Blog powered by Typepad

« That Shakespeare fella', very tricky, you know! | Main | This blog site is rubbish - and I'm to blame! »

Monday, 31 August 2020

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Huckster - "a person who sells small items door-to-door or from a stall."

Would it they were even as accomplished as a huckster, but these guys couldn't run a whelk-stall.

SoD

They can vote and vote (and the postal voters will); but unless they vote the right way (that is to say by any reasonable measure the wrong way) they'll get another 4 years of borderline sedition and violence.

And if they vote the other way that's it for all of us inasmuch as Dopey Joe's handlers are rabid marxists and will act to emasculate the constitution and all we hold dear about the USA.

Time to remember the Alamo, vote Trump in November, and then be prepared to get stuck into these lefty twats. If the coppers won't do their job then I suspect there's enough people equipped and prepared to do it for them. And that hopefully will lead to them being ordered to do their job again because the alternative is too awful to contemplate.

If Biden wins, the day after his inauguration the forces of the State will round up BLM/Antifada and ship them off to the well known FEMA camps.

You won't believe me that Marxism never caught on over here. Maybe you'll take it from The Ludwig von Mises Institute for Austrian Economics:

American Socialism Isn't Marxism — but It's Still a Problem

https://mises.org/wire/american-socialism-isnt-marxism%E2%80%94-its-still-problem

Bob, if you lock three Lefties in a room they will emerge with at least four different versions of what they call 'socialism'. They will all be equally disastrous!

Western socialism, Bernsteinian socialism, social democracy, call it what you will, is Marxism less the communist phase.

Marxist "theory" predicted / proposed that socialism would come as the first phase only. Then the state would wither away and Liberty and freedom return to the people, albeit a people cultured with a new "no-one gets left behind" attitude, way of being, and world-view: the "new man", in the second phase called communism.

As it stands Marx was only half right so far in the West. The socialists came, and then, when the time for the state to "wither away" and the socialists to depart, they said, "No, we don't wanna" and clung on to their control and power of the state refusing to let go.

So what's happened in the West is Marxism, it's just not run its course yet.

This statement from Bob's article is quite misleading then, in that it is slapping labels on what is merely Marxism at the halfway point. The labels trick you into thinking what has happened in the West is something else, it is not, it is exactly, uncannily, the Marxist prediction up to the halfway point ...

In the United States, what we have come to know as socialism is not Marxist, but appears as an amalgam of provisions taken from Bernsteinian reformism, Italian fascism, and French revolutionary syndicalism.

Prizing the death-grip fingers of the pol and public sector middle class off the levers of power is the precise struggle we in the West face right now. Lenin struggled with it, even Stalin acknowledged it would happen (just not on his watch if course!) ...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withering_away_of_the_state#:~:text=%22Withering%20away%20of%20the%20state,the%20state%20and%20its%20coercive

The peoples of South East Asia are the ones who round off the evidence that corroborates Marx because they have moved past the socialist phase and into the communist, thereby demonstrating the 2-step process is real and not fictional, and the diverse labels - Bernsteinian etc. - for the first phase as some kind of end state, quite false and unnecessary.

SEA has moved onto a redistributive state and ceased state ownership and operation of the means of production and distribution, aka socialism, leaving ownership in the hands of the ordinaries, with social buying power to go get what they need from the market of their own "new men".

Call it Funded Libertarianism if you're right wing and gloat that you had it right from the 19th century if you want, or call it communism if you're left wing and gloat that your acolyte Marx got it right if you want, but can we please leave this socialism thing behind us in the West and all go down the pub and have a pint now, please?

SoD

https://youtu.be/7yYplnEkbqU

Or:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yYplnEkbqU&feature=youtu.be

That's Entertainment! & I suppose in certain quarters, it is.

Or was at any rate.

Just saw the Gaffer's comment crossed over with mine - his far more succinct comment is exactly in accordance with not just me but Marx, Lenin, and Stalin - bloody old commie!

Call it what you will, first phase socialism was (East) and is (West) a disaster.

SoD

"rid your great nation of these hucksters who have slithered into your body-politic!" Oh you have no idea of just how much some of us would love to be rid of them. I'll stop there.

David, the same could be said of the right, be they authoritarians, fascists, reactionaries, monarchists, conservatives, nationalists, nativists, theocrats, and whatever others I've left out. Some of these groups are also sometimes anti-capitalists. Labels aren't always useful, are they?

SoD,

For not being a Marxist, you certainly have faith in his ability to map out the future.

David, the same could be said of the right, be they authoritarians, fascists, reactionaries, monarchists, conservatives, nationalists, nativists, theocrats, and whatever others I've left out. Some of these groups are also sometimes anti-capitalists.

