"Any presidential candidate speaking to AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, during an election year is going to bow to the hawkish elements of the Israel lobby. Hillary Clinton’s keynote speech at AIPAC’s annual meeting Monday, however, was more debased than it needed to be, promising that under her administration, Israel will be spared even the mild rebukes it has suffered under President Obama. A symphony of pandering, it attempted to outflank Donald Trump on the right and will end up outraging a large chunk of the left." Slate
******
"Trump proved that he knows exactly how to press the right Jewish buttons, much as he has shown his expertise in manipulating the fears and resentments of middle class, white Americans. He told the AIPAC delegates exactly what they wanted and what they’re used to hearing — and they loved it. He mocked other candidates for pandering and proceeded to pander as if there’s no tomorrow.
Trump delivered a speech that could easily have been written in the Prime Minister’s Office in Jerusalem or AIPAC headquarters in Washington, and for all we know, possibly was. He vowed to “dismantle” the nuclear deal with Iran as well as Tehran’s terrorist infrastructure, condemned Palestinian incitement and praised Israeli moderation. He said that Obama was the worst-ever President for Israel and the crowd burst out in loud applause, as if the assertion was some kind of “open sesame” that removes any roadblocks standing in Trump’s way." Haaretz
http://www.haaretz.com/world-news/u-s-election-2016/1.710222
********
"Ted Cruz opened his speech by saying "God bless AIPAC, I am thrilled to be here today. Palestine has not existed since 1948." "
http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.710213
—————
There was also groveling by Paul Ryan, John Kasich, and assorted junior bears. Trump's pander was so extreme that one ponders the possibility that he was mocking the audience. The thing about Ivanka's impending "Jewish baby" was so far over the top as to bring to mind passages from "Gulliver's Travels." Perhaps that travelogue should have included another island called the "Land of the Pander Bears."
Hillary? Does she really have to shout that much? Oh, sorry, old men are doomed to sexism. pl
What is too funny to observe is that the actual Jewish person running seriously for American President, Bernard Sanders, is not speaking before AIPAC.
She had been closely drilled in maintaining a level non-shrill tone throughout and only shouted at the end: got thrown by sound of audience applause/cheers and misunderestimated mic amplification effects.
I missed the pandering – What did she say? Not much. I thought it was an orgy of blandissimal (bland dial cranked up to 11) generalities.
“Old men are doomed to sexism.” Justifiably!!!
Col. Lang:
I agree, Trump was doubtlessly mocking them; likely holding them in deep contempt as well.
IMO Israel a Clear and Present danger and at best a far outpost of the American Empire!
Perhaps will regain utility as it [Israel] confronts the new power in the MED–Russia and its Israeli linked OC {organized crime]!
Am I correct that no formal treaty exists between the U.S. and Israel and No U.S. President or Congress since 1948 has supported U.S. guarantees of post-1948 Israeli border modifications?
WRC
Yes. No treaty exists. Israel has never wanted one because it ouls inevitably involve obligations to the US. pl
“Perhaps will regain utility as it [Israel] confronts the new power in the MED–Russia and its Israeli linked OC {organized crime]!”
I think you’ve got Geo-strategic setup wrong.
@ ambrit
However, he is also pandering:
https://berniesanders.com/sanders-outlines-middle-east-policy/
Trump is exactly the president we deserve.
And he gave AIPAC the type of speech they deserve.
When you demand subservience, you get deceit.
rjj
Is our sexism justifiable or is it our damnation that is justifiable? pl
WRC,
A good book on Russian organized crime is “Red Mafiya, How the Russian Mob Has Invaded America”, by Robert I. Friedman. It was published in 2000. Around that time I gave a copy to a man who had been a Russian specialist at the NSA and he liked it.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/inconvenient-truth-6413027
http://fij.org/robert-i-friedman-award/
Possibly so… but I think it’s even simpler than that. Trumps goal is to be president, so he is doing everything he perceives is necessary to achieve that goal. His own political history shows no foundational loyalty to either party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump#Political_affiliations
I will hazard a guess that 90% (?) of what he says on the campaign trail is pandering to some group or another to get their support so he can achieve his goal of being president. That is a very practical business/marketing/sales approach to politics. He also knows how to play to the media circus… he’s a political Ringmaster http://www.insidejobs.com/careers/circus-ringmaster
Both. The damnation of such things keeps them in check.
