61% panicked …


" … what should disturb Obama, who bypassed his own vice president to lay out the red carpet for Hillary, is that the email transgression is not a one off. It’s part of a long pattern of ethical slipping and sliding, obsessive secrecy and paranoia, and collateral damage.

Comey’s verdict that Hillary was “negligent” was met with sighs rather than shock. We know who Hillary and Bill are now. We’ve been held hostage to their predilections and braided intrigues for a long time. (On the Hill, Comey refused to confirm or deny that he’s investigating the Clinton Foundation, with its unseemly tangle of donors and people doing business with State.)

We’re resigned to the Clintons focusing on their viability and disregarding the consequences of their heedless actions on others. They’re always offering a Faustian deal. This year’s election bargain: Put up with our iniquities or get Trump’s short fingers on the nuclear button.

The Clintons work hard but don’t play by the rules. Imagine them in the White House with the benefit of low expectations."  Maureen Dowd in the NY Times


 Panicked?  Yes indeed!  Why should they not be?

A significant attempt is underway to re-program Trump as a more plausible person who could be trusted with the actual ability to launch a nuclear strike without congressional action.   That ability is a vestige of the Cold War when it was thought that MAD required it.  Do we still need for the president/commander in chief to have that actual power?  Is there really a threat of such immediacy that the concentration of such apocalyptic power is justified?   The neo-cons and neo-liberals are trying to re-start the Cold War.  Why are they doing that?  I don't know.  I don't see what the actual, as opposed to notional, threat from Russia consists of.  In any event can Trump actually be trusted when in office?  That is the question and I expect that will remain the principal question.

Hillary is not trusted by the public.  She polls at around 20% with regard to whether or not people across the country trust her.  Can one actually and successfully govern with that low a level of public trust?  The Democrats undoubtedly think that they will re-capture control of the senate because of mistrust of Trump, but is that really true in light of the level of mistrust of Clinton?

Baggage?  She has a lot of it. 

1.  Health.  There are massive questions, unresolved by her physician's statements, as to the actual state of her health.  How bad was her head injury?  Has she had a series of micro-strokes? What about her numerous blood-clot incidents?  What is the total effect of the prescription drugs that she takes, drugs designed to keep her alive by keeping her blood thin?    How much is she medicated for stress and anxiety?  

2.  Legal problems.  Comey let her off on the issue or whether or not she could be successfully prosecuted for malpractice with regard to government secrets but a number of other issues remain.   Representatives Gowdy and Chaffetz have their staffs perusing all of HC's sworn statement to Congress looking for material upon which to make a "referral" to the FBI for an investigation of possible perjury.  Comey declined to discuss before Chaffetz' committee the question of whether or not there is a different ongoing FBI investigation into the operations of the CGI and the Clinton Foundation and possible intersections of HC's receptivity at State to foreign people or groups who were or later became donors to the CGI and the Clinton Foundation.  There is also a question concerning the Greece centered hedge fund activities of HC's son in law, Mezvinsky.  It has been alleged that HC provided Mezvinsky US government secret material concerning the intentions of various European leaders with regard to propping up the Greek economy.   This would have obviously been useful to Mezvinsky in making "bets" in the markets on Greek economic recovery.  He was a miserable failure at doing that but that would not obviate HC's culpability if she did give him US Government information especially if, as it is said to me, some of this were SIGINT products.

IMO if HC faced anyone but Trump she would be "toast."  pl  


This entry was posted in As The Borg Turns, Current Affairs, Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

109 Responses to 61% panicked …

  1. The Beaver says:

    Re: Health
    As an outsider looking in (and one who could and would be impacted by the Foreign policy of her administration), I was surprised to hear her repeat on different occasions that she is looking for a VPOTUS who could be president.
    Scratching my head as to whether she believes that she would not be able to finish her term but is fighting to ensure that she goes in history as the first POTUS from the feminine gent.

  2. JMH says:

    If Jill Stein makes it into the debates, HC will indeed be burnt toast.

  3. ked says:

    The Cold War will drag on in some ways just as the Civil War has. It was too big a deal, on many levels, not-to.
    I think we have seen (going back at least to LBJ revealing the existence of the SR71) use by elected officials (both Exec & Legislative) of classified information & knowlege (even techniques) to further state policy &/or personal agendas. Is a President’s authority to do so unlimited? Can he allow or direct others to do so? Are Congressmen & Senators restricted differently – should they be? Are “political” people different from civil service or the uniformed services people? Historical context of laws & behaviors might help us differentiate long-standing, on-going trends from specific actions by specific actors.

  4. DC says:

    Comey carefully described how Clinton violated the letter of the law; that she knew what she was doing and indeed intended to do it. Yet, according to Comey, she did not have the correct type of “intent” in order to prosecute, notwithstanding the fact that “gross negligence” is by definition not intent. And, as a result, this precedent allows any federal employee to be negligent with sensitive information and escape criminal liability. There is now no deterrent in criminal law. That’s malpractice from Comey, in my opinion. A lot of Americans are angry and confused right now, including myself.

  5. Jack says:

    In the Republican primary the majority voted against the status quo. Trump defeated all the establishment candidates who had far more resources and superior organizations. Even in California Trump got 1.6 million votes. In the Democrat primary a sizeable minority voted against the status quo. If we assume that Trump stepped down, we can be certain the GOP convention will nominate a status quo candidate. Is that what a significant number of voters want?
    I understand that the Borg Queen is an immense danger to our safety and the thought of the Clintons and their well known cesspool of sleaze once again in the White House is too abhorent. With the entire big money, big media and the establishment of the duopoly actively campaigning for the Borg Queen the weakness of the Trump campaign is being magnified. But, the GOP establishment as savior. …

  6. Tyler says:

    Disagree as to your last line.
    Jeb and Rubio were supposed to lose gracefully to HRC and only disagree with her on how much they love Israel. Then the RNC was supposed to push amnesty down our throats cause they decided that’s why the Republicans lost. Jeb and all the others would have lost worst than Romney, only Trump’s populist message is different than the same tired nonsense about acts of love and “invade 89th world invite the world” that the Republicans kept pushing.
    Dukakis was much further ahead of Reagan at this point and time, and the media wasn’t nearly as much in the bag for the Left as today.

