Ken Bernstein here recapitulates a blistering article by David Frum about the debacle of Melania Trump’s speech. David Frum was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush. Say this for Bush: whatever his faults, he knew how to run a campaign. Trump doesn’t.
Frum lists ten reasons why the speech was a disaster. Here is one of them:
Plagiarism draws attention to content of the passage plagiarized. In 2008, Michelle Obama summed up the values that she had learned from her parents and that she and Barack Obama now tried to instill in their children: work hard; tell the truth; keep your promises; treat others with dignity and respect. Donald Trump epically does not tell the truth, does not keep his promises, and does not treat others with dignity and respect. A plagiarized speech (and the failure to detect the plagiarism) pretty strongly confirms that the Trumps do not much care about hard work, either. “Thine own mouth condemneth thee, and not I: yea, thine own lips testify against thee.”
Diane Ravitch's blog 
No, seriously, it doesn’t. She didn’t write this speech, neither did Trump, and he didn’t give it. No one will remember it next week or next month, let alone in November. This is the best Hillary supporters can offer? An attack on Trump’s wife and a snark fest on a speechwriter’s error or sabotage?
If Sanders was the nominee, he’d be calling this a non-story and a non-issue. Because it’s neither. The schadenfreude “liberals” have been engaging in since they decided that Hillary was queen-in-waiting should be deeply depressing to any serious progressive, Democrat or independent.
This is the “best” available American candidate for POTUS? The “best-prepared” in history? And all her supporters can do is wallow in the mud attacking her presumptive opponent’s wife, ex-butler, former advisor, etc. The stench over Cleveland is rushing to Philadelphia. It just doesn’t get more sickening that this.
LikeLike
Michael,
I am not sure it would be right to call David Frum a “Hillary supporter.”
LikeLike
Rumor has it she DID write the parts that were plagiarized from Michelle Obama. In the end, it won’t matter because Trump will not be president.
LikeLike
Between people screaming at me that if I don’t vote for Hillary Clinton, I’m helping to elect Donald Trump (shame, shame!!!) and people assuring us that nothing matters because Hillary is going to be elected (in a landslide, I hear!), I guess I’d best clone myself and vote for Hillary and not vote for her. Kind of a many-worlds hypothesis in electoral clothing.
So while “liberals” threaten to move to Canada and conservatives threaten to move to. . . wherever they were supposed to move when Obama won twice, progressives are thinking about the joys of America when all those folks get out of town. Otherwise, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, . . . If I have only one life, let me live it as a bald, bearded, diabetic cancer-surviving atheist Jew.
LikeLike
Michael,
I suggest that you don’t watch either convention. I don’t know the Dem convention will be like but the GOP conventional is disgusting. I have watched conventions since 1956 and I can’t remember one so hate-filled as this one.
Hillary is like George Orwell’s “Goldstein” in 1984. Hate, hate, hate. I imagine if they could, they would burn her at the stake on national television. The chant “Lock her up” was alarming. When the election is over, Americans are supposed to unite behind the President. It is hard to imagine how this will be possible when the political atmosphere is full of toxic waste.
LikeLike
I agree. I find it very low to attack her.
LikeLike
Sorry, Michael. Whether Melaine is at fault or not is NOT the issue at all. It’s an unknown Trump’s ghost speechwriter who stole words from the opposing camp, and Trump campaign manager gave it a go. They are total disgrace to the GOP platform.
LikeLike
Well, Ken, I’m still confused. How can a dumb or careless or mendacious or traitorous (to the Trump camp) speech writer be a “disgrace to the GOP platform,” which is, of course, the pinnacle of evil itself? Would that be a SERVICE to humanity and civilization as we know them?
Constipated Christ. Are we really supposed to buy the narrative that Donald Trump is both Satan AND Bozo the Clown?
Meanwhile, I had to hunt really hard to find this: https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/a2282cfd-7713-3857-9538-e5e2f0c711d5/ss_suspected-u.s.-airstrikes-in.html?nhp=1
Bread & Circuses in Cleveland have so many good liberals up in arms that they’re missing what the husband of the “wronged” First Lady is up to in the Middle East. The dead folks’ families haven’t missed it, though. And probably aren’t too upset about who Mrs. Trump borrowed from.
