to hostile foreign powers, attacked our intelligence and military communities, and lent a sympathetic ear to neo-Nazis and white supremacists across the globe.

For those of us still believing that Islamic extremists hate America because of the freedoms we guarantee to all people, the gravest threat Trump poses to our national security is the damage done daily to America’s image…

Osama bin Laden was killed by SEAL Team 6 before he accomplished that goal. Other tyrants who tried to do the same were consigned to the ash heap of history. The question for voters this fall is whether their country will move beyond this troubled chapter in history or whether they will continue supporting a politician who has done more damage to the dream of America than any foreign adversary ever could.

To use the anniversary of 9/11 to spout-off about Trump is shameful. (And shameful is a word I use often to describe the behavior of this president.) To be so sanctimonious when Scarborough’s own record reveals that he was a shameless, back-slapping suck-up to Trump, reveals how utterly tone-deaf and self-centered he is. Scarborough, along with others in the MSM, gave Trump free airtime and publicity (more than the other candidates), which in turn, gave Trump a bigger media platform to reach a wider audience. As Scarborough clearly helped push Trump front and center, his op-ed is little more than a pile of hypocritical crap coming at the expense of a mournful nation. His arrogant moral preening, amusingly, is not unlike the very president about whom he criticizes.

Remember these moments?:

In late 2015 and 2016, when Trump’s campaign was gaining momentum, they defended him against his critics and offered him advice. For example, at an event at the 92nd Street Y in New York in November 2015, Scarborough proudly recounted how he frequently called Trump to offer political guidance. Returning the bromance favor, in January 2016 Trump talked about Scarborough with Boston talk radio host Howie Carr. “He’s a great guy, and he has a great show … and we have a lot of fun,” Trump said. After Trump won the New Hampshire primary in February 2016, Trump appeared on “Morning Joe” and told the co-hosts: “You guys have been supporters, and I really appreciate it.”

A few days later, CNN reported that MSNBC officials were concerned about “Scarborough’s friendship with Trump and his increasingly favorable coverage of the candidate.” According to CNN, MSNBC insiders called Scarborough’s admiration for Trump “over the top” and “unseemly.” The Washington Post observed that Trump received “a tremendous degree of warmth from the show,” and that his appearances on the show, in person and over the phone, often felt like “a cozy social club.”

That coziness was caught on tape during an MSNBC town hall with Trump in New York that Scarborough and Brzezinski hosted in February 2016. An unaired clip of banter between Brzezinski and Trump in-between segments revealed the two of them colluding about what questions she’d ask him. “Nothing too hard, Mika,” Trump says. “OK,” she responded.

Scarborough pushed back on the criticism today:

“Many have been offended by a tweet I sent out earlier re: my @washingtonpost article. Even if they did not read the article, I should have shown more care on the tweet’s wording and the column’s conclusion,” Scarborough wrote. “The column was focused on 17 years of strategic missteps. The last paragraph became the sole focus of Trump supporters. On every other day of the year, I do not shy away from negative feedback from the right, the left or from Trump supporters… On September 11th, I’ll read the column again and think about whether I could have said the same thing in a way less offensive to Trump supporters on September 11th.”

Anyway, the best of America was revealed on that horrible day, from those who fought back on a plane, to those who plowed through the rubble looking for signs of life, to the military, law enforcement, first-responders and the everyday Americans whose efforts, no matter how big or small, made a difference. That’s who I am thinking about.

(Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.)


110 Responses to “Joe Scarborough: President Trump Worse For America Than ‘Any Foreign Adversary’”

  1. It’s the smug, self-righteousness.

    Dana (023079)

  2. Anyway, the best of America was revealed on that horrible day…

    And the worst: 20 guys w/jut $500,000 did an end run’round a bloated, stove-piped multi-trillion dollar military and intelligence system and did more physical and psychological damage to the United States that the German Kaiser, the Nazi Führer, the Japanese Emperor and Soviet General Secretary could have dreamed.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  3. Joe Scarborough: President Trump Worse For America Than ‘Any Foreign Adversary’

    Meh. Catch it daily- for years- and there’s absolutely no doubt ‘Morning Joe’ is decidely a better broadcast when ‘Morning Joe’ hizself ain’t on it. But then, there’s that stint doing ‘Scarborough Country’ from earlier this century for he and the Right to live down as well, but that’s another story– and an another decade.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  4. That coziness was caught on tape during an MSNBC town hall with Trump in New York that Scarborough and Brzezinski hosted in February 2016. An unaired clip of banter between Brzezinski and Trump in-between segments revealed the two of them colluding about what questions she’d ask him. “Nothing too hard, Mika,” Trump says. “OK,” she responded.

    And much to the surprise of colleagues connected to the show and not, she also correctly predicted he’d win the election.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  5. Never Trumpers like Scarborough and Democrats are both animated and motivated by an intense hatred of the president.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  6. What broke up the bromance? When Joe hooked up with Mika?

    nk (dbc370)

  7. There was a conspiracy, a collusion if you will, among the MSM and the Hillary camp to promote Donald Trump as her opponent. Desperately, they blame Putin for the victory of their own Golum, and decry the result as if they had no part in it.

    Eff ’em, and I hope two more seats open up on the Court.