  7. crone says:

    …” and the media wasn’t nearly as much in the bag for the Left as today.”
    imho… the “media” is in the bag for the 1% – who own them. There is no “Left” today.

  8. steve says:

    Your last line nails it. I could have voted for any of the other candidates, except maybe Cruz. However, if he ran I just would not vote. With Trump I have to decide if I want to vote against him. While I am generally optimistic about most things, the fact that we managed to put up the two worst candidates in recent history up against each other at the same time is depressing.

  9. Tyler says:

    Oh give me a break with the “no true Leftist” hand waving sophistry. The 1% is overwhelmingly in favor of more secular humanism including gay marriage, abortion on demand, open borders, and more globalisation.
    Stop trying to pretend the Left is a bunch of scrappy underdogs. You’re not. You are the Borg. Deal with it.

  10. Haralambos says:

    My take-away from Dowd’s piece is this: “…that’s the corkscrew way things go with the Clintons, who are staying true to their reputation as the Tom and Daisy Buchanan of American politics.” Those who read _The Great Gatsby_ will recall that Tom and Daisy were “careless people.”
    I would add that they are crudely cavalier and uncaring as well: “We came, we saw, he died.”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Y

  11. Bobo says:

    Hill and Bill have been on the fire for a long long time but when Mark Shields and Maureen Dowd are turning the spit you know they are almost done.

  12. Edward Amame says:

    Well, I agree with your last line anyway.

  13. HankP says:

    I’m going to have to disagree. No matter who the Republican nominee is, or who the Democratic nominee is, the most likely outcome is another 48% – 48% close race with the remaining 4% deciding the election. That’s what we’ve seen since Reagan’s landslide in 1984, with the only exception being the 1992 race where Perot got a significant percentage of the vote. I think that is likely to be the outcome this year as well, with Trumps numbers coming up in the fall.
    As far as Dowd, she’s been anti-Clinton since the 90s, so I wouldn’t count on her for any kind of reasoned analysis.

  14. ISL says:

    Tyler, you forgot to mention Trump had spent slightly more than zero dollars on advertisements, yet won. I also think the media is biased because he does not talk policy wonkery, yet, many of his actual plans (I assume wall is a metaphor) are reasonable policy responses that make me not worried about the finger on the button.
    Ex: Talk about bombing ISIS, but plan to let Russia handle the details. (Hmmm sensible).
    HRC: Set up a no-fly zone in Russia and not worry about shooting down jets escalating to nuclear war.
    Ex: Build our infrastructure from 3rd world to a 1st world level and default (Hmm, when Krugman suggested the Treasury print a 1 trillion dollar coin to retire debt, it was a serious policy).
    HRC: Lets funnel more taxpayer money to wall street through naive students who expect a job waiting to pay their debts as a Walmart greeter or equivalent (our economy officially mostly generates bartender and waitress jobs the last few years – if you were to trust the official stats).

  15. Edward Amame says:

    The left is winning the culture wars, but in the process mostly ceded economic/labor issues to the 1%. First there was Howard Dean, now there are Bernie and Liz, who actually sound like Old Democrats in the liberal FDR tradition.
    The days of indie local press with scrappy lefty reporters questioning the powers-that-be are gone. US media has been consolidated and corporatized and while it may trend left on social issues, the News Hour, networks and cable, like congress, all know which side the butter’s on when it comes to economic/labor issues. The NY Times has always known.

  16. ISL says:

    I disagree there is a Left; however, the Left featured on the media are “useful Idiots” to the 1% (I.e., the media owners), excepting those who plug in at high levels in the Borg (they are servants of the Borg queen).

  17. TonyL says:

    The Borg is neither Left or Right. I’m surpised you did not get that. The social conservatives and social liberals are fooling themselves they can make a difference fighting against each other. IMHO, the 1% are laughing at our ignorance.

  18. “Dukakis was much further ahead of Reagan at this point and time …”
    That’d be G.H.W.Bush, not Reagan.

  19. Jack says:

    I agree that the number of voters that can be persuaded by either side is very small. Our recent elections hinge on who gets out to vote in the handful of swing states. California currently will only elect a candidate with DEM next to their name. Texas similarly will only elect a Republican. Partisanship runs deep and is a large lens through which we view politics. Those of us who traditionally never vote the duopoly are in a fringe minority. What I find ironic is how partisans will excuse the same behavior and policies that they decry in the other party. Many Democrat partisans were up in arms about Dubya’s warmongering, yet they were very supportive of Obama-Hillary’s destabilization into anarchy of Libya and Syria. One hardly hears them as Obama arms and funds Islamist extremists to overthrow Assad. There is a very limited constituency in America today for a non-interventionist policy in both foreign and domestic affairs. IMO, we are where we are precisely because of it.

  20. annamissed says:

    “Tom and Daisy Buchanan”. That’s a scary adept. And following, he Trump is Gatsby? For sure.

  21. Balint Somkuti says:

    What r u winning?
    Nothing my friend.
    U r losing big time and it is only the matter of time and the world socialist or simply ‘left’ will be as despised as nazi.

  22. Allen Thomson says:

    The points ked raises would provide rich material for discussion in a graduate seminar on government. This probably isn’t the place to pursue them, but they certainly should be kept in mind.

  23. Balint Somkuti says:

    Weren’t you banned?
    Why dont you get the funk outa here?

  24. Doug Colwell says:

    The lefts’ real concerns are class and labour. The fact that many see issues like identity politics as leftist shows how successful the ruling class has been. Labour and the left has been gutted and what you call the left is its’ corpse.
    Globalization and “free trade” is sought by that same ruling class. I was on a (small) union executive years ago and we fought against NAFTA. Those of us truly concerned with the working class are listening very carefully to Trump. His remarks about trade deals belong in the debates. The same goes for immigration, and for the same reason. HRC has proven herself to be an enemy of working people every chance she has had.