rjj
mysterious. p
Did you hear the latest where the Saudis are so enamored with AIPACS success that they’re creating their own
http://www.mintpressnews.com/saudi-arabia-gets-dc-public-affairs-firm/214885/
It could be said that stating anything other than Israel is in continual violation of international law and does not deserve the diplomatic or military cover provided by the US, and that its leaders are guilty of war crimes is pandering.
Having said that, though Sanders’ position is not my own, I think his election would produce a far better Israeli policy than anyone else’s. That may not be saying much.
I think the lower pitch of the male voice is more effective with an attempted stemwinder than a female’s.
I notice that some Israelis and Israel-Firsters like to cite Israel’s designation as a “Major Non-NATO Ally” in response to the “no treaty exists” statement.
Looking at the Wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_non-NATO_ally, the whole thing appears to be another end-run by Congress to let the President do what Congress should do (or not do). A dodgy designation which “does not automatically include a mutual defense pact with the United States.”
Within that article is a statement that as of 2014, Israel is a “Major Strategic Partner” which the Jerusalem Post describes as a “new class of ally.” http://www.jpost.com/International/US-House-of-Representatives-passes-bill-declaring-Israel-major-strategic-partner-383616
Obviously, many on this site, myself included, don’t consider Israel an ally. Which is why these apparent legal fig leaves are troubling at best.
Concerning her voice. HRC seems to be having a significant problem. Today, she made a statement about the Belgian bombings and her normal speaking voice was just terrible if it is compared to about a year ago. Even when speaking at a normal level, there is a harshness and hoarseness that seems to be getting worse by the week. Her voice is really over strained. The campaign is breaking her vocal cords.
And it would require a specific definition and limitation of Israel’s borders. They wouldn’t want that. But we cannot enter into a mutual defense agreement with a country with which we do not clearly know its borders.
muddle on my part. was cheering and waving the contra-PC banner.
He condemns the U.N. in his speech.
And then there’s this, “So what if I have properties in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Qatar and Saudi Arabia – and if I partner with them and with Kuwait and the Emirates…”
He goes on and on about Iran sponsoring international terrorism.
In sum, it doesn’t matter who is elected President. To Hell with the U.N. and God Bless The King of Saudi Arabia.
You would think that Europe would wake up. ISIS is not a Shia outfit.
Time to turn away from all this.
Beaver: Bernie’s speech was far more even balanced than any serious modern president, and in any case, actual jews dont pander to AIPAC, they are conflicted. Its the basic indoctrination from early childhood versus rationality, and dont believe that rationale people lead purely rationale lives.
For the record, I prefer Bernie, but will vote Trump against Hillary.
Makes Obama’s lack of pandering look pretty good, doesn’t it.
The way he puts it Beaver, may make all the difference:
“To my mind, as friends – long term friends with Israel – we are obligated to speak the truth as we see it. That is what real friendship demands, especially in difficult times. ”
I got that sense too, Babak. Also, if you listen really carefully, Trump WAS telling this crowd that if Israel wanted peace and survival in the region it was going to have to negotiate. He would bank that with a comment about Palestinians that suited the crowd, but I could hear another agenda under his words. Was I making this up?
Great book, robt willmann, at least I loved it.
Explains why you can’t get away with Jewish affinity or tribal connectedness in Russia; can’t pull the ‘Is It Good for the Jews’ bullshit. Jews dont roll that way in Russia, and I saw that when I was there for three months decades ago with a bunch of Jewish students who couldn’t make any headway using that argument with the Jewish locals. they stared at them as if they had three heads. So few North Americans understand this about *any* group in Russia.
Russians relate to Mother Russia, a concept completely misunderstood here although many think they do. They don’t. it’s NOT like American patriotism, but it binds all Russians. I encountered it at a young enough age and because my family lived in Russia from 1841 to the Revolution that somehow I get it. You are connected by the land, your village, your town, not your religion or any defining faction. Friedman tried the Jewish schtick with a big Mafiya Don in Little Odessa who blew him off, but when Friedman innocently mentioned that his grandfather came from the same village that the Don did, and the Don knew the family, it was Open Sesame.