And the one you missed out, Bob, because you couldn't quite bear to get your digital lips around it: National Socialist.

All the examples you've given, plus the one above, plus all shades of socialism (if you feel the need to distinguish them) are all in that zone in the bottom pointy corner of Nolan where they get squashed together and become indistinguishable.

Good, well done, you're learning.

SoD

The Dems fear losing the black vote. So they promote stories of racism to scare the black population into voting their way. Some stir up riots, but remember that the bulk of the rioters are apolitical opportunist looters.
They seem to have started wondering whether the majority of blacks like having their neighbourhoods destroyed. So now the people who once encouraged "protests" and contributed to funds to bail out " protesters " say they were against it all along.
It's not about ideology, it's about a ruthless lust for power.

Pat,
Your conclusion is spot on. Nobody who is normal can believe the lengths to which this "Democratic Party" of ours will go to regain power. 2016 and their shocking loss to Trump has completely undone them thereby causing them to completely drop the mask. Their allied institutions in academia, media, big business and governing authorities all across America have done the same. A mindless primal scream that comes from deep mental illness that only self righteous entitlement can birth.

I agree, Pat.

The riots may actually have been a gift for the Don. He can leverage them as you've said to win back the "black and shocked white" vote. The longer the riots go on the better. And he gets to bank the economic come back that will happen over the next four years ready for his anointed successor - no doubt someone from "the family" - to leverage at the next election.

There is a route through all this where it all turns out very nicely indeed, short and medium / long term.

You lucky buggers over there. No such thing can be said this side of the pond, of course.

SoD

"his anointed successor"

Ivanka, first female president of the US. And white....

SoD,

So Libertarians stand apart from all others. Behold! The Master Race! John Galts all! Lead us Master!

It's somewhat inconvenient for Trump that all the chaos developed on his watch. Not that blaming it on "others" won't work on some people.

Come to think of it, I let Donnie off too easy. The US accounts for 4% of the world's population and 25% of covid deaths. That's why he wants to distract the public with black people and anarchists. If we can believe polls, and that's a big IF, it's not working.

Oh Bob,

"The US accounts for 4% of the world's population and 25% of covid deaths."

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm?fbclid=IwAR2-muRM3tB3uBdbTrmKwH1NdaBx6PpZo2kxotNwkUXlnbZXCwSRP2OmqsI

"Table 3 shows the types of health conditions and contributing causes mentioned in conjunction with deaths involving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death."

I'd actually be tempted to increase that decimal value if only because of that Florida motorcyclist who got decapitated during a traffic incident then, getting included on the list of "death[s] due to Covid-19."

That can't possibly have been the only time that sort of "fudging the numbers" occurred.

"President Trump's support among black voters rose 9 percentage points amid the Republican National Convention, a new Hill-HarrisX poll finds. ... The survey found support among Hispanic voters also grew by 2 percentage points, from 30 percent in the last poll to 32 percent in this most recent survey."

https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/514174-poll-trump-approval-rises-among-black-hispanic-voters

IF we can believe the polls.

Civil wars are like black holes: it's hard to tell when you've crossed the event horizon.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6186424701001#sp=show-clips

That's Tucker Carlson.

Pisses of not merely Bob but, as often as not 'Establishment Republicans' too.

No wonder John McCain and Jeff Flake refused his appearance requests.

And it's little wonder he'll not be moderating any presidential debates.

Well for that matter, nobody from 'conservative media' can do so.

Off topic but worth a read

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/on-musical-jingoism/?taid=5f4bcdb4f67cb600011b66a3&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

AussieD, an excellent article!

JK,

Carlson doesn't piss me off. He's just one more operative. Accusing the opposition of doing what you're obviously doing yourself is one of the oldest political tricks in the book. Expect plenty more from plenty more Republican flacks.

And I'm not sure why it disappeared, but yesterday I corrected myself. We're down to 22% of global covid deaths, but still have the most of any country in the world.

Expect plenty more from plenty more Republican Democratic flacks.

Fixed it fur ya, Bob.

https://americanmind.org/features/the-racial-marxism-of-blm/the-war-on-america/

And to put the finer point on it Bob:

That's a pretty fine analysis.

UP2L8,

Absolutely.