  25. charly says:

    The SR71 wasn’t a secret for the Soviets so telling such secrets isn’t that bad.

  26. Tyler says:


  27. Tyler says:

    You’re not winning the culture wars. The elite is barreling towards legalized pederastry and doing everything it can to make it impossible to stop it. The only reason they haven’t is because we haven’t gotten to the point where Middle America brings back the rope and the firing squad.

  28. kao_hsien_chih says:

    Trump isn’t Gatsby. Bernie could be/have been, but there is no real Gatsby in this version.
    I was thinking about another novel: Native Son by Richard Wright. The 1% are gloating about how wonderously progressive and tolerant they are, but, to us Bigger Thomases of the world, of all races, none of their “culture wars” (who’s winning or losing) really matters.

  29. Tyler says:

    Yeah yeah “wake up sheeple!” I’ve heard it before.
    The Left is for unfettered globalism and rootless cosmopolitanism. I know some of you get your nipples in a twist over that but that’s the reality of it. No amount of mendacious sophistry about triple bank shot theories changes that.
    For reference: the pretzel logic employed whe, someone tries to argue that Obama is a secret non interventionist vs. A bumbler who orders drone assassinations over his corn flakes.

  30. Fred says:

    “The left is winning the culture wars,…”
    You are correct. Before giving the joyous report of Pheidippides you should reflect on the great victory. In 1960 80% of black children were born into two parent households, most of which were Christian. in 2016 It is now less than 30%. The great victory of the left, defeating Christianity and the black family.

  31. Keith Harbaugh says:

    To “Legal issues” should be added the FOIA lawsuits.
    As more becomes known about how thoroughly HRC,
    with her retainers and lackeys and aiders and abettors in the State Dept.,
    made a mockery of her obligation to make her records available to the American public through the FOIA process,
    while at the same time she made them available to any foreign intelligence service worthy of the name,
    the Federal judges overseeing the Judicial Watch, Vice, et al. lawsuits
    may hold her feet to the fire over this issue.
    Of course, on the other hand, they may shrink from being the person who thwarts an objective so clearly held by so many of the ZOG:
    empowering yet more feminists, homosexuals, people of color and those fans of punishing Russia for its perceived transgressions against its Jewish oligarchs and their fellows, and attacking any state that poses a threat to Israel,
    and receiving the obloquy of the Washington Post, etc. in return.

  32. Fred says:

    To quote the NYT: “In a mere 11 days, arrogant, selfish actions by the Clintons contaminated three of the purest brands in Washington — Barack Obama, James Comey and Loretta Lynch — and jeopardized the futures of Hillary’s most loyal aides.”
    “The purest brans in Washington” well the manure sure must smell different up close; where an understanding of personal integrity and individual agency can’t get in the way.

  33. Harry says:

    All good points, but I think a reasonable man would still guess she was 4 points now and likely to win unless something else comes up. Trump is not the easiest win one could imagine. But I can imagine him winning if there was a fair wind and he manages his media way better than he is now.
    But seriously, apart from not being one of the idiot politicians who got us here, what positive characteristics does he offer? I imagine there are many other outsider candidates you might support with more enthusiasm.

  34. Harry says:

    I think the Clinton/Blair new left are for those things. The old left is for unions and is anti big business.

  35. Bill Herschel says:

    An excellent choice. I hope he chooses Flynn. He’d be an idiot not to. Foreign policy credentials? It seems to me that Flynn has them. C’mon Trump, do the right thing.
    Choosing Flynn would open the right debate. And it seems to me that it will be very difficult to tar Flynn with the brush of “legalized pederasty” though he is pro-choice, etc.

  36. Matthew says:

    Fred: Remember Pauline Kael’s remark about her surprise when Nixon won in 1968 because no one “she knew” was supporting him.

  37. Mark Logan says:

    Bobo, re: “…almost done.”
    She only person she has to outrun is Don Trump, not the bear(s). IMO the only worthwhile hope now is for a Trump-dump convention. The guy isn’t fixable and they will eventually quit deluding themselves about that, it’s simply a question of when. I’d give it 30-70 odds that happens before they nominate him.

  38. The Beaver says:

    To Babak,
    OT : please check this
    She has a lot of followers amongst the politicos on both sides of the pond.
    I was surprised to read a tweet from Howard Dean and this former staff member of HRC at Foggy Bottom:

  39. steve says:

    “The Left is for unfettered globalism and rootless cosmopolitanism.”
    So is the right. That is what big business would prefer. At the top, the 1% all agree on that, be they economic conservatives or liberals. The right wants that cheap labor. The left has weird ideas about immigrants. Besides, they mostly look after their own interests. (Actually, this is not quite correct, The right wants unfettered globalism so that big business can write their own rules, or have none. The left wants fettered globalism. They want to write lots of rules and regulations into globalism.)

  40. Tyler says:

    Yes yes, the poor left has been suckered in by all those gender studies professors and coastal talking heads.
    Do you listen to yourself talk?

  41. HankP says:

    Jack –
    I’m not so sure about the party loyalty bit anymore. Most democrats I know weren’t happy with the bombing in Libya or Syria. Similarly, most conservatives I know weren’t that happy with Bush when he expanded Medicare. I think party loyalty is fading, which can also explain why Trump and Sanders did so well.
    I agree that our foreign policy is a bipartisan problem. I do think the Dems will do a better job keeping HRC in line, other than immediately after 9/11 Democrats in congress haven’t been very supportive of foreign adventures. At least, not as much as the Republicans.

  42. rjj,
    I mentioned this yesterday on the previous post linking to the same Guardian article. I haven’t heard anything else about the offer or if Bernie considered it. Wouldn’t it be a hoot if he announced he will run as the Green candidate when he has a joint appearance with Hillary next week. As she clutches her heart and prepares to faint, old Bernie hollers over, “How do ya like dem apples, toots?”