Friedman is dead now.
rjj, I won’t check anyone’s speech after giving up early on Trump’s. But sexism apart, it’s all sooooo ritualized by now, it doesn’t matter if coming from a male or female speaker. And many seem to like it that way, more have come to expect it, resulting in something like a closed circuit.
*******
Shami Shalev, Haaretz, “Like a Pied Piper, the GOP front-runner’s pro-Israel magic tricks swept his Jewish audience from initial suspicion to outright enthusiasm.”
[Nevermind, I gave up early after his initial comments on Iran, once again lying about it “getting all this money for nothing in return”. We all know, this is no mistake. Could the following be rated as within free quotation allowances and not as a ‘Haaretz copyright infringment’? pay attention to the juxtaposition of the first two paragraphs. Notice AIPAC’s central conference issue]:
“Trump is usually an undisciplined speaker who lacks concentration and focus, allowing his stream of consciousness to narrate his thoughts and his powers of improvisation to phrase them. So it was that less than an hour before he came to AIPAC, which focuses on American aid to Israel, Trump raised the bizarre demand that Israel, like other rich American allies, repay the financial assistance it had received from America. Hey, it just popped into my head, Trump seemed to indicate, so it must be a good idea.
In honor of AIPAC, however, he undertook an extreme makeover, reading a tightly formulated speech from the kind of teleprompter that he usually mocks. He didn’t deviate from his prepared text, which wasn’t any different from the addresses made on Monday by Hillary Clinton, John Kasich and even House Speaker Paul Ryan, another AIPAC favorite. Ted Cruz, usually considered a far better speaker than Trump, suddenly sounded dazed and confused.
…
Judging from a few conversations I had after the speech, it left many Jews in a state of shock. That’s because they weren’t there and couldn’t feel the magic, one AIPAC sympathizer told me, and maybe he had a point. Nonetheless, the enthusiastic reception given Trump could very well deepen the fault lines inside the Jewish community that were uncovered over the summer in the bitter clash over the Iran nuclear deal. With a Trump Presidency, it’s not the security of far away Israel that’s at stake but the well-being of America, closer to home. The potential for schism is there.
Some commentators, including this one, thought that the Trump Show at AIPAC would yield more protests and more turbulence, beyond the demonstrations outside. Instead, what we got was a standard AIPAC speech that promises the moon and garners applause even though everyone knows it’s just an empty slogan that isn’t really going to happen. Nonetheless it was good enough to transform Trump from a morally repugnant presidential candidate into a run of the mill contender who deserves as much respect as the others.
A friend who watched the proceedings on television said he felt the need to take a shower to get the stain off. But then I met a religious family walking back to their hotel, engaged in a deep debate over the evening’s speeches. I eavesdropped just as they reached a family decision to transfer their votes from Cruz to Trump. When I asked them why, they said because “he’ll be good for Israel.” And how did they know that, I persisted, and they looked at me as if I was an idiot. “Didn’t you hear his speech?” they asked, and rightly so. I saw and heard the whole thing, and still find it hard to believe.”
That’s now. Back in 2008 he pandered with the best of them.
http://bit.ly/1RiQtMJ
It’s not clear how significant of a political statement it is to pander to AIPAC at election time. Everyone does it. The money is good. It’s free TV & advertising exposure. Decisions regarding Israel once elected can be a different story.
Tempted to agree with you, for a businessman to believe that the Iran Nuclear deal can be reversed does not compute [US business wants in to Iran, Europe, Russia and China will never agree to reinstate sanctions].
nay, sir, true pithy wisdom, IMHO
Let’s see them accuse Bernie of anti-semitism.
She didn’t want to release medical records. Coumadin is not usually a sign of good health. She would probably be advised not to travel as much.
William Blake wrote, “Opposition is true friendship.”