    Kevin M (5d3e49)

  8. Good post. I don’t understand why anyone watches Scarborough.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  9. This tweet from Trump is rich:

    Wow, @foxandfriends is blowing away the competition in the morning ratings. Morning Joe is a dead show with very few people watching and sadly, Fake News CNN is also doing poorly. Too much hate and inaccurately reported stories – too predictable!

    Trump loved Morning Joe, as long as he was getting what he wanted and needed to propel to the front of the pack. Users and grifters, both of them. They deserve each other. And I don’t care how much they blather, neither one is any different than they were when using each other during the campaign. No functioning moral compass there.

    Dana (023079)

  10. If only Hillary had won!
    The life of the true conservative would be so much easier!

    kobeclan (ef3e90)

  11. Yeah, using people to win sucks.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  12. Dana, what if he’s taking a page out of the degenerate President’s little book of dirty tricks to get ratings? Doesn’t this sound like a punk stunt like Spanky’s?

    Sure, it’s over the top, but you know, zeitgeist.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  13. ‘Morning Joe’ Sees Record Ratings Week As MSNBC’s Numbers Continues To Climb – August 28, 2018

    ‘MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” saw its best ratings ever last week, as the network continues to get a boost from its negative coverage of the Trump White House. “Morning Joe” more than doubled CNN’s “New Day” weekly viewership in the 6-9 a.m. time slot and pulled in an average of 1.27 million viewers, according to Nielsen. CNN pulled in 599,000 viewers. (RELATED: MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Sees Massive Ratings Spike.)

    Despite its record week, “Morning Joe” still failed to eclipse “Fox & Friends,” which drew an audience of 1.4 million. “Fox & Friends” has spent 202 months as the number one show in its time slot, according to a Fox News press release.’ 8-28-18, source-

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  14. FYI: ‘”Scarborough Country” was an opinion/analysis show broadcast on MSNBC Monday to Thursday at 9 P.M. ET. It was hosted by former [Republican] congressman Joe Scarborough.

    “Scarborough Country” made its debut in April 2003. On average, “Scarborough Country” received approximately 300,000 viewers per night (Source: Nielsen Media Research). Frequent on-air contributors to “Scarborough Country” were Craig Crawford, Pat Buchanan, Brent Bozell, and Tony Perkins. While remaining “extraordinarily conservative”, Scarborough became more critical of President George W. Bush and some of his policies before the show ended in 2007. Scarborough more frequently agreed with traditional conservative Pat Buchanan, who appeared on Scarborough’s show nearly every day. “Scarborough Country” was replaced with “Live with Dan Abrams” in 2007 when Scarborough left to host “Morning Joe.”- source, wikiTeeVee

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  15. Several thoughts. One, Scarborough’s final paragraph was just plain hyperbolic, and there’s already way too much of that in our discourse. Two, I think we’re a big enough nation to commemorate the fallen on 9/11 and honestly address the mistakes we’ve made in the last 17 years as a result of 9/11, including the years Trump has been commander-in-chief. Why criticizing Trump and others is okay on 9/10 and 9/12 but not on 9/11 doesn’t make a lot of sense to me, not 17 years after the fact. We’re big enough.
    Three, Scarborough did give Trump generally favorable coverage, but at some point he’d had enough and he tipped the other way, and then he left the GOP. I can think of several people who left the GOP in disgust, myself included (although I’m pondering a return). I don’t see a problem with that. After all, a majority of FoxNews is in the bag for Trump and has excused an amazing amount of his bad behavior, and they’re still in the bag.
    Four, whether the slant is positive or negative, covering Trump is good for ratings and clicks. Mainstream media wants to make money, so they’re really all a bunch of ratings and click sluts. Scarborough is part of that group but I don’t see why he should be singled out when they’re all culpable.
    FTR, I watch Scarborough, Tapper and Special Report semi-regularly and not much other cable news.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  16. At least Scarborough said that maybe he should have done things differently. Trump cannot ever bring himself to do the same, though he doesn’t hesitate to accuse others of sins.

    Trumpsters think it’s great that Trump “tells it like it is and doesn’t care what people think.” They like his hyperbole, and they defend his reckless accusations — but they’re outraged when other people say what they think about Trump. Why the double standards?

    And Scarborough’s turnabout on Trump is certainly no more cynical than Trump’s radical shift from “Hillary is a really good person and would be a terrific president” to “Crooked Hillary! Lock her up!” — not because he learned anything new about her, but because it suited his personal ambition to turn her from friend to enemy.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  17. never forget 9=11 can we remember why bush invaded iraq?

    lany (3d7608)

  18. Lori Klausutis could not be reached for comment.

    mg (8cbc69)

  19. mr. puller!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  20. #15 —

    The media has been doing double standards for years. It’s a (but not the only) cause of the “If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em” gleeful hypocrisy of a class of Trump supporter.

    Y’know — I don’t know if you folks have ever read a guy named Kenneth Anger, who published a series of ghastly Classic Hollywood exposes years ago, after years of having his explicit “experimental” films ignored. The tone of some Trump people — mixing boisterous moral condemnation with a celebration of degeneracy — reminds me of those things.

    Appalled (96665e)

  21. Trying to put mind out of business, because they stuck to their principle, putting a known pederast in charge of safe schools, if that isn’t moral degeneracy,

    Narciso (495c2c)

  22. I admit it: I don’t like Scarborough very much. So even though Saturday Night Live is tedious in most ways, I always watch the following when Scarborough irritates me.