  43. annamissed says:

    Bernie as Gatsby? Ha!. There’s only one in this race with an insatiable desire for approval acted out through an epic level of wealth display and self promotion.
    may have to trade in my (were living in a) Dickens world for Fitzgerald.

  44. Amir says:

    Blood clot incidence (as long as they are not cerebral) and anticoagulation would not necessarily disqualify her from her job as they have no immediate effect on the intellectual capacity obviously the longevity of the patient is reduced.
    Clinton seems to have a slightly abnormal gait, especially when she was coming of the plain. Whether this is due to pain (antalgic) and joint disease or neuro-muscular (stroke or inflammation related) is obviously hard to say.
    Multi-infarct dementia in someone who has had multiple strokes and has underlying condition that -if suboptimally treated- would cause more strokes (irregular heart beat that necessitates blood thinners)is a reality of our “age” and guidelines and protocols need to be determined to limit the nation’s exposure to leaders with dementia. At the end of the day, Reagan had dementia towards the end of his presidency and GW II was an alcoholic with associated sequelae.
    Use of psychotropes is a chapter apart and obviously the influence of your treating physician should also be monitored.

  45. Tyler says:

    Four points is nothing considering she was leading by 12-16 as little as two months ago, and now she’s tied with Trump or losing to him. Its been, much like the primary was, a steady downhill trend for Trump’s opponents while he gains on them bit by bit. We haven’t even had the debates yet – how is Hillary’s coughing spell going to look on national television?
    Is your question rhetorical? Trump believes the US is a country and that illegal immigration must be stopped, not a bazaar for the 3rd World to flood into while rootless cosmopolitans hop from coast to coast.

  46. Tyler says:

    No, the “right” as you describe isn’t the right, but just another branch of Marxist tyranny.
    The Right believes in the existence of the nation state more than the Left ever did.

  47. Tyler says:

    Problem is its likely she had a stroke a few years ago that was swept under the rug as a “concussion”.
    As I pointed out, she’s not a healthy woman. Anyone of her, shall we say, stature is likely on at least a beta blocker, if not a calcium channel blocker. I’d say there’s a very good chance she’s on an ACE inhibitor as well. Captopril? Seems like she’s a fan of these drugs from the 60s and 70s. Come to think of it, I wouldn’t rule out her being on Digoxin either.

  48. TonyL says:

    No tripple bank shot theory. Please make a list of the 1% , see how these orligarchs influenced policies. Murdoch, Soros… etc.

  49. jonst says:

    Personally, I always prefered the Snopes model for the Clintons.
    Just my opinion mind you.

  50. rjj says:

    gloomy suspicion: voters are being set up to choose Biden as the least of 2.5 evils.

  51. Cee says:

    If Donald is smart!!

  52. rjj says:

    TTG, did a speed-read right by the link. Apologies. YES!!! it would create much havoc!! Seems likely CorpsMedia will give it their flatus in ecclesiam (fart in church) treatment while the problem is resolved behind the scenes. Has it even been mentioned by mainstream media commentariat?

  53. Fred says:

    As I recall Nixon proposed national health insurance, created more than one national park and then there is that war record. When he got caught lying about stealing secrets was held accountable.

  54. Dave in MD says:

    I’m amazed that so many white Americans (and we only have a two-party competition b/c of whites, the only non-lockstep demographic), who have children and grandchildren, yet somehow think Democrat or liberal policies will make things better for them or their offspring. Is it cognitive dissonance? An unawareness of what is actually going on? I work a job where I see the societal collapse and emerging clusterf*ck first hand. Sometimes I tell my liberal acquaintances about what I deal with, and what goes on in the real world, and they seem seriously shocked and ask, “How is that possible?”
    The FBI sent a hundred agents over months to investigate Michael Brown’s death in MO, who was shot while attacking a cop in his cruiser. Meanwhile, if you see someone from their Most Wanted-Murders list and call them, they might have someone available to take your information as long as it’s not after-hours. Chances are some watch officer will take the call and refer to a local PD who will say it’s not their jurisdiction.
    Btw, check out the list. All these murders took place in the U.S. Notice anything?: https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/murders/@@wanted-group-listing
    But mark my words, this liberal dystopia emerging will do away with the problem by doing away with discriminatory criminal databases. They already eliminate criminal history for government hiring and EEOC sues companies who disqualify applicants because of prior criminal arrests/charges/convictions.
    “The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is publishing a proposed rule that would prohibit federal agencies from asking questions about criminal and credit history to applicants for tens of thousands of jobs in the competitive service, as well as the career senior executive service, until a conditional offer of employment has been made. People with criminal records are already eligible to compete for the vast majority of federal jobs; the proposed rule builds on current practice at many agencies by ensuring that hiring managers are making selection decisions based solely on applicants’ qualifications.”
    I’m sure someone’s past behavior is not indicative of future behavior. Right?

  55. jld says:

    The 1% are not the billionaires nor even the millionaires, it is EVERY HOUSEHOLD MAKING $180,000 annually:
    The thirld world poors have benefited from industry moving toward them and the ones who got f–ked up are the lower middle classes.

  56. Christopher Fay says:

    Yes, “the left’s real concerns are class and labor.” Those other things are not necessarily leftist. Being on the left is a type of Progressive where you want an improved standard of living in the U. S., and for all. Teddy Roosevelt was a Progressive.

  57. Castellio says:

    Do you?
    The terms left and right come from the French Revolution. It was the “left” that created and pursued the idea of national citizenship. Before that it was the nobility with their serfs. That was the right, and we are returning to it.
    Nothing destroyed the left more thoroughly than commitment to identity politics, which has momentum both in the right wing and left wing circles.
    Having said that, the whole concept of left and right is now suspect. Those who use any and all issues of the moment to blast the “other” side are more likely to be expressing anger and resentment than addressing the present.

  58. rjj says:

    it’s not emerging. it emerged 20-30 years ago and is the new normal. people have nothing to compare it with.