Onetime proprietor of the blog “Whiskey Bar” billmon expresses his view that the “two-state solution” is dead:
https://storify.com/billmon1/hillary-at-aipac
Old women are subject to sexism also and Trump and Cruz sickened me. Which country are they running for President or is that Prime Minister?
he’s a political Ringmaster” really, I would have said sociopath.
I think you’re quite right. Trump’s speeches are purely for effect, ie, votes. He tells people what they want to hear, and mocks them for lapping it up. As for AIPAC, he presumably said, You want pander, I’ll give you pander in Trumps!.
For a novel (but quite correct) take on Trump, see this article by Israel Shamir. His concluding argument would convince anyone to vote for Trump:
http://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-blessed-bigotry-of-mr-trump/
Think all of them make President Obama look good, but this group could probably make anyone look good.
YES! e.g., John Kerry in stentorian mode!
Sadly, it’s been dead for a long time, despite many wishful denials of that fact.
This classic Monty Python sketch is a great allegory…
Dead Parrot https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218
No.
The destruction of Cast Lead started after Obama’s election, it ended before he was sworn in. He didn’t say a word during it. And when he did speak, he defended the war crimes as proportional. The first question asked him as President was about whether it was time to admit Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons – he said he didn’t want to answer hypothetical questions.
We can pretend that Obama has been a stalwart defender of US interests against Israeli extremism if we want; but that won’t make it true. More money is given than ever before, more military supplies than ever before, the same complete diplomatic cover; and all this while the Israeli leaders publicly state that there will “never be” a Palestinian state, and endorse the complete subjugation of the non-Jewish populations native to the land.
The only disagreement has been over the agreement with Iran, which Obama factually argued was a more effective route than bombing to close down any possible Iranian nuclear weapons initiative. The screams of pain in this regard from Bibi and friends were largely theatrical as leverage for yet more US treasure as compensation, and as a way to swing traditionally Democratic Jewish support to Republican candidates who promise even more.
We are a very great distance from any American political leader in office publicly stating that Israel has nuclear weapons, that Israel does not negotiate in good faith to recognize a Palestinian state (as it has promised it would do), that Israel runs an apartheid regime in the Occupied Territories, that it endorses and funds settler extremism and violence, and that it regularly passes and implements sectarian laws.
Nancy K: My wife is a Palestinian Christian, so the AIPAC spectacle used to really, really bother me. Now I enjoy watching our “brave” leaders debase themselves in front of AIPAC and then campaign on “strength.”
Humor helps. It helps a lot.
MRW: As you know, Trump let the cat out of the bag a month ago. He said he would talk to Netanyahu and find out if the Israelis were willing to make the sacrifices necessary for a deal. If not, there would be no deal.
This opinion was poorly received in the Israel-First Community because it shreds the cover that the “Peace Process” provides to the Ongoing Settlement Enterprise.
Castellio: Our politicians don’t take brave stands. When a position becomes untenable, they stop talking about the subject. And move on to something else. Then, when a new idea becomes popular, they claim they were always in favor of that. Rinse. Repeat.
BTW, it is easy to figure out the likely position of American politicians on Israel-Palestine. Just watch Israeli elections. The Republicans will adopt the Likud position; the Democrats will adopt whatever fraud passes itself off as the “center” of Israeli politics. And Joe Biden will keep insulting America by repeating the Golda Meir quote that about Israel being necessary because Jews need a refuge. (He does remember he’s American, right? America is the true promised land.)
Lol, well now, my observation wasn’t meant to be universal!
steve
I’d like to have his boat if I don’t have to take the wife with it. pl
Maybe he can laugh about it. Maybe he doesn’t really expect to win.
Colonel,
Here are recent articles regarding Clinton, Trump, and the only candidate who hasn’t been AIPACed (yet), Sanders.
http://theantimedia.org/wikileaks-drops-hillary-email-bomb-that-could-end-her-campaign-but-fb-censored-it/
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/searched-hillarys-emails-indicted-win-presidency/
http://commondreams.org/news/2016/03/22/what-sanders-would-have-told-aipac-which-he-talked-about-palestinian-rights
http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/bush-appointed-judge-asks-obama-justice-dept-to-act-on-disclosure-of-trump-associates-mafia-ties-160322?news=858517
Exactly, Norbert. it’s red meat for those who don’t think, or refuse to learn what they are talking about. Trump knows damn well that the US is only one party to the international agreement. His constant statement that we paid Iran $150 billion suits the hoi polloi’s–and a significant number of congressmen’s–misunderstanding of how the Fed and federal government accounting works. . .which they think is run like a business/household (jeezuss). [William R. Cumming can set all of you straight on that.]