LikeLike
MPG,
Yea, I’m still confused, too. You keep rambling on about the load of nonsense. GOP has Trump because other candidates failed to do their jobs. There were/are two options: 1)endorse Trump; 2)boycott the convention in defiance of Trump. Third option? Go find alternative candidates other than Trump and Clinton. Several notable GOP leaders decided not to join in the convention because they know too well who Donald Trump is. Denying him does not give anyone license to judge whether one is liberal, hypocrite, or whatever. Otherwise, throwing such label also needs to be scrutinized for its fallacy.
Sorry, none of us here is responsible for the mess in their courtyard. And certainly not for picking up the garbage of your rant. If you want to do that, please go somewhere to steam off your locomotive.
LikeLike
Oh, I’m terribly sorry, Ken. Didn’t realize that: 1) this is YOUR blog to invite me to leave; 2) that your personal insults comprise substantive argument; 3) that your inability to grasp the simple point that attacking Trump’s wife, even if she willfully plagiarized every word of her speech, one that was, as someone else pointed out, just as cliche-filled as the one Michelle Obama gave from which Ms. Trump is alleged to have stolen, is petty, stupid, and ultimately irrelevant to the upcoming mud-flinging that we’ll be treated with from the end of next week until November, and then for the following four years regardless of which of these two trolls wins.
Was that short enough and clear enough for you? If not, I’ll work on a version with all one- and two-syllable words and no periodic sentences.
LikeLike
The discussion about Melania Trump’s speech has veered far off topic.
The issue pointed out in the post was the lack of organization and coherence in the Trump campaign. Any well-organized campaign would have run her speech through a device to check for inadvertent or advertent plagiarism. No one did. Some in the media think that Trump loves the controversy, is not embarrassed by it at all. Apparently he tweeted that all press is good press. Keep ’em talking about you, no matter what they say.
LikeLike
MPG,
Look, I really don’t care whatever rant you have about Trump or his aides. I don’t give a crap about your cynicism(contained anger) in the first sentence “this is my blog(Hello? Who said that?? I didn’t.),” which is way beyond contention.
But you are wrong about Melania Trump’s speech. It was not drafted by initially appointed GOP speechwriters. Trump’s close aides(possibly, his family members) scrapped their draft, and chose a different writer to help her work on the speech. Depending on how she got involved, she does not deserve all the blame–much less slandering and excessive bashing let alone. But she doesn’t really understand the significance of blunder she made. You can’t claim that this is my speech by borrowing chunk of words/quotes from someone and saying exactly the same phrases without even bother quoting. It is called stealing. It’s just too good to be authentic.
LikeLike
Gee, Ken, you’re pretty when you’re angry.
LikeLike
MPG,
Huh!? I’m not mad at anything. You are.
LikeLike
Of course, Ken.
I never said you were “mad.” I said you were cute when you’re angry.
But you deny that emotion applies to you.
After you wrote, “And certainly not for picking up the garbage of your rant. If you want to do that, please go somewhere to steam off your locomotive,” I stated that you surprised me by apparently thinking this was your blog to tell me to leave. Then you apparently deny that and butcher what it is I said, to boot, writing, “Look, I really don’t care whatever rant you have about Trump or his aides. I don’t give a crap about your cynicism(contained anger) in the first sentence “this is my blog(Hello? Who said that?? I didn’t.),” which is way beyond contention.”
Of course, I don’t REALLY think you believe it’s your blog. You just tried to chase me off it as if it were. My comment was what the kids call “sarcasm.”
I’m not cynical: that’s why I can’t vote for Hillary Clinton. And I have never asked for YOU to give a crap about anything, least of all my voting intentions. Vote for whom you like. Just stop asking others to buy the bilgewater known as “Melania Trump’s speech matters.” If it does, the country is in even worse shape than everyone says.
My sense is that you’re very confused. I think it’s from swallowing too much Neoliberal Tea, the tea of pseudo-progressivism. Or perhaps it’s just a bit of beef or undigested potato.
As for me, I am but mad north-north-west. When the wind is Southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw.
LikeLike
Geez, you still keep rambling on and on. I don’t see what you are trying to do other than taking your anger/ cynicism out on us over the idea that differs from yours. You don’t like Hillary? Fine. Then, go for Trump at you own risk. Or don’t bother going for vote until people find the third canditate.