  59. rjj,
    Just did a quick search for news stories on this issue. The MSM has indeed buried this. I’m not sure the Green Party has done the work to ensure they are on the ballot in all 50 states, but the MSM sure doesn’t want the idea to gain traction.

  60. kao_hsien_chih says:

    I meant Bernie is like Gatsby in the sense of someone who is not “natively” of the political ruling class (i.e. of the two parties) trying to join the ruling class and not succeeding. So his run as a “Democrat” after having avoided joining the Democrats for decades is, to me, the equivalent of the ostentatious parties. It didn’t work for much the reason Gatsby’s parties did not work: Bernie is not a “real” Democrat, as the Democratic Party insiders see him, and it is their party, pun intended, much the way Gatsby was never a real member of the ruling class.

  61. kao_hsien_chih says:

    The strength of party loyalty shows itself in the number of Democrats who oppose HRC in principle but are willing to vote for her in large numbers nevertheless. At most, 1/3 (and probably much less) of the Sanders voters, for example, will break from the Democrats if HRC goes through unfettered. Tellingly, these identify as “independents,” not “Democrats.” Even then, a large chunk, perhaps even a sizable majority, of them will not consider voting for anyone “Republican,” even an unorthodox Republican. The two party system may be disgusting to many, but not disgusting enough that they are willing to publicly claim that the narrative is dead. Even if enough people can sense that the “common knowledge” is wrong, they see no “credible” alternative to playing along just yet–because they do not know what to make of those outside the standard narrative (or even how to think about them: how often do people say Sanders is “liberal” or ask if Trump is “conservative”? As if these labels, products of conventional wisdom in politics, are meaningful descriptions of them.) In a sense, this is exactly why even outsiders like Sanders or Trump had to seek nomination through the existing parties, despite all the institutional hurdles.

  62. gemini33 says:

    I loathe agreeing with Maureen Dowd on anything. She’s just as bad as Hillary. But she’s not running for president. And she’s spot on in this column. I’m terrified of a Hillary presidency. Maybe even more terrified than of a Trump presidency but he’s a complete wildcard and I can’t vote for that and for other reasons that really don’t need explaining.
    I’m also weary, already, of another Clinton presidency. From day one they’ll probably be working on impeaching her. We’ll go through all the same junk we went through in the 90s with the constant, constant political attacks and counterattacks and obsessive media and it make my stomach feel sick just remembering it and thinking of how much more of it there will be.
    But what makes my stomach even more sick is that I firmly believe she will take us into wars, big wars, unnecessary wars, deliberately provoked wars that will eventually involve nuclear powers.
    She’s also dead set on demolishing what is left of the New Deal, to finish the job they started in the 90s and Bush and Obama continued working on but there are a few very large tasks left, involving Social Security and Medicare.
    I could go on but we all know all of this. It’s sickening. Why couldn’t the Clintons retire and enjoy their ill gotten wealth and their grandchildren and their foundation?
    I’m still not entirely convinced that Hillary and Trump will be the ones running come November. In such a volatile situation, anything could happen. But I’m also not convinced we’d end up with anyone much better because post-convention candidate choices would be done by disastrous party leadership and their oligarch owners.

  63. All,
    In Britain, attempts to make sense of what is happening in terms of divisions between ‘right’ and ‘left’ becomes less and less helpful – although they always were somewhat misleading.
    More interestingly, the division between ‘élite’ and ‘non-élite’, which was also not always very helpful, has less and less ‘grip’.
    In many ways, our key ‘Borgist’ organ is now the ‘Financial Times’. Unfortunately, its articles are behind a subscription wall, which means that the comments on them, which unlike most of the articles are often very interesting, are not openly accessible.
    What however this also means is that those commenting are people who have enough interest in the issues involved, and also enough money, to pay for a subscription. So generally they are very different in background from those who comment on the ‘MailOnline’ site.
    What is the very striking is how often there is overlap between the views expressed in comments on both sites.
    A few hours ago, an article appeared on the ‘FT’ site by Tony Barber, who is billed as ‘Europe Editor and Associate Editor’, under the title ‘A renewed nationalism is stalking Europe.’
    What is striking is that, so far at least, almost all the ‘Most Recommended’ comments are hostile.
    That at the top of the list, by one ‘Metrodorus’, which refers to an interesting British political philosopher called John Gray, is I think striking:
    ‘A quote from the thoughtful John Gray (New Statesman, 05.07.16):
    ‘“As it is being used today, “populism” is a term of abuse applied by establishment thinkers to people whose lives they have not troubled to understand.”’
    Fifth down the list, from one ‘rrahul’:
    ‘Another HUGE problem that people are rebelling against is political correctness.
    ‘The war against political correctness must not be underestimated and/or written-off as mere “dinnertime conversation.” For this war is well and live, and it is completely reshaping the political order.’
    What are at issue here are emphatically not divides between ‘left’ and ‘right’, or indeed simple divisions between ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’. Those are real, certainly, but, as so often, economics only explains a certain amount.

  64. ked says:

    “… telling such secrets isn’t that bad.”
    perhaps one could make the same point about the Hill’s emails. I selected a famous example, not necessarily a critical one.

  65. Matthew says:

    DH: I suspect that many people oppose political correctness for the darn good reason it is used to shut off debate, not elevate debate.

  66. ked says:

    yes, however my intent is to put a slight damper on Blame Allocation in Service to Righteous Indignation that’s all the rage. sometimes I wonder if people just landed on this planet.

  67. Bill Herschel says:

    The use of “populism” is the absolute perfect example of Edward Bernays (may Satan rest his soul) at work.
    It is the word the rentiers use to turn democracy into a dirty word. Ukraine’s elected government was overturned in the name of “democracy”, but when Donald Trump thrashes 18 rentier sycophants it is “populism”.

  68. Tyler says:

    My point is they always influence them towards Leftist secular humanism, which is NOT what you are arguing.

  69. Tyler says:

    We have labels for a reason, not so they can be endlessly redefined on a whim by people uncomfortable with what they mean.