All foreign profits held in USD are held at the NY Fed in the foreign country’s checking or savings (treasury securities) account. CANNOT LEAVE THE US unless the foreign country exchanges their money for another currency on the open market and wires it home, which I suspect it has already done, or is doing, into Euros. (The foreign government also has the choice of buying US products with those USD, which would still keep those USD in the country.)
That’s what the USG put a hold on: Iran’s own earned USD profits held at the Fed as a sovereign nation earning interest in its own savings account (treasury securities). The federal government, the admin, calls it “sanctions.” But it’s illegal under international law and agreements. The USG agreed under international law not to touch sovereign foreign reserves as the country of the reserve currency. Is the correct term for what the USG does when it ‘sanctions’ extortion?
When foreign countries no longer want to hold USD, the US will lose its reserve currency status. It’s my off-the-wall contention that it may happen by 2030 if China can replicate the $750 billion/day treasury securities market. We would have Obama and his R2P minions to thank for initiating that.
PL-FYI if you haven’t seen it yet
“If Hillary Isn’t Indicted, the Rule of Law and the Republic Are Dead”http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article44489.htm
To Trump’s credit, he did mention Palestine three times in his speech, two of which was in the context of a deal between Israel and Palestine.
Dream on, honeypie. The power of images: Trump the master of the deal. How funny. What was the contribution of his co-author or editors?
http://time.com/4267058/donald-trump-aipac-speech-transcript/
******
If you ask me, which I know you don’t, this speech could have been written by Netanyahu. How wonderful to learn that the Iranians write something in Hebrew and Farsi on their rockets too. 😉
But then, Ahmadinejad’s speech at the UN, never mind legitimate issues of concern, could have been written by the Mossad.
Rooms full of mirrors.
@FB Ali,
Thanks for that link. Thoughtful argument; I agree with so many things Shamir says. Opening paragraph is great.
Here are the ones they let you see.
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/MOUs.html
As for borders Israel has no fixed borders and really doesn’t want any. Their opinion is the entire Middle East was given to them by god.
Russian Jews, are outside, looking in at the Great Rus, wishing they could be part of it.
Alas, the Rus maintain a distinction between themselves and the Jews of Russia; “Not Rus”.
You guys are late; I stated that on this forum more than 10 years ago.
I know, I should have copy-righted that.
The Electorate in US loves Israel; why should an American politician take a stance opposed to that fundie belief?
Was he married?
I think the AIPAC crowd’s response to Obama-bashing by Trump only deepens the acrimony among between Jewish Americans and African-Americans.
I think Mr. Obama is an untouchable saint among African-Americans and therefore one has to be extremely careful in how one criticizes his policy choices; lest someone think one is a racist.
Ahmadinejad’s speech was not meant for endearing himself or Iran to the Shoah Cultists of all stripes; chiefly among them the Western Diocletian states that equate a Love for the State of Israel as the ultimate touch-stone of (Western) Humanism.
The fact of the matter is that for reasons of religious principle – “God is Just” – as well as political and cultural solidarity – Islamic Iran oppose the existence of the State of Israel; her usurpation of Palestinians lands and the oppression of Palestinians.
In the language of Medieval Chivalry – which I hope you understand – Iran is the sole remaining Knight of Palestine.
On the other side, of course, are gathered all the Black Knights…
I understand that for Western Diocletian states, Love of the State of Israel is a principle component of their religion.
Since neither side has the power to overcome the other’s religious convictions – it is best to separate; sign a cease-fire over Palestine so that Palestinians can live in peace and pursue their interests without wanton death or humiliation at the hands of Israelis.
