"Haley’s old-school Republican worldview might not resonate with the party’s base, which is increasingly isolationist and populist" Christalmighty, I don't even know where to start.
I was puzzled when a friend used “populist” in a derogatory way. I told her “I don’t think you can just redefine words without some pushback” according to the dictionary it means for the people not elites.. what’s the (unsavory) alternative, being for elites and not the people? There’s a whiff of “supported by the wrong, unwashed people”. Anyway, I’m a fan of not redefining common English words.
Same here. Drives me crazy. Seems to me the Dems do use "populist" as a derogatory term because they are indeed the party of the elites now (despite all the lip service they pay to the "marginalized" and "minority" groups).
That silly line got me, too. Was this Bari? Is she still hangin' with her former buddies at the Times, who also don't know any real Republicans? I sure hope not. Republicans are not "isolationist." Putting America first, doesn't mean disengaging from the world. But it does mean not playing the sucker and paying the way for the defense of nations that are more than capable of paying their own way. It means an end to silly "nation building" exercises that cost us the precious lives of our young men and trillions of our treasure for people who despise us. It means a strong, capable defense of America's interests. This is not isolationism. It's wisdom. As far as "populism"- whatever that means - the new Republicanism is for the prosperity and liberty of Americans. It is for smaller, less intrusive government that actually improves the lives of Americans - not the consulting class, rent sucking CEOs, lobbyists and illegal immigrants. Like you said.."Christalmighty, I don't even know where to start" when dealing with such insular idiocy.
I think you give the current administration too much credit. Rather for this administration it is all about the money. Which might or might not result in Russian regime change.
(sorry for weird URL, the original essay is paywalled on the Foreign Affairs site. This link launches a perfectly normal pdf. Don't miss the Q&A at the end, too.)
As mentioned in my other reply, there are many agendas being pursued by Western elites in Ukraine. Some are short-term and some are most definitely long-term.
Indeed. If we zoom out far enough, Ukraine is just one very small part of the much larger global war over a uni-polar (aka centralized one-world order) vs. multi-polar (aka decentralized) world, with the West/NATO fighting for the former, and the Eurasian Economic Union fighting for the latter.
DeSantis is at the top of my list. But there are many others. Pompeo is quite capable. Cotton has a good resume. Haley is not bad. I'm eager to see who will surface. I would put more former Bushies, however, in the dustbin. Also any Lincoln Project loon or clowns such as Cheney are off the table.
Christ on a bike. I just saw that Herr Cheney the Sourpuss is now "teaching" at UVA. What a pimple on the rump of America Charlottesville and Mr. Jefferson's School have become. Jefferson must be spinning in his grave like a top. (edited for spelling)
DeSantis is the GOP establishment's choice to run against Trump. They will back him to the hilt. Should he fail or should he decide not to run, they'll back whoever else remains in the field. They'll cheat and spend and do anything else they need to do to ensure that Trump is not the nominee.
I don't think Trump will go rogue. The GOP certainly deserves it, as its leadership are little better than quislings at this point. They have failed over and over again to represent their voters and have shown open contempt for those who have put them in office. I think they'll cheat their way to a different nominee - and that nominee will lose. Trump's voters will be angry as well they should. Also, the Dems stole 2020 with GOP cooperation, so there is likely never going to be a Republican president again anyway.
... and THAT kind of rhetoric is why the Normals in America have decided that there is no compromise. I don't even try to convince anyone anymore. It's Do What You Have To Do. It's drive them into the ground, scorch the earth, and plow in salt. Got a load on my truck and the plow on my tractor.
That is Bari's view to which she is entitled. It is also shared by many others including many who voted for Trump in the past and would do so in the future. I would challenge Bari to also describe what the democrats increasingly look like. Let's instead focus on issues, have intense but civil debates about issues (no name calling ) and most importantly WIN against Biden or whomever the Dems choose. I am not convinced Haley is that person but let her make her case.
I would rather punish the pubs for their insolence in pushing another cheney/nuland neocon POS and suffer through biden until the pubs get it through their heads that certain warmongering special interests are not in the interests of the nation or the pub voter.
OK I'll remove the gun from Bari's head that is preventing her from speaking. Last time I checked, my post qualified as "my view to which I am entitled." Silly me, I thought "The Free Press" meant this was a free press for commenters as well. And BTW, in case you missed it, in this particular context, "increasingly isolationist" and "[increasingly] populist" was name-calling. Which was the source of my gobsmackdom. But do remind me what name I called her or anyone, as my post was so lengthy it will take forever to review it.