    It helps.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  23. I’m watching battlestar galactica and now buck Rogers reruns. It’ spitting image without the puppets.

    Narciso (495c2c)

  24. I don’t get morning joke anymore, but I listened to Imus, ocassionally.

    Narciso (495c2c)

  25. The tone of some Trump people — mixing boisterous moral condemnation with a celebration of degeneracy

    That pattern is especially dismaying among Trump’s most “intelletual” boosters: They think Trump’s “style” is heroic because he “gets things done” and isn’t hobbled by PC — but they think it’s morally indefensible for others to make candid, unfiltered comments about Trump (or the behavior of his fans), because somehow Trump is supposed to represent virtues and values he has not noticeably practiced in his own life.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  26. Of course if you’re comparing trump to bin Laden, what is the solution?

    Narciso (495c2c)

  27. Meanwhile jerry Brown prepares to go all morlock by 2050

    Narciso (495c2c)

  28. it’s cryptogeddon

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  29. Then there’s think regress objecting to having their lies about Cavanaugh be flagged.

    Narciso (495c2c)

  30. The sixth circuit, didn’t find that much to the agita from 2016.

    Narciso (495c2c)

  31. And may 4th Scarborough was for trump, on May 6th he was against, what changed?

    Narciso (495c2c)

  32. 14, I remember when Scarborough Country was the contrarian show along with the original Abrams Report from the early GWOT era. I found it schlocky when SC’s opening montage featured the elderly couple that looked like a real people adaptation of the elderly couple visiting Washington DC in the animated Beavis and Butthead movie (1997). Hank Hill was supposed to be their son, but had to take on a different persona because MTV would not allow Fox Entertainment the rights to the Tom Anderson character.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  33. 31, maybe the Taco Bowl tweet…but with Scarborough its 50/50 as to whether it was seen as deameaning versus overly pandering, he’s still somewhat staunch on that issue despite appearing to adopt other MSNBC company lines.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  34. Woodward fakery is legendary, going back to presidents men, when he misrepresented a grand juror as a witness.

    Narciso (495c2c)

  35. Twitter banning Kris paronto for pointing out facts.

    Narciso (495c2c)

  36. Cheer up, NeverTrumpn’Democrats, you’ll always have someone to blame…×522.png

    Colonel Haiku (56f14c)

  37. “An exaggeration is not a lie,” wrote one Trumpista recently in defense of Trump’s obviously inflated boasts of his own greatness. Why then should Trumpistas be so outraged if someone exaggerates Trump’s horribleness? Are their specific Trump-centric rules for acceptable hyperbole?

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  38. you’ll always have someone to blame

    And Trump, of course, will always find someone else to blame in order to maintain his posture of faultlessness – a posture that his fans are ever-eager to shore up. They might ritually intone “We knew we were voting for a flawed man,” but they apparently believe it means that no one else has a moral right to mention any specific flaws of his.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  39. The Trumpistas who parrot Trump’s charge that the Anonymous op-ed looks like “treason” have little ground to complain about Scarborough’s hyperbole.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  40. Meanwhile, ABC finally, in 2018 decides to fact-check Obama:

    “Obama campaigned in Illinois and California last week, with more politicking planned. Here’s a look at some of his remarks:

    OBAMA: “It shouldn’t be Democratic or Republican to say that we don’t threaten the freedom of the press because they say things or publish stories we don’t like. I complained plenty about Fox News, but you never heard me threaten to shut them down or call them enemies of the people.” — rally Friday at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.

    THE FACTS: Trump may use extraordinary rhetoric to undermine trust in the press, but Obama arguably went farther — using extraordinary actions to block the flow of information to the public.

    The Obama administration used the 1917 Espionage Act with unprecedented vigor, prosecuting more people under that law for leaking sensitive information to the public than all previous administrations combined. Obama’s Justice Department dug into confidential communications between news organizations and their sources as part of that effort.

    In 2013 the Obama administration obtained the records of 20 Associated Press office phone lines and reporters’ home and cell phones, seizing them without notice, as part of an investigation into the disclosure of information about a foiled al-Qaida terrorist plot.

    AP was not the target of the investigation. But it called the seizure a “massive and unprecedented intrusion” into its news-gathering activities, betraying information about its operations “that the government has no conceivable right to know.”

    Obama’s Justice Department also secretly dogged Fox News journalist James Rosen, getting his phone records, tracking his arrivals and departures at the State Department through his security-badge use, obtaining a search warrant to see his personal emails and naming him as a possible criminal conspirator in the investigation of a news leak.

    “The Obama administration,” The New York Times editorial board wrote at the time, “has moved beyond protecting government secrets to threatening fundamental freedoms of the press to gather news.”…….

    …….OBAMA: “Their sabotage of the Affordable Care Act has already cost more than 3 million Americans their health insurance. And if they’re still in power next fall, you better believe they’re coming at it again. They’ve said so.” — Illinois rally.

    THE FACTS: Obama is cherry-picking survey results, overlooking a recent estimate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found the number of uninsured Americans basically unchanged under Trump.

    He’s also blaming Republicans for all the problems with health insurance, ignoring the fact that premiums started going up sharply under his watch.