In the meantime, the other side, can organize tours to Yad Wa Shim to their hearts’ delight.
There was a useful legal doctrine of Sovereign Immunity. That doctrine was repudiated by the United States in cases of Iran, Cuba, Sudan, Libya, and North Korea in the 1990s – the hey-days of the Unilateral Moment.
I thought US legislation in that regard was nuts and I still think so.
In 2070, there might be US Presidential visit to Iran. The US sanctions might be unwound by 2100.
Very entertaining link, thanks 🙂 Unfortunately Shamir’s arguments wouldn’t persuade any of the Hillary supporters I know. Plus… I have observed that there is an inverse correlation between party/candidate loyalty and a sense of humor about politics.
I do have one wee issue with the concluding paragraph, though it is certainly cleverly done. There is the assumption that one must choose Hillary or The Donald. No mention of the Third Party option.
If the choice does end up as Hillary vs. Trump, I predict an increase in 3rd party voters, an increase in crossover votes, and probably an increase in voters staying home in disgust as well. Interesting times!
Wikipedia states: Blake met Catherine Boucher in 1782 when he was recovering from a relationship that had culminated in a refusal of his marriage proposal. He recounted the story of his heartbreak for Catherine and her parents, after which he asked Catherine, “Do you pity me?” When she responded affirmatively, he declared, “Then I love you.” Blake married Catherine – he was 25, she 20 – on 18 August 1782 in St Mary’s Church, Battersea. Illiterate, Catherine signed her wedding contract with an X. The original wedding certificate may be viewed at the church, where a commemorative stained-glass window was installed between 1976 and 1982. Later, in addition to teaching Catherine to read and write, Blake trained her as an engraver. Throughout his life she proved an invaluable aid, helping to print his illuminated works and maintaining his spirits throughout numerous misfortunes.
You really think no sitting US President publicly acknowledges Israeli nuclear weapons because of concerns for the electorate?
There’s some very nice waterfront land in Florida for sale.
@LeaNder,
The WSJ reported that the speech was written by Trump’s Zionist and religiously Orthodox son-in-law, Jared Kushner (Ivanka’s husband).
http://www.wsj.com/articles/in-speech-to-aipac-donald-trump-affirms-support-for-israel-1458605471
Jared Kushner failed to get into Harvard–because apparently he’s as dumb as a pie–until his father donated millions. Don’t know whether Daddy did that from jail, where he was for four years, or not.
@Babak,
Say more. Don’t understand. Thx.
“Russians relate to Mother Russia, a concept completely misunderstood here although many think they do”
It is more complex than that, albeit it doesn’t make what you said wrong. Most, not all, what has been produced in the West re: Soviet/Russian reality, including the organized crime, is about as representative of Russia as is Solzhenitsyn of Russian literature.
Nothing profound – just the empirical observation to the Rus – the Jewish inhabitants of Russia are not “Russian”. That distinction is not necessarily meant negatively, just as I would observe that I am “Beige” and not “White”.
But, on the other hand, the Russian Jews, want to belong to that big “Rus” tribe; in the 60s many Jewish women married Rus men so that their progeny would have Rus last names and be more accepted.
It is just the way those peoples view themselves.
I think US electorate, largely the Protestants, love Israel – it is an article of their religion.
Thanks.
So he had a good wife who supplied him her counsel.
Ayatollah Khomeini also taught his wife the principles of Jurisprudence and some other topics in the Religious Sciences of Islam, but she eventually gravitated towards Arabic language novels.
Valissa,
Re Trump. I think if Trump is elected President (and there’s a good chance of that), he will prove to be a very good one. He appears to be a very practical person, and he’s not going to waste the chance of a lifetime to make his mark on history by pursuing crackpot policies.
Best of all, he’s likely to break free of the current ruling establishment and set the USA on a sensible path, both domestically and in the world. It could mark a turning point in history!
FB,
After last nights showing in Arizona couple with the professional politicians reactions to Brussels I believe Trump’s chances of winning the Republican nomination are increasing. The Establishment appears to be panicking.