Did I challenge your right to express your opinion? I did not accuse YOU of name calling. I was referring to Trump who again went low v DeSantis. That's his right. My main point is WINNING elections.
When your direct response to my post includes "let's," as in "you and me" and ends with "let her make her case," I assume you are addressing me. But no one is preventing Bari from making her case. And she's a big girl & doesn't need protection from rebuttal, especially if she says something idiotic.
"Isolationist" and "populist" seem now to mean "you ignorant non-bug-eating non-climate-alarmist non-Gates-kowtowing non-globalist." The people I've heard say those things just use them as code; memes used by elites, like "fascist" and "racist" are by 20-somethings. But if being the I-word & the P-word means not funding Ukranians' pensions while our veterans are suiciding daily on park benches, where the fuck do I sign up.
I actually got off the Trump train (I wasn't all the way on this time anyway) when he made that creepy remark about DeSantis grooming kids or whatever the hell that was.
FYI my reference to SHE was to Haley. I abhor the use of any word or term by anyone who refuses to define it. I try to take then to task whenever and wherever. Usually I do not get a response. The Ukraine issue is a tough one on my opinion. At a minimum I want full transparency and accounting regarding any money spent. I also want every weapon given replaced and then some. Just my opinion
"Haley’s old-school Republican worldview might not resonate with the party’s base, which is increasingly isolationist and populist"
Christalmighty, I don't even know where to start.
I was puzzled when a friend used “populist” in a derogatory way. I told her “I don’t think you can just redefine words without some pushback” according to the dictionary it means for the people not elites.. what’s the (unsavory) alternative, being for elites and not the people? There’s a whiff of “supported by the wrong, unwashed people”. Anyway, I’m a fan of not redefining common English words.
Same here. Drives me crazy. Seems to me the Dems do use "populist" as a derogatory term because they are indeed the party of the elites now (despite all the lip service they pay to the "marginalized" and "minority" groups).
That silly line got me, too. Was this Bari? Is she still hangin' with her former buddies at the Times, who also don't know any real Republicans? I sure hope not. Republicans are not "isolationist." Putting America first, doesn't mean disengaging from the world. But it does mean not playing the sucker and paying the way for the defense of nations that are more than capable of paying their own way. It means an end to silly "nation building" exercises that cost us the precious lives of our young men and trillions of our treasure for people who despise us. It means a strong, capable defense of America's interests. This is not isolationism. It's wisdom. As far as "populism"- whatever that means - the new Republicanism is for the prosperity and liberty of Americans. It is for smaller, less intrusive government that actually improves the lives of Americans - not the consulting class, rent sucking CEOs, lobbyists and illegal immigrants. Like you said.."Christalmighty, I don't even know where to start" when dealing with such insular idiocy.
100% !!
and don't forget "regime change" .... which is the current administration's plan for Russia.
I think you give the current administration too much credit. Rather for this administration it is all about the money. Which might or might not result in Russian regime change.
It's both the money and regime change. For they are two branches of the same motivation: power and control.
Maybe. If you have time watch this
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JrMiSQAGOS4
Oh yes, I have watched that many times, and I also admire Mearsheimer's February 2014 essay in Foreign Affairs: https://www.natur.cuni.cz/geografie/socialni-geografie-a-regionalni-rozvoj/studium/doktorske-studium/kolokvium/kolokvium-2013-2014-materialy/ukrajina-a-rusko-mearsheimer-souleimanov.pdf
(sorry for weird URL, the original essay is paywalled on the Foreign Affairs site. This link launches a perfectly normal pdf. Don't miss the Q&A at the end, too.)
As mentioned in my other reply, there are many agendas being pursued by Western elites in Ukraine. Some are short-term and some are most definitely long-term.
Thanks. I had read much of it piecemeal when this recent war broke out. But it is nice to see a comprehensive, coherent piece.
You're welcome. Here's another, published Feb 2022, just after the current outbreak:
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/ukraines-deadly-gamble
It chronicles more recent events such as Democrat/Ukraine involvement in Spygate and Trump's subsequent impeachment as well.
Have you seen anything on SBF? I only saw one blurb shortly after the arrest and since then crickets.
Same. Lots of coverage and then zero coverage. Not surprising, is it?
Oh yes, I agree, that's the proximate, short-term need. But there are larger agendas at play.
Indeed. If we zoom out far enough, Ukraine is just one very small part of the much larger global war over a uni-polar (aka centralized one-world order) vs. multi-polar (aka decentralized) world, with the West/NATO fighting for the former, and the Eurasian Economic Union fighting for the latter.