    Updated last month, CDC’s National Health Interview Survey finds the number of uninsured no worse so far under Trump. It estimated that 28.3 million Americans of all ages were uninsured during the first three months of 2018, or 8.8 percent of the population. That compares with 28.6 million uninsured people — or 9 percent of the population — during 2016, Obama’s last full year in office.”

    harkin (fb7ea4)

  41. Haiku:

    Has “NeverTrump” become an incantation against evil spirits, sort of like “FakeNews”? I always understood NeverTrump to mean Jonah Goldberg George Will Republicans who had not fallen like a porn star for Trump’s charms.

    Appalled (96665e)

  42. It’s the smug, self-righteousness.

    Yeah, I hate that stuff. That and hypocrisy. I thank the Lord above that I am not so afflicted. Goes double for self-abuse.

    Skorcher (5b282a)

  43. #41, “NeverTrump” apparently now means anyone who ever criticizes Trump.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  44. I didn’t, the leak to the times re the keystone coup in Venezuela is something else again,

    narciso (d1f714)

  45. “Never Trump” is anybody who does not constantly heap fulsome praise on Trump listing all his “accomplishments”.

    nk (dbc370)

  46. NeverTrump might also share some Venn territory with Neo-Conservative not so much for policy (which in fact actually the 2 do) but for a certain superficial reason.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  47. 41… no, it includes Goldberg, Will, Krystol, etc., but it’s also an appellation for those who’ve thrown in with the fever swampers and dance to their drumbeat. They are all animated and motivated by an intense hatred for all things Trump.

    Colonel Haiku (56f14c)

  48. and henry cavill is out as superman, getting rid of what passes for a sympathetic character in that franchise,

    narciso (d1f714)

  49. They tried to “lock him in a room” with Kaley Cuoco and it didnt take.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  50. and he won’t be taking over the mission impossible franchise, is that too broad a hint?

    narciso (d1f714)

  51. I know it’s a cipher which you consider important,

    narciso (d1f714)

  52. I remember when Scarborough Country was the contrarian show along with the original Abrams Report from the early GWOT era.

    I remember that he was MSNBC’s version of Alan Colmes, a token host, but with more personality.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  53. #47, actually, the label is thrown around freely in response to any specific mention of Trump’s flaws and errors. Trumpistas were unusually hostile to criticism of Trump from the beginning. They pledged their loyalty to him personally and unconditionally (as Trump himself boasted), and then chose to believe that anyone who doesn’t like his extreme narcissism and habitual dishonesty — or simply believes that Trump should not be exempted from fact-based criticism — must be driven by some irrational and arbitrary “hatred” that couldn’t possibly have any basis in reality. This Trumpista defensiveness is like an extension of Trump’s own belief that he is faultless.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  54. And may 4th Scarborough was for trump, on May 6th he was against, what changed?

    Nothing. He actually supported Jeb! and when he crashed burned, Kasich. I don’t who he voted for for president, but it definitely wasn’t Trump and I’m pretty sure it wasn’t Hillary.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  55. never trump is shorthand, like trumpalo, for those who appreciate some objectives of his, now when you balance it out with our possum congress, a runaway prosecutor ala javert, and a media which is four scoops of crazy, it puts things into perspective,

    narciso (d1f714)

  56. narc:

    I think you are draining the term of its meaning by the way Trump supporters use it. When it referred to anti-Trump Republicans, the term has some descriptive power. When Haiku talks about “NeverTrumpn’Democrats”, well, you might as well say “Big Meanies”.

    Appalled (96665e)

  57. I think some of the people labeled “Never Trump” weren’t quite completely “Never Trump.”

    This was a term applied to people who would not support Donald Trump for the Republican nomination, and wanted to find away to deprive him of it, even though that went against conventional practice, and later maybe to those who would not vote for him in the general election while also not wanting Hillary Clinton to become president.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  58. I know his replacement will be one richter scale worse,

    narciso (d1f714)

  59. I think further escalation in Syria, is provocative, putin is not likely to hold back after the deir er zour incident, nothing much seems to have happened in the Ukraine, but it could,

    narciso (d1f714)

  60. Barack Obama just claimed the other day that the “Anonymous” cabal only blocked 10% of the bad things Trump wanted to do.

    Now the op-ed may be a pack of lies, but I think he claimed something more like 75% – and that some of what trump wanted to do was good in the first place.

    Some of his aides have been cast as villains by the media. But in private, they have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained to the West Wing, though they are clearly not always successful.

    Not always succesful does not equal that they succeed only 10% of the time.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  61. I thought ‘Never Trump’ had evolved.

    Before the nomination, it was anyone who wanted a different Republican nominee, aka anyone but Trump.

    After the nomination, it was anyone who not only refused to vote for Trump (i did not vote for him) but to go far enough to voting for Madame Pantsuit.

    Now i think it includes anyone who insists on concentrating on Trump in a negative way to the point of ignoring much more newsworthy occurances, and also without putting what he says/does in perspective to other politicians or actually weighing the difference in both impact and CW on what he says vs what he actually does. But one has to admit some of these folks, by going full TDS, may actually help sustain his support by being so blatantly biased, you know, one of the main reasons he was elected.

    harkin (fb7ea4)

  62. The professionals are afraid there couild be abloody confrontaitopn with bioth China and Russia so they are giving optoons in Syria that won’t change any results, and caving into China (on sending a high ranking official to the opening of the non-embassy emnassy in Taipei, not selling new arms to Taiwan military manuevers in the south China Sea and promoting what will ineffective sanctions because if what China is doing to the Uyghurs in Sinkiang – basically rounding up a huge fracion of the population)

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  63. @harkin I don’t think the phrase “Never Truump” has any meaning past the 2016 election.