  70. Tyler says:

    What song you whistlin’ past that graveyard?

  71. gemini33 says:

    Question: Why does Gen Michael Flynn hate the Iran deal and believe that Iran “has every intention to build a nuclear weapon” and also to destroy Israel? If he got into a position of power, say Trump’s VP, would we end up in a war with Iran (which seems logically to lead to a war with Russia and China as well)?
    I also saw his proposal to partition Syria.
    Both of these things seem contradictory to his strong opposition to overthrowing Assad and the resultant overrun of the country by extremists. I’m trying to understand his positions on things.

  72. different clue says:

    Mark Logan,
    The problem with that is that there are currently undecided people who might vote for Trump but who would not/ will not vote for any of the brand name Establishment Republicans. Especially the pack of Darwin’s Discards who got defeated by Trump to begin with.
    And as to Trump’s firm supporters . . . if they are presented with a “Trump overthrow” and the installation of one of the Darwin’s Discard Republicans in Trump’s place as the nominee . . . how many of Trump’s firm supporters are going to accept that? What will those who do not accept that outcome do instead?

  73. Bill Herschel, Matthew,
    This is a matter to which we need to return.
    Unfortunately, I have yet to find time to read the Bernays book.
    What I do not know is whether he ever reflected on what happened when the ‘narratives’ used for the purposes of ‘propaganda’ collapse.
    In recent months, I have thought that someone maybe needed to write a supplementary chapter to his study, which could be called ‘The Art of the Own Goal’.
    It might feature sections entitled ‘The Cameron Curveball’ and ‘The Breedlove Boomerang’.
    This is not simply a bad joke.
    When Cameron claimed – using the supposed authority of our Joint Intelligence Committee – that there were 70,00 ‘moderate insurgents’ in Syria, the effect was simply to sow distrust of everything that he and others had claimed about that country.
    And then, when Breedlove claimed that Putin was ‘weaponizing’ migrants, the effect was once again to fan the flames of distrust.
    Very many people here have a rather different view as to who is to blame for the migrant crisis and Islamic terrorism.
    And ‘propaganda’ is not going to persuade them out of it.

  74. LondonBob says:

    That said Flynn seems a lot more good than bad, although Bill Kristol has kind words for Flynn which is cause for concern. Then again I am only observing from afar.

  75. gemini33,
    I also am puzzled by Lieutenant-General Flynn.
    It may be that he is confused – old conventional wisdoms under challenge from new evidence can often produce elements of intellectual chaos.
    And then, resentment at the way he was ‘purged’ may enter into this in complex ways.
    There also could be an element of opportunism.
    The connection to Ledeen I find both puzzling and worrying.
    If others could clarify, it would be helpful.

  76. Harry says:

    And you can’t find another candidate who disagrees with unfettered free trade? Actually you are probably right. The only other one I can think of its Bernie Sanders.
    I think you are probably right. This election is about free trade. Funny how the media has not bothered to clarify that.

  77. turcopolier says:

    IMO Flynn’s purge from DIA and from active duty was a great shock to him. he had not experienced defeat before. Now, he is flopping about and IMO is sold out to the neocons. pl

  78. crone says:

    I think you have a clear understanding of Flynn’s positions… they are contradictory.

  79. ked says:

    Of even greater concern (to those who may prefer clever & selfish diplomacy before warfare) is his co-authoring a book with that paragon of wise policy-making, Michael Ledeen.

  80. VietnamVet says:

    These are strange days. I am convinced the West is suffering from pre-civil war turmoil. The propaganda has stopped working. It is impossible to hide that the world is a very dangerous place with the restart of the Cold War 2.0 and the influx of refugees from the Long Wars. If Brexit is a shock, the quick selection of the new Prime Minister and confirmation of the vote to leave the EU seems to provide hope. The USA is approaching being ungovernable with the hallowing out of the middle class that provides stability. 50% of Dallas is struggling. Other than party apparatchik, Americans will vote for the lesser of two evils, a third party candidate or opt out. We are beginning to question if our vote even counts. Today’s inverted pyramid will come hurtling down when people no longer have any reason to hold it together. Elite and technocrats alike will be wiped out by the crash. Perhaps mankind will survive.

  81. turcopolier says:

    I think he is just a confused pretty boy who had a few great moments before he was shown that he, too, is mortal. IMO he will do anything to restore his self-image. pl

  82. Amir says:

    The medication you described don’t have psychiatric or emotional effects, except nightmares in case of some of the beta blockers.
    In any case, she is healthier than Darth Vader Cheney:
    The psychological effect of heart pump that he had with hovering on the edge of death, is well described: http://www.sfu.ac.at/publikationen/PTSD%20StressHealth.pdf
    Decline in intelectual capacity:
    Maybe there is just an evolutionary and physiological explanation for Cheney’s behavior: due to his chronic exposure to life-death stress, his paleomammalian brain (limbic or animal brain) took over from his frontal or intellectual/moral brain, leading to the consequences that were extensively discussed on this forum. Maybe in the future, anyone with these artificial-organ life-support systems, should be barred from higher office.

  83. Tyler says:

    Immigration. Immigration.

  84. Tyler says:

    I never said her medications caused her psychosis, I said they were the sign of an unhealthy woman. The stroke caused her psychosis, likely with a number of ministrokes.