LikeLike
Sure, Ken, anything you say.
Vote for Trump? Not any sooner or more willingly than I’d vote for her Herness. Which isn’t going to happen. And I never stay home from an election. I have my choices, pending next week’s Democratic Love-Fest. Meanwhile, I get to fantasize a collective moment of clarity in Philadelphia resulting in Sanders being nominated and Hillary not.
My dissent from the apparent majority really gets your goat, apparently. I have no remedy for that other than offering a coherent argument on why Hillary R. Clinton is a candidate who is worthy of the support of progressives, one that NEVER mentions or hints at her Republican opponent. I won’t hold my breath.
Nor should you hold yours waiting for me to be silent as long as Trump is being vilified for so many things that have nothing to do with him or the issues. His wife’s speech and speechwriters? Please. Pull the other leg, it’s shorter.
But if we’re going to use that as an indication of Trump’s unwillingness to “be honest” and admit a mistake, let’s please discuss: 1) Hillary facing gunfire in Bosnia: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4 ; 2) Hillary serving on the board of WalMart, the world’s worst corporation owned by America’s worst billionaire family, supporters of charter schools and privatization of public education; 3) Hillary and Bill Go To Haiti (and its people suffer the consequences): http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/09/hillary-clinton-email-213110
I could go on, but you won’t respond to any of the dozens of issues of her character because you’ve convinced yourself that Donald Trump is the antichrist. Isn’t it pretty to think so, too? Me, I won’t vote for the evil of two lessers, and never again will I fill out a ballot for a neoliberal, no matter what uniform or sex.
LikeLike
Oh, and when we’re praising GWB for “running a campaign,” you’ll excuse me if I’ve got my fingers down my throat. David Frum is a piece of garbage and so are those who’ve owned him.
LikeLike
I think more than anything it’s an indication of the seat-of-the-pants nature of the campaign. And I agree with Michael that this will be forgotten by next week, displaced by whatever new absurdity the Trump campaign brings us.
LikeLike
I also agree, A minor goof. It does undermine the attacks on Hillary (A plagiarist candidate Trump calling Clinton a liar).
But the ad hoc campaign by Trump is ready to collapse. He’s bound to lash out.
LikeLike
If you want to hear rabid, frothing at the mouth Hillary bashing, just tune into the GOP convention tonight. If you hate Hillary so much, then you will enjoy the GOP convention. Right now some obnoxious right winger Arkansas Attorney General, Leslie Rutledge, is swift boating and smearing Hillary non stop. She also brags that she is pro gun, pro life, pro Christian, pro small government and pro family values. Is this what you want? Really? Oh yeah and Rutledge is against liberal activist judges like Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She is thrilled that president Trump will appoint solid right wingers to the supreme court, no more RBGs. She wants far right wing pro corporate activist justices on the supreme court.
I will definitely be voting for Hillary. I think RBG is great and thank God for her presence on the supreme court.
LikeLike
Why anyone who isn’t a Republican would watch one nanosecond of the Cleveland Show eludes me. I’d sooner watch an infomercial, and I avoid those like the plague they are.
I don’t need to listen to GOP hatred of Hillary. First, most, if not all, of it is predicated on all the wrong reasons to loathe her. They can’t hate her for being what she really is, Republican-Lite (and maybe more Republican than Donald Trump, in fact). So they invent her as this monstrous super liberal. I suspect that half the traction she gets in the Democratic Party comes from people who don’t get that she’s only a liberal compared with someone like Paul Ryan or Yertle the Turtle of Kentucky. No Roosevelt progressive Democrat would recognize her as other than a middle-of-the-road Republican c. 1942.
Second, I know her by her works. So why would I want to hear a bunch of GOP bilge? The best thing that could happen to the American people at this point would be a very selective Rapture involving the nominees of both parties after next week. Or maybe we could be invaded by Denmark. . .
LikeLike
I don’t see how to reply directly to Michael, I will put what I have to say here.
I used to teach social studies, particularly government & Politics and economics. That is one reason I watch.
I write about politics online. Therefore I pay attention.
And sometimes as a result of watching I can provide information or ideas about how to respond.
LikeLike
Hi Ken…thanks for getting this info to us.