    I think you meant to say:

    After the nomination, it was anyone who not only refused to vote for Trump (I did not vote for him) but NOT ZSOMEONE WHO WOULD go far enough to voting for Madame Pantsuit.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  64. so it turns out our possum congress appropriated the money to that purpose,

    narciso (d1f714)

  65. George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq even though no evidence linked Saddam Hussein’s regime to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

    There was alittle bit of evidence – some training in hijacking maybe.

    More important, it was what lesson Saddam Hussein might draw from it: That you didn’t need to have a delivery system to attack the United States with weapons of mass destruction. So if he got free of sanctions..that might be in prospect because he’s shown a complete lack of caution when he;d invaded Kuwait.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  66. 56… NeverTrumpn’Democrats abbreviation for NeverTrump and Democrats

    Colonel Haiku (56f14c)

  67. black widow, after repeating the narrative about Iraq, for the umpteenth time, reveals the villain trained hamas, and abu nidal, exactly the kind of scorpion we went there to fight,

    narciso (d1f714)

  68. I know our wannabe congressman, seems to be hiding in plain sight,

    narciso (d1f714)

  69. may actually help sustain his support by being so blatantly biased, you know, one of the main reasons he was elected.

    That doesn’t explain why the fandom was so rabidly hostile to criticism of Trump from early in the primaries, when they would paint supporters of other GOP candidates as all “RINOs” or leftists or traitors. It doesn’t explain why the fandom has practically redefined patriotism as being synonymous with loving Donald Trump. It doesn’t explain the double standards that always work to the benefit of Trump.

    It would be easier to applaud Trump on meritorious actions if Trump fans hadn’t adopted Trump’s own view that anything unflattering to himself is ipse facto “fake,” and if they weren’t so indulgent of his manifest lies and exaggerations when he claims that he’s doing everything the best that it has ever been done. The fawning, uncritical adoration of Trump by his fans has certainly not made him more palatable to skeptics.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  70. so now we see the research potential with stormy’s workplace with jeff fager stepping downm

    narciso (d1f714)

  71. “That doesn’t explain why the fandom was so rabidly hostile to criticism of Trump from early in the primaries, when they would paint supporters of other GOP candidates as all “RINOs” or leftists or traitors. It doesn’t explain why the fandom has practically redefined patriotism as being synonymous with loving Donald Trump.”

    I know many people who voted for Trump and we had many discussions/arguments about my refusal to vote for him (Before the nomination was decided, I wanted Scott Walker or Ted Cruz).

    Never once was i called a RINO, leftist or traitor. Never once was I told that patriotism was synonomous with loving Donald Trump.

    The one thing that struck me, that so many said to me that did not resonate until after election day was this;

    “Only Trump can beat her”

    Thanks for a perfect example of TDS.

    harkin (fb7ea4)

  72. The irony (or worse) of Trump detractors, the ones who can get worked up for days over how someone positioned her hands, calling out Trump defenders for being “cultists” and worse, now complaining about being stereotyped, painted with a broad brush, what have you, is…well…irony. Or irony on top of irony. I had this naive hope that the events of last week/weekend would result in some sort of afflatus of temperance in the animus directed at Trump supporters. Some extended period of reflection. But of course not. How silly of me.

    Skorcher (5b282a)

  73. @32. Meh. ‘Inside baseball’ stuff: management got on his case for occasionally calling Fox the ‘mother ship’ on MSNBC air;’ some years ago around contract renewal time there was an incident where he left his MSNBC hosts on air 15 minutes early to finish up the show and dashed across 6th Avenue to Fox [well, under it] to pimp his book on Fox & Friends in a live segment.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  74. Speaking of:

    Hillary Clinton
    I want to be sure we’re all clear about something that Brett Kavanaugh said in his confirmation hearings last week. He referred to birth-control pills as “abortion-inducing drugs.” That set off a lot of alarm bells for me, and it should for you, too.
    __ _

    Brit Hume
    It seems she waited until this claim about Kavanaugh had been thoroughly fact-checked and shown to be false before repeating it.


    harkin (fb7ea4)

  75. 72… great post, Harkin. I was for Cruz, Walker would’ve been fine… in fact, the only guy I wouldn’t have put in front of Trump during the primaries was Kasich, who was dead last in my book.

    But when you get lemons you make lemonade. There is much to criticize about Trump… but I have been pleased with much of what he has done so far. And…


    Colonel Haiku (56f14c)

  76. #72, I was many times called a “leftist” or “Hillary lover” or “Bernie fan” in response to online comments that were even mildly critical of Trump, demonstrably based on facts, or even when I simply quoted Trump himself. Trumpistas on this site and others have accused conservatives who dare to criticize Trump of being “leftists.” A neighbor of mine still gets irate if I even begin to say a critical word about Trump.

    The refrain that “only Trump can beat her” is in no way proved by the fact that he eked out an electoral-college victory by narrow margins in a few key states, while losing big in the popular vote. The polls that showed him more likely to lose than some other GOP candidates are not disproved by that outcome either.