JK,

"There is empirical and anecdotal evidence that far-right hate groups pose a significant threat to public safety. Far-right extremists commit many violent attacks, and some scholars conclude that far-right extremists, especially groups motivated by religious ideology, are strong candidates to commit future acts using weapons of mass destruction (Gurr & Cole, 2002; Tucker, 2001). Research analyzing data from the Extremist Crime Database has shown that active members of far-right extremist groups have been involved in over 330 homicide incidents in the last 20 years (Freilich, Chermak, Belli, Grunewald & Parkin; Gruenewald, 2011). Similarly, a national survey of State law enforcement agencies concluded that there was significant concern about the activities of far-right extremist groups, and that more states reported the presence of far-right militia groups (92%), neo-Nazis (89%), and racist skinheads (89%) in their jurisdictions than Jihadi extremist groups (65%) (Freilich, Chermak & Simone, 2009). Despite these important concerns, few projects have empirically studied far-right hate groups in the United States. This study aims to address this research gap by exploring the factors that distinguish violent far-right hate groups from non-violent far-right hate groups."

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/944_OPSR_TEVUS_Comparing-Violent-Nonviolent-Far-Right-Hate-Groups_Dec2011-508.pdf

"Non-violent far-right hate groups" is an interesting phrase, don't you think?

Yes Bob actually specifying a "hate group" is non-violent is interesting.

Kinda like me "hating" licorice twists but I'm not gonna go out and set fire to the factory that produces the crap.

Uhm Bob?

Your posing that question nagged at the back of my mind for whatever reason so I finally figured I'd best hit your link and try to figure 'the why' the authors of that, ostensibly DHS study, would indeed use that phraseology.

I understand now what it's most likely to be - from Page 2 [Executive Summary]:

"We used the Southern Poverty Law Center’s (SPLC) annual Intelligence Report and Klan Watch publications to produce a list of hate groups in the United States."

https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/488923-the-southern-poverty-law-center-and-yesterdays-wars

Don't have a clue Bob as to whether you're familiar with that organization's "hate group list" but are you aware that one of its criteria for getting listed is something so seemingly innocuous as one's having "political differences"?

JK,

I was pretty sure you'd notice that. However, the report is a product of the DHS and University of Maryland. Jeremy Tedesco isn't exactly an unbiased observer, since his has been named a hate group by the SPLC:

The Southern Poverty Law Center designates the ADF as an anti-LGBTQ hate group.[9] The SPLC has also described the ADF as a "prominent Christian legal powerhouse," and criticized it for providing "advice to anti-gay bigots in Belize." ...

In 2016, the Southern Poverty Law Center listed the organization as an anti-LGBTQ hate group. The group's designation "was a judgment call that went all the way up to top leadership at the SPLC". The ADF has opposed its inclusion on the SPLC's list, with senior counsel Jeremy Tedesco describing it as "a stranglehold on conservative and religious groups that is just hovering over us and that can continue to constrict and limit our ability to simply voice our opinion".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_Defending_Freedom

Oh well.

Bob, is Biden getting desperate now raising the veterans issue? The UK has made a legal Covenent to help veterans.

Glesga,

Biden's probably just taking advantage of an opening. I read months ago that Trump might lose the military. The trend seems steady:

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2020/08/31/as-trumps-popularity-slips-in-latest-military-times-poll-more-troops-say-theyll-vote-for-biden/

"Why Joe Biden?

During his over four decades of public service, Joe has been an ardent supporter of veterans and the US military. During his tenure in the US Senate, Joe fought tirelessly to secure additional funding for veteran healthcare, including funds to support veterans struggling with mental illnesses. He also fought to expand housing benefits for US veterans.

Aside from his consistent support for veterans, we believe Joe Biden possesses the values, temperament, and vision to restore the soul of our Republic."

https://www.veteransforbiden.com/mission-1

Bob, the point is was Biden telling porkies about Trump regarding veterans. I bet he was. No President would ignore veterans except a leftie.

"During his over four decades of public service"

That tells you all you need to know Glesga.

Glesga,

Trump doesn't fit the leftie/rightie scale. He's in a world of his own. Biden didn't make up the story:

"The Atlantic magazine described a 2018 meeting with senior officials in France in which Trump discussed why he was cancelling a planned visit to the Aisne-Marne American Cemetery near Paris to honor America's war dead.

The president publicly blamed the cancellation of the visit on safety concerns expressed by the Secret Service due to rain which made it impossible to fly a helicopter there.

But The Atlantic, citing four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day, reported Trump said in the meeting he didn't want to go because he didn't want his hair to get disheveled in the rain and he didn't see why he should honor dead soldiers.

“Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers,” the magazine quoted Trump as saying. The report said he referred to the more than 1,800 marines who died at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/09/04/trump-calls-military-dead-losers-he-denies-claim-atlantic/5714254002/

Hum Bob?

Remember how you been going on and on (and on and on and on and ... about how the 'Boogaloo Bois' is definitely a Right-Wing [terrorist] group?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/09/boogaloo-bois-meet-hamas-or-want-to.php

You do Bob, understand just what Hamas is, who its enemies are, which countries provide its financing, what its "Party Platform" consists of?