For years now, you and I have had an occasional back and forth going, and since I teach much what you teach, (but at the university where it is now called public policy), we are generally on the same page.
It was with great discomfort that I finally endorsed Hillary yesterday, here, after too much shadenfreude about the issues, and some actual anti Diane Ravitch and anti Semitic comments coming from a writer here. Too many haters in our midst to let Trump win.
Today, NPR kept repeating in each woman’s actual voice, the portion on family values. When Michelle speaks it, we know she lived it and instills it in her girls as it was instilled in her. When Melania speaks Michelle’s words, with NO attribution, they ring hollow. She is a phony, ignorant, mendacious, narcissist just like her husband Donald.
And today hearing Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan lean on getting a Repub Congress elected, told the tale. No talk of Trump from them, only Dump Hillary and elect other Repubs. So that is the game plan.
The mood of the country is so torn to shreds, cannot imagine how the three branches of our government can ever function again. .
LikeLike
What if Michelle Obama had plagiarized a speech or Hillary? The right wingers would be in full frothing at the mouth mode.
Donald Trump last year targeted Vice President Joe Biden for his history of plagiarism, arguing that Biden’s past mistakes would give Trump an advantage if Biden entered the race.
LikeLike
And it means NOTHING, Joe. What would it take could get you out of your tit-for-tat, they-did-it-first or they-would-be-worse mentality? This is a media game and you fall for every trap they lay and jerk every single time your strings are pulled.
LikeLike
Brings up the likely fib of her degree and highlights other likely fibs.
Also, speaking of education, Turkey suspended 15,000 ed staff.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/07/20/world/europe/turkey-erdogan-gulen.html
LikeLike
Thanks for link Akademos! The situation worsens daily.
LikeLike
Turkey really needs Gulen and his charter schools at this crucial time.
God (and the FBI) knows they have worked wonders here in the US.
LikeLike
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36838347
21,000 teachers’ licenses revoked
LikeLike
Just the arrogance of this man and the people who follow him. If I lie long enough about this, people will believe me and if they don’t believe me, who cares, I’ll get elected anyway.
LikeLike
Right, as opposed to the transparency and legendary honesty that is Hillary Rodham Clinton.
You prefer your lies to have a big “D” on them, I gather. I prefer something resembling honesty. Bernie Sanders, Jill Stein, Tulsi Gabbard, Nina Turner. . .
LikeLike
Funny. Teachers thank Melania!
https://www.google.com/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/36836599?client=safari#
For the object lesson in plagiarism.
LikeLike
people really should go read the entire piece by Frum. I’d be honored if you read what I wrote about it.
LikeLike
So we have Frum, George Will, Jeb Bush, and a few other charmers coming out against Trump. If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, doesn’t that make Trump our friend? He’s opposed by so many pieces of garbage, I’m almost inclined to like him. Not quite, but he really isn’t the worst the Republicans have put forward or tried to in this cycle, for that matter.
LikeLike
I am going to be blunt – if you even consider being inclined to support Trump you are an idiot.
He is sexist, misogynist, xenophobic in what he spews out.
He sees nothing wrong with retweeting from Alt-Right sites some of which put neo-Nazis to shame
He is a dishonest businessman, who lies about his networth, who regularly screws people in business dealing, daring them to sue him (and in the process has bankrupted several small businesses).
He managed to lose money running casinos in Atlantic City. That is, he bankrupted his casinos, but was able somehow to pay himself a lot of money
He was kept from folding at one point because his father illegally bailed him out by buying a lot of chips but not cashing them in – under the law that needed to be reported as a loan but was not
He thinks wages are too high.
He illegally brought in Polish workers to build one of his sites and then ripped them off even for the low wages he was paying them
He did a LOT of business with several mob-controlled companies, paying them a premium as a way of avoiding labor issues
I could go on, but google is your friend.
LikeLike
Come on, Ken. You are too smart to not read my very clear intent. I won’t insult you by reiterating my glaringly obvious viewpoint. And I’ve stated so many times that I’ll never vote for Donald Trump or suggest to anyone else that s/he do so that it’s just a little tiresome to have to do it again to fend off being called an idiot by you or anyone else. I’m many things, not all of them wonderful, but an idiot isn’t close to any of them.