    But thanks for demonstrating the reflex to label those who think it’s okay to criticize the president even if he’s named “Donald Trump” as necessarily deranged.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  77. There is much to criticize about Trump

    And yet the fandom gets very indignant if anyone actually criticizes him in any specific way. If anyone else were in the presidency, they would probably agree that someone who acquires that kind of power should particularly be subject to scrutiny and criticism. So why do they think Trump should be exempt?

    A president who openly identifies right and wrong with whatever flatters his ego and who believes himself to be without fault should especially be watched with great wariness. Viewing him with an open eye is being rational, not deranged.

    Radegunda (07ace3)

  78. now elaine chao is supposed to be nyt mole!

    lany (f4b84e)

  79. 77&78… why the concern about how you are perceived? What you post are your opinions and most people have them.

    You are welcomed to them.

    Colonel Haiku (56f14c)

  80. 77 – “Trumpistas on this site…….”

    You may want to consider that the real problem is that you communicate with people too much like yourself.

    “The refrain that “only Trump can beat her” is in no way proved by the fact that he eked out an electoral-college victory by narrow margins in a few key states, while losing big in the popular vote”.

    Constitutional Republic

    Learn It
    Know It
    Live it

    “The polls that showed him more likely to lose than some other GOP candidates are not disproved by that outcome either.”

    Are those the same polls that showed him losing by 8-12 pts? Try not to use Rachel Maddow as a fortune teller.

    harkin (fb7ea4)

  81. #45

    In the category of worst literature ever I offer you a line from a book wherein a ship is named the Fulsome Wench

    “The Fulsome Wench was sinking, its hull already half beneath the waves, and as a result what the second mate saw was wildly skewed, disorientating, obscured …”

    The second mate must be Maxine Waters

    steveg (a9dcab)

  82. Off-topic, but amusing anecdote from Fear:

    White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer, who was a commander in the Naval Reserves, tried several time to persuade [Defense Secretary James] Mattis to appear on Sunday talk shows on behalf of the administration. The answer was always no.

    “Sean,” Mattis finally said, “I’ve killed people for a living. If you call me again I’m going to f*cking send you to Afghanistan. Are we clear?”

    Poor Spicey!

    Dave (445e97)

  83. Trump just seems to bring out the imperious and seditious spirit in people who think they’re the REAL government here:

    “(00:00:00 – 00:01:12) Google co-founder Sergey Brin states that the weekly meeting is “probably not the most joyous we’ve had” and that “most people here are pretty upset and pretty sad.”
    (00:00:24) Brin contrasts the disappointment of Trump’s election with his excitement at the legalization of cannabis in California, triggering laughs and applause from the audience of Google employees.
    (00:01:12) Returning to seriousness, Brin says he is “deeply offen[ded]” by the election of Trump, and that the election “conflicts with many of [Google’s] values.”
    (00:09:10) Trying to explain the motivations of Trump supporters, Senior VP for Global Affairs, Kent Walker concludes: “fear, not just in the United States, but around the world is fueling concerns, xenophobia, hatred, and a desire for answers that may or may not be there.”
    (00:09:35) Walker goes on to describe the Trump phenomenon as a sign of “tribalism that’s self-destructive [in] the long-term.”
    (00:09:55) Striking an optimistic tone, Walker assures Google employees that despite the election, “history is on our side” and that the “moral arc of history bends towards progress.”
    (00:10:45) Walker approvingly quotes former Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi’s comparison between “the world of the wall” with its “isolation and defensiveness” and the “world of the square, the piazza, the marketplace, where people come together into a community and enrich each other’s lives.”
    (00:13:10) CFO Ruth Porat appears to break down in tears when discussing the election result.
    (00:15:20) Porat promises that Google will “use the great strength and resources and reach we have to continue to advance really important values.”
    (00:16:50) Stating “we all need a hug,” she then instructs the audience of Google employees to hug the person closest to them.
    (00:20:24) Eileen Noughton, VP of People Operations, promises that Google’s policy team in DC is “all over” the immigration issue and that the company will “keep a close watch on it.”
    (00:21:26) Noughton jokes about Google employees asking, ‘Can I move to Canada?’ after the election. She goes on to seriously discuss the options available to Google employees who wish to leave the country.
    (00:23:12) Noughton does acknowledge “diversity of opinion and political persuasion” and notes that she has heard from conservative Google employees who say they “haven’t felt entirely comfortable revealing who [they] are.” and urged “tolerance.” (Several months later, the company would fire James Damore allegedly for disagreeing with progressive narratives.)
    (00:27:00) Responding to a question about “filter bubbles,” Sundar Pichai promises to work towards “correcting” Google’s role in them
    (00:27:30) Sergey Brin praises an audience member’s suggestion of increasing matched Google employee donations to progressive groups.
    (00:34:40) Brin compares Trump voters to \“extremists,” arguing for a correlation between the economic background of Trump supporters and the kinds of voters who back extremist movements. Brin says that “voting is not a rational act” and that not all of Trump’s support can be attributed to “income disparity.” He suggests that Trump voters might have been motivated by boredom rather than legitimate concerns.
    (00:49:10) An employee asks if Google is willing to “invest in grassroots, hyper-local efforts to bring tools and services and understanding of Google products and knowledge” so that people can “make informed decisions that are best for themselves.” Pichai’s response: Google will ensure its “educational products” reach “segments of the population [they] are not [currently] fully reaching.”
    (00:54:33) An employee asks what Google is going to do about “misinformation” and “fake news” shared by “low-information voters.” Pichai responds by stating that “investments in machine learning and AI” are a “big opportunity” to fix the problem.
    (00:56:12) Responding to an audience member, Walker says Google must ensure the rise of populism doesn’t turn into “a world war or something catastrophic … and instead is a blip, a hiccup.”
    (00:58:22) Brin compares Trump voters to supporters of fascism and communism, linking the former movement to “boredom,” which Brin previously linked to Trump voters. “It sort of sneaks up sometimes, really bad things” says Brin.
    (01:01:15) A Google employee states: “speaking to white men, there’s an opportunity for you right now to understand your privilege” and urges employees to “go through the bias-busting training, read about privilege, read about the real history of oppression in our country.” He urges employees to “discuss the issues you are passionate about during Thanksgiving dinner and don’t back down and laugh it off when you hear the voice of oppression speak through metaphors.” Every executive on stage – the CEO, CFO, two VPs and the two Co-founders – applaud the employee.
    (01:01:57) An audience member asks if the executives see “anything positive from this election result.” The audience of Google employees, and the executives on stage, burst into laughter. “Boy, that’s a really tough one right now” says Brin.