True. What's that quote? Oh yeah, "[O] what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive."
Exactly. Since when did questioning the massive spending over investing in solving our own countries issues mean "isolationist?"
Which Republican politician do you think we could nominate for 2024?
DeSantis is top of my list, too.
Mike Pompeo
Good pick a really decent man!
DeSantis is at the top of my list. But there are many others. Pompeo is quite capable. Cotton has a good resume. Haley is not bad. I'm eager to see who will surface. I would put more former Bushies, however, in the dustbin. Also any Lincoln Project loon or clowns such as Cheney are off the table.
Christ on a bike. I just saw that Herr Cheney the Sourpuss is now "teaching" at UVA. What a pimple on the rump of America Charlottesville and Mr. Jefferson's School have become. Jefferson must be spinning in his grave like a top. (edited for spelling)
DeSantis is the GOP establishment's choice to run against Trump. They will back him to the hilt. Should he fail or should he decide not to run, they'll back whoever else remains in the field. They'll cheat and spend and do anything else they need to do to ensure that Trump is not the nominee.
I don't think Trump will go rogue. The GOP certainly deserves it, as its leadership are little better than quislings at this point. They have failed over and over again to represent their voters and have shown open contempt for those who have put them in office. I think they'll cheat their way to a different nominee - and that nominee will lose. Trump's voters will be angry as well they should. Also, the Dems stole 2020 with GOP cooperation, so there is likely never going to be a Republican president again anyway.
... and THAT kind of rhetoric is why the Normals in America have decided that there is no compromise. I don't even try to convince anyone anymore. It's Do What You Have To Do. It's drive them into the ground, scorch the earth, and plow in salt. Got a load on my truck and the plow on my tractor.
That is Bari's view to which she is entitled. It is also shared by many others including many who voted for Trump in the past and would do so in the future. I would challenge Bari to also describe what the democrats increasingly look like. Let's instead focus on issues, have intense but civil debates about issues (no name calling ) and most importantly WIN against Biden or whomever the Dems choose. I am not convinced Haley is that person but let her make her case.
Wrong. I will never vote for a warmonger pushed by the neocons as the pub candidate, never, ever.
I will not be played by the Nuland/Bush coalition.
Your right of course especially if you prefer biden and all that comes with him and his political appointees who have vast regulatory power.
I would rather punish the pubs for their insolence in pushing another cheney/nuland neocon POS and suffer through biden until the pubs get it through their heads that certain warmongering special interests are not in the interests of the nation or the pub voter.
I will not be blackmailed.
OK I'll remove the gun from Bari's head that is preventing her from speaking. Last time I checked, my post qualified as "my view to which I am entitled." Silly me, I thought "The Free Press" meant this was a free press for commenters as well. And BTW, in case you missed it, in this particular context, "increasingly isolationist" and "[increasingly] populist" was name-calling. Which was the source of my gobsmackdom. But do remind me what name I called her or anyone, as my post was so lengthy it will take forever to review it.
I agree she was name calling and thats why I wanted to hear her description of Democrats for equivalency
She does that frequently - the backhanded disparaging adjective where none of any description gets applied to her party.
You've noticed that, too.
Did I challenge your right to express your opinion? I did not accuse YOU of name calling. I was referring to Trump who again went low v DeSantis. That's his right. My main point is WINNING elections.
When your direct response to my post includes "let's," as in "you and me" and ends with "let her make her case," I assume you are addressing me. But no one is preventing Bari from making her case. And she's a big girl & doesn't need protection from rebuttal, especially if she says something idiotic.
"Isolationist" and "populist" seem now to mean "you ignorant non-bug-eating non-climate-alarmist non-Gates-kowtowing non-globalist." The people I've heard say those things just use them as code; memes used by elites, like "fascist" and "racist" are by 20-somethings. But if being the I-word & the P-word means not funding Ukranians' pensions while our veterans are suiciding daily on park benches, where the fuck do I sign up.
I actually got off the Trump train (I wasn't all the way on this time anyway) when he made that creepy remark about DeSantis grooming kids or whatever the hell that was.
FYI my reference to SHE was to Haley. I abhor the use of any word or term by anyone who refuses to define it. I try to take then to task whenever and wherever. Usually I do not get a response. The Ukraine issue is a tough one on my opinion. At a minimum I want full transparency and accounting regarding any money spent. I also want every weapon given replaced and then some. Just my opinion