  85. Tidewater says:

    Tidewater to Bill Herschel, Amir, Tyler, Turcopolier,
    Hillary Clinton is on Coumadin (Warfarin) for the rest of her life, it seems.
    I find this startling. This is a very dangerous drug, though most recently, I learn, to my surprise, that at “INR levels below 2-3.0 ” (whatever that may mean, I suppose a carefully monitored low dosage) people can go for years taking Coumadin. But there is a continuing debate about this drug. At high dosages even a bruise on an arm or leg could cause dangerous bleeding under the skin. A fall could be fatal. It seems that the risks of taking Coumadin versus the risks of simply allowing or treating differently the thrombosis question tend to statistically favor not taking Coumadin. (Of course, I don’t know how accurate that received opinion is.)
    My question is this. It is commonsense. How could a doctor prescribe Coumadin to a person who has had a stroke? Any kind of a stroke. Coumadin stops the ability of the of blood to clot. It would seem to me that this is the worst possible treatment for someone who has actually had a stroke whether minor or major, or shown a vulnerability to this happening.
    Hypothyroidism is apparently diagnosed. The thyroid gland is underperforming, whatever a thyroid gland does. Amir says that this produces an irregular heartbeat? And this irregularity means that blood becomes thicker and at some point can pool and clot, a condition known as deep vein thrombosis? My father and several of those in his generation had, in their late seventies, their legs “stipped” of veins to prevent blood clotting in the legs. It was the use of metal clips instead of “stitches” which cause comment about pain.
    From what I have read, Hillary Clinton has a history of deep vein thrombosis. This is being controlled by the Coumadin. She is also on hypertension medication, and I will bet that however much she takes it means that her blood-pressure is at normal levels. I understand Tyler’s point that this medication could cause a dry cough. (Something different from the results of her announced vulnerability to ‘allergy season.’)
    I think it seems extremely possible that she suffered a post-concussion syndrome that followed a fall, as specialists in this area have speculated. This has never been admitted. The question of double-vision is suggested by the fresnel lense glasses. This scenario of a fall and of course the actuality of hospitalization happened in December, 2012, as I recall, and she was out of hospital in early January. I suspect that it is likely that she has gotten over the effects of the post-concussion syndrome effects. But I would be curious to hear any opinion about how long such effects would take to go away. I played contact sports and did a certain amount of head tackling, and was never knocked out. I have noticed the whole question of concussion being in the news right now, the effects of concussion on pro football players. Frankly, I didn’t realize that concussion was all that dangerous. Players getting ‘racked up’ used to happen routinely. I didn’t know that, as they say, the brain “remembers” concussion. I think Hillary Clinton has to be extremely careful not to fall and not to bruise for the rest of her life.
    Again, what I am speculating about here is exactly what is causing the apparently abnormal blood thickness and blood flow. Surely if you could avoid Coumadin with a pacemaker you would go that route, would you not? Also, you would think that they could control the thyroid. I find it hard to believe that hypothyroidism is the dangerous thing. (But you think it is, Amir? Again, why?)
    Something lies underneath this, surely, but not a stroke.

  86. Mark Logan says:

    different clue,
    That is a problem, but then again they are screwed either way. I’m not convinced Trumps firm supporters are all that firm. Most seem to be so in the thrall of abject hatred of “liberals” they may only be supporting him because he is a peerless irritant of them. Will they be able to stay away? They certainly won’t vote for Clinton in any event. Balance that against the number of people who will not vote for Trump under any circumstances and the the math works..or so says my gut…

  87. Castellio says:

    You have defined yourself.

  88. steve says:

    “My question is this. It is commonsense. How could a doctor prescribe Coumadin to a person who has had a stroke? Any kind of a stroke. Coumadin stops the ability of the of blood to clot. It would seem to me that this is the worst possible treatment for someone who has actually had a stroke whether minor or major, or shown a vulnerability to this happening.”
    There are 2 types of strokes–ischemic and hemorraghic. 87% of strokes are ischemic and are normally caused by a blood clot which prevents oxygen from reaching the affected portion of the brain, hence the cumadin. Hemorraghic strokes are caused by bleeding from a ruptured vessel which can also damage the “flooded” brain cells, for which you would obviously not prescribe cumadin.
    There’s nothing strange at all in prescribing blood thinners for someone who has a history of ischemic strokes.

  89. Tidewater says:

    Tidewater to Steve,

  90. LeaNder says:

    how often do people say Sanders is “liberal” or ask if Trump is “conservative”?
    Concerning Sanders: my uninformed impression was a strong whiff of sentiments reminiscent of the McCarthy era. Labels: communist, with socialist as close second. Liberal? less so. Maybe considered not so effective in the propaganda tool box. 😉
    At most, 1/3 (and probably much less)
    It’s one of the most peculiar US election it feels, including Kerry trying to confront Dubya as war hero. But yes, I think you are right.

  91. Babak Makkinejad says:

    The West never fails to learn from past mistakes; that is like Europe supporting the widow of Jefferson Davis or US supporting that of Maximillian after the triumph of Juarez.
    I do not know why Iranians do not break diplomatic relations with France.

  92. Babak Makkinejad says:

    I suspect that too – I look at the politics of Iran, Italy, and France over the last 30 years and it is all about inter-clique rivalry – with the ordinary citizens being spectators to the comings and goings of well-connected people who, all the while, profess devotion to this or that slogan.
    When a kid owns a Lamborghini and 2 miles away a family of 6 lives in a 30-square meter hovel – you are not talking about Democracy but Feudalism.

  93. Babak Makkinejad says:

    He understand that the core state of Muslim Civilization and US are on very very bad terms.
    He also understands that there are threats emanating from un-lawful Muslim combatants against the United States.
    His conclusion is that US is at war with Islam and must take the war to Muslims; as far as I understand his position.

  94. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Flynn at least calls a spade a spade; he is willing to admit that there is a religious war.
    One may disagree with his prescription (more war) in contradistinction to mine which is “Partial Cease Fires”.

  95. Babak Makkinejad says:

    Nixon was not stealing secrets; he was sure to win. His problem was that he was too loyal to his underlings and associates – the old game of Politics as Patronage.
    Congress threatened to impeach him, he owed too much to the Republican Party for his rise to power to not be persuaded to resign.
    Congress did not threaten to impeach Ronald Reagan – one guy was obstructing justice, the other one lying to Congress – not to mention the earlier one hat suspended the Writ of Habeas Corpus or even the earlier one that refused to uphold the Law in case of the Cherokee Nation.
    Nixon was just unpopular – may be it was his nose.

  96. Fred says:

    It was the cover up that did it. He deserved to be impeached.