    A private company indeed…infested by despicable people, who interfere with public discourse worldwide far more than Russia ever does, that deserves any and all government action taken against them.

    Nonpartisan Actor (8fd6c0)

  84. Google is emblematic of the type of people that we’re dealing with: they will not stop, they will not let us be, and anything short of complete destruction has the risk that they will come back into power.

    They should have their company property taxed at the valuation of their company and fed to California’s ravenous bolshevokracy, it’s the only way to be sure.

    Nonpartisan Actor (a7c67e)

  85. ^^^^ Now u understand how to fight the Left!

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  86. When 90% of the things said about you are lies, it stands to reason when the “next new smear thing is presented” folks who like you will defend you. I mean a .900 batting average is epic.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  87. 85 – and more about the Google video:

    All of the speakers express grief over Donald Trump’s election. All of the speakers assume that every Google employee is a Democrat and is stunned and horrified that Hillary Clinton–the worst and most corrupt presidential candidate in modern history–lost. There is much discussion about what Google can do to reverse the benighted world-wide tide exemplified by Brexit and Trump’s election. The insane doctrine of “white privilege” rears its head.

    You really have to see it to believe it. Having suffered through the hour-long cri de cœur–OK, to be fair, there is a huge element of schadenfreude, too, and you will relish much of it–you probably will have several reactions: 1) These people may have certain valuable technical skills, but they aren’t very bright and are unusually lacking in self-awareness. 2) It is remarkable that they can achieve such an extraordinary monoculture in an organization with thousands of employees. It must require vigorous enforcement of right-think. 3) It is easy to see how these uniformly left-wing robots/people seamlessly transitioned into Resisting the duly elected Trump administration.”

    This is absolutely TDS.

    Oh no wait, you have to shoot yourself to qualify. Smh.

    harkin (fb7ea4)

  88. Florence weakens to Category 2, ‘life-threatening’ conditions still expected

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  89. That’s misreads the situation, when people are threatened they lash out, when they have not only the money but the information space, they probably monopolized since 2008. They take advantage.

    Narciso (5e2266)

  90. “That’s misreads the situation, when people are threatened they lash out”

    Not always, some simply hunker down. Others, like the Googlerati, hold company-wide Marxist struggle sessions very poorly disguised as open forums (their public denials that it was anything but were hilarious.)

    Regardless, when the people lashing out have that highly visible and highly disturbing mixture of emotional fragility and unchecked power, it immediately becomes a matter of public interest. Good to remind these over-leveraged and over-scaled companies run by hothouse flowers with delusions of world information domination that all it takes is targeting a few datacenters and their entire business model grinds to a halt.

    Nonpartisan Actor (4d9e68)

  91. Well, gee, nobody saw this coming.

    “Illegal immigration across the southwest border surged last month as President Trump’s zero-tolerance effort crumbled and smugglers and migrant families rushed to take advantage of renewed “catch-and-release” loopholes.

    It’s so bad that caravans of families like the one that drew headlines this spring have become commonplace. Authorities reported groups of 65, 65, 66, 96 and 163 illegal immigrants caught in just the last two weeks — with children as young as four months being carried through the scorching deserts of northern Mexico and southern Arizona.“

    But, “zero tolerance” is gone and that’s the important thing.

    Munroe (2d5f2c)

  92. This is absolutely TDS.

    Oh no wait, you have to shoot yourself to qualify. Smh.

    And the third time the boy cried wolf, the villagers paid no attention.

    Patterico (52aafa)

  93. George W. Bush’s decision to invade Iraq even though no evidence linked Saddam Hussein’s regime to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

    The 9/11 Report concluded that there were links between Saddam and al Qaeda, but Saddam did not collaborate with the terrorist organization.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  94. And dubya booooosh refuses helping Mr. Cruz in his reelection bid. Establishment republicans in Texas are extremely resentful.

    mg (8cbc69)

  95. Shirts and slims, mg

    Narciso (5eb52a)

  96. And dubya booooosh refuses helping Mr. Cruz in his reelection bid. Establishment republicans in Texas are extremely resentful.