***

Oh Bob you never seem to get it:

"The article cited “four people with firsthand knowledge of the discussion that day,” but did not name them. During a conversation with senior officials that day, according to the magazine, Mr. Trump said: “Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.” On the same trip, the article said, he referred to American Marines slain in combat at Belleau Wood as “suckers” for getting killed."

"John R. Bolton, the president’s former national security adviser who has broken with him and called him unfit for office, said he was on the trip in question and never heard Mr. Trump make those remarks. “I didn’t hear that,” Mr. Bolton said in an interview. “I’m not saying he didn’t say them later in the day or another time, but I was there for that discussion.”

"Mr. Bolton said he was in the room at the ambassador’s residence when Mr. Trump arrived and Mr. Kelly told him that the helicopter trip had to be canceled. A two-hour motorcade would have put him too far away from Air Force One and the most capable communications array a president needs in case of an emergency, per usual protocol, Mr. Bolton said. “It was a straight weather call,” he said."

Of course Bob you'll be arguing the source?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/04/us/politics/trump-veterans-losers.html

Yeah like the NYT is suddenly overcome in realizing 'the error of its ways' and has become now Trump's cheerleaders?

Right.

https://theintercept.com/2020/09/05/journalisms-new-propaganda-tool-using-confirmed-to-mean-its-opposite/

And now not only has the New York Times become Trump fans now it's none other than Glenn Greenwald hisself too!

Funny thing about how this "media confirmation process" has done a one-eighty since Trump's coming down the escalator - now it's whenever another media outlet repeats whatever was alleged in the first hostile media's accounting - whether true or not, whether anonymously sourced or not - it's the repetition of the original rumor-mongering that "confirms the allegation" rather than the actual facts.

How the Russiagate myth all got kicked off should be illustrative of our illusory the rewards of this type of "media confirmation" works out - Let's remember the Steele Report was first given to one Michael Isikoff who, unable to verify its allegations the Editorial Board of the NYT refused to publish it.

But then the Steele Report was "leaked" to Buzzfeed which did publish it, followed hours later by Yahoo News then repeating what Buzzfeed had done - Only then did the NYT become emboldened enough owing to its been "repeatedly published" to accept the Steele Report as "confirmed."

Then we only had to wait three years to find out during the testimony Inspector General Horowitz gave before Congress that the only thing about the Steele Report that anyone could rely on was that it was confirmed bullshit.

Just got a break from my 'overwatch duties' [riotous behavior across conus - consultancy] (mainly watching video postings to social media sort of things)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/05/21/veterans-healthcare-scandal-shinseki-timeline/9373227/

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13793

Anyway Bob as if you needed a reminder of just how much Biden personally undertook to "watch over our boys" - during his over four decades of public service That ought go some distance toward illustrating all the good Biden accomplished.

JK,

Bolton might not have heard Trump, but other people did:

"Trump's reported comments were confirmed independently by the Associated Press, the Washington Post and other outlets including Fox News – which sparked an angry attack from Trump on Fox News’ National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin."

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/fox-news-reporter-doubles-down-on-confirmation-of-the-atlantic-s-trump-story-1.9132658

You can't reasonably defend Trump. The blog spin about the Boogaloo Bois, who I might have mentioned twice, seems pointless.

https://cdrsalamander.blogspot.com/2020/09/from-aircraft-to-dikes-pick-your.html

Well Bob, Goldberg's got 4 sources un-named & unwilling to speak on the record (fearing "mean tweets") while those voicing "that stuff was never said" number eleven named & willing to speak on the record. Now were this a baseball game, or any other activity upon which a greater number trumps a lesser number one could reasonably defend the higher scoring party wins whatever the contest.

That link incidentally is mil-centric. And not un-coincidentally in my personal experience, reflective of what I'm hearing from my fellow veterans.

Caveat - Pentagon ie 'political Generals/Admirals' types I can not count among my "fellow veterans."

Bob,

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/20/laurene-jobs-the-atlantic-072210

https://ballotpedia.org/Emerson_Collective

https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?cand=&cycle=2020&employ=&name=Laurene+jobs&page=1&state=&zip=

Having a little time on my hands I figured I might take a deeper dive into 'the hows & whys' some media outfit could might be recognized by even the most jaded troll trolling around that there might be, possibly could be, Say it ain't so Joe! troll, possibly fathom there's media outfits 'out there' which might, possibly might, have a readily observable agenda even that most dedicated troll could hardly maintain such disputatious carryings-on as we seem so likely to keep at.

So what say Bob, in the interests of you maintaining your {supposedly] 'equal opportunity' insistence "there's there there" you get in touch with whoever those anonymous sources are and convince 'em mean tweets are analogous to sticks-and-stones?

I'll wait.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)