  97. The Beaver says:

    @ Tidewater
    Overactive thyroid (Hyperthyroidism) can cause irregular heart beat (arrhythmia) or a potentially dangerous heart rhythm disorder called atrial fibrillation
    Underactive Thyroid (Hypothyroidism) does not have the same causes. HRC has Hypothyroidism and this is what is said here:
    I have hypothyroidism and I have been taking a very low dose of Synthroid daily for it as soon as my blood tests within a 12-month period showed the level of my TSH. However HRC is treating hers with a natural product.

  98. Babak Makkinejad says:

    “He deserved to be impeached.”
    I think that is a matter of opinion and not law.
    My understanding of US Law in this case has been that there is no law; it is whatever US Congress says it is – a highly politicized institution in its good days.

  99. Tidewater says:

    Tidewater replying to The Beaver,
    Thank you very much for taking the trouble to inform me about hypothyroidism and how it is controlled. Interesting to read that Bernie Sanders, in excellent health, also has it. I realize I need to read up on some basic medical matters. In each treatment, that of the use of a carefully regulated dosage of Coumadin, and that whole question you mentioned, the use of the natural product Armour Thyroid (NDT) versus Synthroid, I find this knowledge actually reassuring.
    Regarding Hillary’s fitness to be President of the US, continuing to speculate a little bit more,here, I assume that her weight gain could be attributed to her thyroid treatment. But if she has her hypothyroidism under control, and her blood is properly thinned by a judicious use of the (very dangerous) Coumadin–with its equally problematic long-term damage to the veins of eyes (macular degeneration)(?) and the question of Vitamin K being depleted– still it seems to me that two of her worst problems are resolved or held in check. Further, if hypertension drugs can stablize her blood pressure–and again, I don’t see why not, even if there might be serious side-effects down the line– it seems to me that Hillary might qualify as being in good (enough) health to become the candidate.
    It was only a few years back that she posed for those offical Secretary of State portraits. These are quite striking and flatteringly deceptive, as is customary. But the change is extraordinary. She looked terrible. I listened to her and Judy Woodruff for a few moments and then gave up.

  100. Fred says:

    That is probably as correct an interpretation of the Constitution as any. It is up to the Legislative Branch to decide.
    “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other High crimes and Misdemeanors.”

  101. Tyler says:

    Steve explained the ischemic v hemorrhagic stroke issue nicely.
    I think, personally, from my paramedic understanding of pathphys, that she likely has AFib going on as well. Her strokes, irregular heartbeat, and clots all fit with the profile of someone who has that particular arrhythmia. AFib can be a precursor to generalize CHF as well.
    Hypothyroidism can lead to a lot of nasty stuff. General symptoms include confusion, coma, and sometimes myxdema. Gotta take care of it.
    I definitely think there’s a stroke involved though. She is not suffering from “pumphead syndrome” like Bill Clinton or Cheney, but she’s not all there either.

  102. Tyler says:

    Also good luck finding a picture of Hillary wearing short sleeves. I would be hard money that her arms are all blotchy from the coumadin.

  103. Keith Harbaugh says:

    Monday, July 18 will be a very significant day for the Clinton legal situation.
    Judge Emmet G. Sullivan will hold a hearing on whether Judicial Watch gets to depose Clinton;
    the Director of Office of Correspondence and Records of the Executive Secretariat (“S/ES-CRM”) Clarence Finney; and
    the former Director of Information Resource Management of the Executive Secretariat (“S/ES-IRM”) John Bentel (the man who supposedly told his staff “never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.”).
    (This after Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy imitated Sgt. Schultz.)
    See the Thursday, July 14 Judicial Watch statement
    On Thursday, July 14, Judge Sullivan gave an indication of his thinking:
    The court ordered Clinton and the State Department to file responses to Judicial Watch’s reply briefs no later than Friday at 12 noon.
    The court specified that they “shall not repeat any argument made previously.”
    I’m no psychologist, but that doesn’t sound very encouraging for the Clinton/State side.

  104. Tidewater says:

    Thank you for your medical insight into this. I had to do a quick bit of reading-up. AFib, then, is atrial fibrillation. And CHF is congestive heart failure. (I have witnessed the death of someone with CHF.)
    I suppose at some point I might as well read on pacemakers.
    If it is atrial fibrillation I guess that changes everything. If it is that, there are all kinds of questions. I take your point.
    Surely there will be further releases from other doctors in the near future? Doctors who give a final report to the leaders of the Democratic party?
    I had never heard of “pumphead syndrome.” (Thought at first you were having a little fun.) Now I learn that is mental impairment after bypass surgery when patient has been on a heart lung machine. Bypass surgery, then, seems pretty well guaranteed to cause a significent intellectual decline which can last up to five years after the surgery, and tests have fairly well proven this. Well, the good news there is if you live five or six years more, most of the impairment goes away! (At least from one source.)
    Yes, there is documented evidence of “confusion” (Huma’s email.) Confusion is one hell of an issue.
    I think it was not one, but two Secret Service agents who commented independently (from different regions of the US) about her apparent exhaustion after simply giving a speech. Someone else said that a walker was used to stand for photos. Walkers are now routinely used for every kind of movement in some retirement homes. I’ve seen it. (And underneath that carpet in the Westminster-Canterbury is concrete.) Could this be a precaution she has been instructed to take when in private?
    Yes, those coumadin “blotches”–I don’t think those areas could take a blow, as from a stumble into something, or a fall. That’s a good point. Interesting comment on what one lives with on coumadin. The side-effects.
    Looking on the bright side, there is Bill Clinton’s nose.
    I was reminded of the painting by Domenico Ghirlandaio “Portrait of Old Man and Boy” (1490). I had forgotten, or perhaps never realized when I first saw it, what a dear thing it is.

  105. rjj says:

    Odd how the details of her medical status are so available and and that Secret Service agents can speak so freely about her condition. Isn’t that a firing offense?
    they are clearing the path for the natty little weasel who will seem less unacceptable than Trump.

Comments are closed.