    Cruz is Harvard Law and married to Golman Sachs, which makes him just as “establishment” as anyone in TX. I suspect the real reason is because Cruz is overly ambitious and underly likable.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  97. I think it is more complex than that, Paul. Politicians manage to get along with lots of unlikeable people when they need to. Cruz may be unlikeable but he was also dangerous to the GOPe.

    DRJ (15874d)

  98. Was.

    DRJ (15874d)

  99. And dubya booooosh refuses helping Mr. Cruz in his reelection bid. Establishment republicans in Texas are extremely resentful.

    This is a lie.

    Cruz has not asked for Bush’s help. Bush has therefore not “refused” anything.

    Dave (445e97)

  100. DRJ, granted that link was back when Jeb! was a candidate. I just don’t accept Cruz’s narrative that he’s anti-establishment. He talks a big game.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  101. And the third time the boy cried wolf, the villagers paid no attention, as by then their focus was drawn to the Potemkin village constructed by the DOJ, FBI and Beltway media…

    Colonel Haiku (3287d7)

  102. Speaking of talking a big game, how many lies per day will it take for Trump’s loyal supporters to acknowledge that the Leader of the Free World is a serial dissembler? Nine? Ten? A dozen? Right now it’s at 8.3 since he put his hand on the Holy Bible and, lately, it’s been getting really out of hand.

    Trump’s tsunami of untruths helped push the count in The Fact Checker’s database past 5,000 on the 601st day of his presidency. That’s an average of 8.3 Trumpian claims a day, but in the past nine days — since our last update — the president has averaged 32 claims a day.

    Maybe his supporters have some sort of app, so they know when he’s talking out of his mouth or his a$$ because, if he’s spinning 32 false and misleading statements daily, what other way to discern whether his next words have a kernel or even grain of truth.

    Paul Montagu (9dcfd2)

  103. DRJ, granted that link was back when Jeb! was a candidate.

    That link was from when his brother was running against Cruz, and Cruz at that time (late 2015) was the only candidate sucking up to Donald Trump instead of criticizing his bigoted/ignorant/insane statements.

    Dave (445e97)

  104. Right now it’s at 8.3 since he put his hand on the Holy Bible and, lately, it’s been getting really out of hand.

    Today he denied the deaths of nearly 3000 Americans in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria.

    Dave (445e97)

  105. The prevailing consensus to this day is in line with White’s interpretation – that the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment does not extend to Puerto Rico. Since the Downes ruling, for 116 years, Congress has governed Puerto Rico as a separate and unequal territory.

    The Foraker Act at the heart of the Downes case had also imposed Puerto Rican citizenship on persons born in Puerto Rico. People who were born in Spain and residing in Puerto Rico were allowed to retain their Spanish citizenship, acquire Puerto Rican citizenship or U.S. citizenship. Island-born were barred from retaining their Spanish citizenship, the citizenship that they acquired while Puerto Rico was a province of Spain, and from acquiring a U.S. citizenship.

    But there was a big problem. At the time, persons seeking to naturalize and become U.S. citizens were required to first renounce their allegiance to a sovereign state. For Puerto Rican citizens, this meant renouncing their allegiance to the U.S. in order to acquire U.S. citizenship. This contradiction effectively barred Puerto Ricans from acquiring U.S. citizenship.

    In 1906, Congress added a section in the Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization Act that waived the requirement to renounce an allegiance to a sovereign state. As my research shows, in 1906 Puerto Ricans began to naturalize in U.S. district courts throughout the mainland.

    The Jones Act of 1917 included a collective citizenship provision. It enabled people living in Puerto Rico to choose between keeping their Puerto Rican or other citizenship, or acquiring a U.S. citizenship. Because the Jones Act did not change Puerto Rico’s territorial status, persons subsequently born on the island were considered U.S. citizens by way of “jus sanguinis” (blood right), a derivative form of U.S. citizenship. In other words, persons born in Puerto Rico were born outside of the United States but still considered U.S. citizens.

    It wasn’t until 1940 that Congress enacted legislation conferring birthright, or “jus soli,” (right of soil) citizenship on persons born in Puerto Rico. Whereas persons born in Puerto Rico prior to 1940 could only acquire a naturalized citizenship if their parents were U.S. citizens, anyone born in Puerto Rico after 1940 acquired a U.S. citizenship as a direct result of being born on Puerto Rican soil. This legislation both amended and replaced the Jones Act. The Nationality Act of 1940 established that Puerto Rico was a part of the United States for citizenship purposes. Since Jan. 13, 1941, birth in Puerto Rico amounts to birth in the United States for citizenship purposes.

    However, the prevailing consensus among scholars, lawmakers and policymakers is that Puerto Ricans are not entitled to a constitutional citizenship status. While Puerto Ricans are officially U.S. citizens, the territory remains unincorporated. This contradiction has enabled the governance of Puerto Rico as a separate and unequal territory that belongs to, but is not a part of, the United States.

    Colonel Haiku (3287d7)

  106. “…….as by then their focus was drawn to the Potemkin village constructed by the DOJ, FBI and Beltway media…”

    Pretty much, lol.

    Everything going on with Google, Feinstein/Kavanaugh, Kerry, a horrific Dallas shooting, Strozik/Page and the FBI/DOJ leak machine China etc……..but – must…….keep…….it……..on……Trump.

    I get confused between the boy who cries wolf and the boy who cries squirrel.

    harkin (fb7ea4)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5677 secs.