Protestants also vary. These are Old Testament Evangelicals, aka Christian Zionists, who are huge Israelophiles. They are significant but still a minority. And then, of course, there is Holocaust industry which is possible, indeed, only in the US. Holocaust did happen, it is just that it is in US where it became both political propaganda tool and a money-making machine.
FB Ali, I think Trump has a very good chance of getting elected. Much will depend on how he sells himself to the greater public now that he has a solid base and strong momentum. He’s gotta step up to the next level of approval pandering 😉
He has started to make the rounds with members of the Republican establishment, and attempting to sell himself to them and “close the deal” with as many of them as he can in order to avoid a contentious convention.
Trump is practical, strong-willed and non-ideological… he does not seem especially pro-Borg, at least not yet. He could make some interesting “deals” while in office since he is by nature very independent minded and has no strong group allegiances. But the Deep State and the Borg will continue to exist and have major influence. Trump will be assimilated to some extent as all Presidents are… after all they are the figurehead of “the establishment.” But assimilation is a two-way street and Trump could trigger some new trends within it.
Though very qualified, I think Hillary would make a much more boring and predictable president, and is already fully subsumed into the Borg way of thinking. When has she ever offered any fresh or original ideas? She’s smart, and she’s always worked hard and done what it takes to get ahead, but she is very conventional in her approach and very much an establishment figure at a time when the mood is anti-establishment. That’s going to work against her in the general election.
Probably only Evangelical Christians think Israel can do no wrong. My husband was in the IDF during 67 and 73 wars, when a very Christian friend of ours gushed over him that he was fighting God’s war for Israel he informed her he did not believe in God and he fought because he was in the army and it was his country, not God’s. She looked stricken and has not spoken to him since. Yes Evangelicals especially here in the South just love Israeli’s. Yet they also believe they are all going to be destroyed at Armageddon unless they accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior.
oofda,
It would also have to adhere to the UN obligation per article 2 section 4 dealing with territorial integrity. I believe East Jerusalem is Jordanian territory accordingly.
Your assessment of the two seems quite sound.
As an outsider, I hope Trump rather than Hillary wins. That would greatly increase the chances of US policies escaping the stranglehold of the Borg. Something the world sorely needs!
That’s hardly pandering.
They wouldn’t let him address the assembly from the campaign trail, over video.
I reckon that’s because it’s really, really hard for a bunch of Zionists to storm out in the middle of a Jewish man’s speech and then claim he’s an anti-semite.
>>>I think Mr. Obama is an untouchable saint among African-Americans
Indeed. he is.
And also among homosexuals of all stripes – with Clinton even moreso, especially among lesbian “feminists.”
Personally, i eagerly await the emergence of a Militant Gay-Masculinist movement. The media-ted fireworks that will follow that should be extremely fun to watch.
For the last couple-of-decades it has been habitual at this point in the Republican game – the primaries – for all candidates to out-brag, out-sneer, and out-tough all the other candidates of the party.
Once they get to the general election, though, all of that goes down the memory hole and suddenly Romney, Bush, McCain, and Dole become Emersonian moderates preaching a transcendental message of self-reliance.
No matter how one measures it, Hillary’s core/pledged supporters are significantly in the minority.
This election will be won on independent/swing voters, which means most of the under-30 crowd. That demographic is particularly vulnerable to “big picture” narratives that are limited only to hotbutton issues.
Trump excels at exploiting such things; Clinton does, too, except that her “hot-button issues” are all 30 years past their due-date – and her remaining positions are entirely stock Borg-ist propaganda, which the under-30s consider a cellophane veneer over a writhing mass of soul-eating worms.
And also to his credit, he did say this:
‘I have a real question as to whether or not both sides want to make it,’…especially…’one side in particular.’ ‘A lot will have to do with Israel and whether or not Israel wants to make the deal – whether or not Israel’s willing to sacrifice certain things…. They may not be, and I understand that, and I’m OK with that. But then you’re just not going to have a deal.’
If he had meant the Palestinians, he could simply have said the Palestinians and been done with it. That’s what everyone else says, no? So his coy answer, here, is quite provocative.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQi-D5ZftVU
That’s just your sectarian bias and lack of practical involvement in the issue speaking. But you know that.