I might not have read as much history as you, but I’ve read a good deal and lived through nearly 66 years of it. I come from a family of lifelong Democrats and progressives. My parents voted for Henry Wallace. Maybe we should dig up my father and explain how refusing to support one of the two major party candidates was and is a crime against humanity (because after all, there’s ALWAYS a lesser of two evils, right?) My father was a combat soldier in WW II. My uncle fought in Korea. They risked their lives so that we don’t have to accept oligarchy and pretend it’s some species of democracy.
I’m so bloody sick of smug liberals telling me what I “have” to do and believe about the primaries and upcoming election. My family paid. I paid with jail. And y’all can go stuff it if you think you can frighten or “guilt-trip” me into casting a vote for Hillary Clinton. It’s never going to happen. Not at gunpoint or any other point.
LikeLike
Ken, I admire and respect you, but I think you’ve got this one wrong. If David Frum and many other reptilian Republican operatives and would-be kings are so set on burying Trump for things his wife said (and clearly didn’t compose), things his ex-butler may have said, things an ex-advisor is alleged to have said, etc., shouldn’t progressives be wondering just why they’re so opposed to him?
I’ll never vote for him, but I won’t waste my time looking for nits to pick. And I won’t turn him into an ogre. Finally, no amount of hysterical vilification of Trump makes Hillary an acceptable, let alone appealing, alternative. That’s what amazes me about those who want to help coronate her. We had a chance to elect Bernie Sanders and we’re going to settle for another 4-to-8 years of neoliberal/neoconservative horror? Not I.
LikeLike
let’s see – tons of political professionals have focused on the plagiarism issue because it encapsulates so much of what is wrong with the Trump campaign, including his never admitting he is wrong. It serves as a lens to refocus on so many other things that are wrong with him.
And just because someone is your political opponent does not mean he cannot be patriotic in his opposition to Trump as bad and dangerous for the country.
LikeLike
Very disappointing, Ken.
If Trump’s such a bumbler, you certainly don’t need me or millions of other progressive Berniecrats to vote for Her Highness: the entire rest of the country should be flocking to see her coronated next week. Let’s suspend the election and just see her put into the White House by acclimation. She knows the address. The Obamas should start packing now.
I just struggle to put together the story that she’s a lock about to win in a landslide and he’s a buffoon who has no chance and is too incompetent to recover from some minor idiocy in his WIFE’S convention speech (suspend the debates, too!), with the one that keeps telling me that I’m living in some sort of white male privileged world in which I’m allowing my silly old political principles and my chauvinistic pride to keep me from keeping the world safe from Donald “The Great Satan” Trump.
It just doesn’t compute, Ken. He’s my sister AND my daughter? The phone company really DID kill Kennedy? Nah. Not buying it. She’s not a lock because she’s not able to sucker enough progressives to hold their noses. And because millions of people have tired of swallowing the Fairy Tale of the Evil Ogre and the Not-Quite-So-Evil-Prince(ss).
LikeLike
You are right, Michael. Hillary is not a shoo-in. She might lose to Trump. Then, goodbye to Roe V Wade; goodbye to gun control; goodbye to environmental regulation. Hello to a big wall on the southern border. Get ready for deportation of 11 million immigrants. Get ready to leave NATO. Get ready for an administration that will make Reahan look like a liberal by contrast.
LikeLike
Michael,
When I see Democrats quoting George W. Bush’s speechwriter lecturing people about honesty, keeping promises and treating people with dignity and respect, I really get the feeling that we have entered an alternate reality in a parallel anti-universe where up is down, black is white, and conservative is liberal.
LikeLike
Good to be the only one who’s noticing the insanity and hypocrisy on both sides. But there really is a progressive movement, too, and few in it are capitulating to the politics of hate and fear. I have hope, if not for this immediate election, then for not too far down the road.
LikeLike
It’s not the fact that Democrats are quoting a political opponent that I find curious.
It’s that they are quoting George W. Bush’s speechwriter pontificating on ‘”honesty, keeping promises and treating people with dignity and respect” (all of which Bush failed miserably at)
If that is not ironic, I don’t know what is.
LikeLike
I read it and agree with you.
LikeLike
“David Frum was a speechwriter for President George W. Bush. ”
George W. Bush had a speechwriter?
Who knew?
Where did he find him? On Craigslist?
LikeLike
Here’s my favorite Frum speech
LikeLike
Exactly.
LikeLike
What a stunning wreck!
“There’s an old saying in Tennessee — I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again.”
LikeLike
Frum is correct. The issue is not about Hilary, it’s about a fraud. RE Trump and his supporters, apologists, there is no there there…no real heart, no soul, no knowledge, no
feelings except for oneself….Mrs.Clinton for me is lesser or two evils.
And Trump is truly evil…lying,cheating, hurting is his true nature..I see no possible
defense. Not for Trump, not for Republicans who have sold their souls, not for some phony
progressives who in destroying Hilary will bring in someone worse even than Nixon.
LikeLike
Watch who you’re calling a phony progressive, Marek; I have 50 years of activism and an arrest record and FBI jacket to back the claim. I paid dearly for the right to stand up as a progressive. And I stand by my refusal to support a neoliberal/neocon hybrid like Hillary Clinton. You’re free to do what you like, but be a little more careful about hurling accusations of phoniness.
LikeLike
Totally agree. I voted for Bernie but he didn’t make it. Now the choice is between the worst of the worst or Hillary; she is flawed and a corporate Democrat but not even remotely as bad as Trump.
LikeLike
Meanwhile at the wonderful hatefest that is the GOP convention: The crowd at the 2016 Republican National Convention on Tuesday repeatedly chanted “lock her up” at the mention of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s name.
As New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie spoke on the second night of the convention, he ticked off criticisms of Clinton, asking the crowd of she was “guilty or not guilty.” After a hearty shout of “guilty,” the crowd dissolved into shouts of “Lock her up, lock her up!”
Hideous and disgusting.
LikeLike
But, of course, the non-stop “liberal” opprobrium directed at Trump, his wife, his kids, ad nauseam, are just good old fair play at its finest.
Am I going mad, or has what passes for the Democratic Party turned into a huge mass of hypocrites and self-deluded lunatics who can’t pause to look into the mirror long enough to notice that they’re starting to actually resemble their party’s symbol? I’m reasonably sure that by the end of next week, I’ll be leaving the party and that I will be in vast and very good company.
Anyone remember 1964? Oooh, don’t vote for Barry Goldwater! You’ll wake up with your family fried by nuclear war! Vote for LBJ. You’ll just get about a dozen years of conventional war, plus the joys Dow Chemical can give the Vietnamese people with napalm and your own troops with Agent Orange. Hey, but LBJ helped the country to Nixon, so that really helped.
And how about that ’68 Democratic “convention”? Read some Norman Mailer when you get a minute. Plenty of demons to go around in both major parties.
LikeLike
“Plenty of demons to go around in both major parties.”
I am thinking, the main reason for this is a century or more of forced compromise. We are pretending that hundreds of millions people can agree on certain essential issues, which makes politicians cautious about saying anything that may not please the masses.
Lies make honest opinions dark secrets which are the mothers of demons and ghosts.
LikeLike
Thanks for two insightful and, in my opinion, dead-on-the-money comments, Máté.
LikeLike
Goethe’s Faust comes to mind.
“Faustian Bargains”
When you deal with the Devil
You’re bound to get burned.
Cuz he ain’t on the level
And ain’t real concerned
LikeLike
I’m sure you will have posts about this tomorrow, but I’m pretty peeved after listening to Trump Jr.’s short attack on public educationat the RNC. I don’t write about politics on my personal Facebook, especially about education because of the possible ramifications.
In reality, it was the usual party line. The school employees don’t care about the students. We only care about our “tenured” jobs. Vouchers are the answer. Most countries who outperform us have school choice (fact check???). Everyone should have the same options he had as a child. I don’t think any poor family in NYC would be able to make up the difference between the value of a voucher and the actual tuition of a school attended by a Trump kid. Blah blah blah.
At least I can vent here. Thank you.
LikeLike
Teacher111,
I totally agree with you. Trump Jr.’s attack on public education and on teachers was outrageous. His claims on behalf of school choice were factually wrong. He sounded like the smug “reformers” we have heard so often. No facts, no evidence, just opinion. The highest scoring nations in the world do not have vouchers or charters.
LikeLike
Mailer, by 1968, no longer supported the New Left….he supported Bobby Kennedy,
with full awareness of Bobby’s flaws–rather than Gene McCarthy.However, MAILER made, in my
opinion, a mistake in not eventually supporting Humphrey…how many deaths American and
Vietnamese came as a result of Nixon’s election?
Bernie is backing Hilary, I think, out of heartfelt desire to stop Trump.
in 1968 RADICALS felt Nixon’s election would hasten the Revolution.
Instead we got Nixon who continued the war with tragic results…Bernie is
doing what is right…The lesser of two evils is more than a slogan.
Trump is dangerous in a way that even surpasses Nixon. Hilary is a
rational choice.
LikeLike
Are you kidding? On what evidence would you suggest that Humphrey would have gotten us out of Vietnam after serving as VP under LBJ in the administration that utterly pulled the wool over America’s eyes and got us deeper and deeper into a totally unnecessary war? Johnson, Humphrey, McNamara, Rusk, et al., should have all burned in hell, the same circle where GWB, Dick Cheney, and the cast of monsters in their administration belong for pulling the same crap in 2002.
Kennedy might have been a peacemaker, though it wasn’t crystal-clear at the time that he was headed that way. Humphrey? Don’t make me laugh. He lost all his credibility on the left for never speaking out, even obliquely, against the war. He dug his own political grave and helped pave the way for Nixon. In retrospect, Bobby Kennedy made perfect sense. Humphrey not one bit of sense. You’re going to rewrite history now? As for Mailer, it doesn’t matter whom he supported: what matters is the story he told about the convention. A story I think a lot of Hillocrats should read or reread.
Most of the radicals who might have thought that Nixon would bring about a revolution in reaction weren’t old enough to vote in 1968. The voting age was 21 then, not 18. I couldn’t vote until the 1972 election, and I sure as hell didn’t vote for Nixon. Nor would I have in ’68 if I had the right to vote then. But if you’re trying to now pin Nixon on radicals (and why not? We’ve been hearing for at least a year from Clintonistas how Ralph Nader, not the DNC, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, or the Supreme Court, gave us George W. Bush), sell that to someone who’s ignorant or gullible enough to buy.
I don’t read minds, so I can’t tell you why Sanders endorsed Hillary. But I do know that he’s not suspended his campaign, either. And regardless, Sanders isn’t a god or guru, as he’d be the first to tell you if you asked; he knows that his supporters aren’t about to leap to Hillary en masse at his word. He’s not released his delegates to her, either, by the way. When she’s nominated, then his campaign ends for the nomination unless he actually ends it before then. And if she’s nominated, you can cast your vote for her on the Democratic line. I won’t be joining you.
Maybe Hillary actually had it right one time in her life: when she worked for Barry Goldwater against Lyndon Johnson in 1964. I’m no longer convinced that Jack Kennedy was a saint or that Dwight Eisenhower was a bad president. And that’s not coming from my having become a Republican in my old age. It’s from constantly reevaluating what these people wrote, said, and did. In any event, keep convincing yourself that the real danger is Donald Trump. And if those who predict a Hillary landslide prove correct, you’ll get to see how wonderful she is when she’s got her finger on the greatest military machine in human history, and when she’s cutting loose all the poor and minority people who’ve blindly backed her mistaking her for the myth that her husband pawned off on the American people as “America’s first black president.”
LikeLike
MPG,
Completely agree with you thoughts. From an “atheist Catholic” to an “atheist Jew”. Gotta love it!
Duane
LikeLike
Well, I’m getting yelled at on YouTube by some Jesus fan because I quoted the anecdote that when Art Tatum walked into a club where Fats Waller was performing, the latter said, “I only play the piano, but tonight God is in the house.” The youngster who has been berating me feels that this is less than respectful of the “true” nature of God, Jesus, and piano players. Go know.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m going to make a bumper sticker
“A vote for Jesus is a vote for Trump”
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m sporting “A vote for Bernie is a vote for the Flying Spaghetti Monster” on my bumper these days.
LikeLike
“A vote for Jesus is a vote for Trump”
A vote for Jesus is a vote for Trump
A vote for Stein is a vote for Drumpf
A vote for anyone other than Hill
Is a vote for swallowing Donald’s pill
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gonna have to post that on fb, just for giggles!!
LikeLike
Humphrey clearly spoke out in Oct.in terms of a negotiated settlement in Vietnam.
Many radicals voted for Eldridge Cleaver as a protest vote. I heard Hayden and others
talk about how a Nixon presidency would bring about the revolution.
Yes,HHH,was an imperfect liberal…In 1948 it was HHH advocacy of Civil Rights
for Blacks that chased out the Dixiecrats and allowed Truman to push for
the integration of the Armed forces…Maybe you should consider the reasons
Bernie is backing Hillary…The prospect of Trump as Pres. is no joke and especially
no joke for those of us who teach in American public schools.
LikeLike
You do understand that the notion of “many radicals” c. 1968 is amusing but essentially statistically meaningless? Have you bothered to actually LOOK at the voting results from 1968? Or are you just making it up to suit your Trump = Satan and Hillary will save us from the AntiChrist narrative?
In 1968, Nixon won by nearly 1,000,000 votes. He got 110 more electoral votes than did Humphrey. The only other candidate to get electoral votes was George Wallace, who received 46. From whom do you fantasize Wallace took those votes?
That said, Mr. Cleaver received a stunning 36,563 votes. Clearly, that cost Humphrey the election. Or perhaps it was the 52,588 votes that went to someone neither of us could name on a bet: Henning Blomen, running on the Socialist Labor ticket. Or Dick Gregory’s 47,133 on the Freedom & Peace Party ticket (Cleaver ran under Peace & Freedom, which may have proved confusing). How about the Socialist Workers’ great Fred Halstead, who got 41,388 Americans to pull the lever for him? My parents may have been among the 25,552 who voted for Gene McCarthy (no party). Then there was the great E. Harold Munn with his 15,123 Prohibition Party supporters.
Yeah, the radicals cost Hubert his Lincoln Bedroom rights. And the 9,906,473 who voted on the American Independent Party line for George Wallace? They must have all been Humphrey supporters.
There has been exactly one US Presidential election since 1900 that indisputably had the outcome changed by a third party candidate. That was in 1912. The loser was William Howard Taft, the incumbent GOP president. The winner was Democrat Woodrow Wilson, who then won re-election in 1916 with the slogan, “He kept us out of war!” (a year later, he put us into it, a mistake that resulted in 323,018 American casualties, not to mention those whose lives were permanently destroyed through addiction to morphine in Army hospitals (I knew one of those fellows in Vermont in the late 1960s). The “spoiler” was former president Theodore Roosevelt, who ran on the “Bull Moose” ticket.
And that’s it. Not Eldridge Cleaver or Gene McCarthy. Not Ross Perot. And not poor beleaguered Ralph Nader.
Whether Bernie Sanders and/or Jill Stein becomes the first candidate to tip an election to the another party in the 21st century is yet to be determined, but if it happens, you can blame me and I’ll blame every lame Democrat who voted for and supported Hillary Clinton in the primaries.
But as far as already-held elections, you really need to look at actual data, not your fuzzy and very selective or creative memory of how people voted. Each successive comment you offer here loses you credibility as even a marginally careful scholar of 20th century American history.
LikeLike
Golden erg…you’re fired.
LikeLike
I’ve had my last named butchered in lots of ways, but that’s a new one. And I can’t be fired: I was never employed by Trump, the GOP, Hillary, the DNC, etc. Nor have I ever watched Trump’s idiotic reality tv show, though maybe the Farrelly Brothers should sue him for stealing that line from the hitchhiker scene in THERE’S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY.
LikeLike
Thanks for a spirited exchange. However, a Trump presidency would be a disaster
in terms of education, of the Supreme Court, in terms of immigration, in terms of
foreign policy. Of the two candidates Trump by any moral standard would be a disaster.
I don’t see that various insults validates your opinion re what ? are you saying that
there is no difference between Trump and Clinton? If so, I think you are wrong
and not convincing. What outcome are you looking for re the election?
LikeLike
I agree with Marek Breiger, all good points. I’m too tired to type any more. Buona notte a tutti voi.
LikeLike
This is a wonderful stream of conversation…thank you all. Great history lessons and remebrance of things past.
LikeLike
“Plagiarism draws attention to content of the passage plagiarized. ”
I didn’t do it earlier so I now listened to both speeches. I really don’t see the big difference. Both speeches are full of banalities, obvious truisms that have been said thousand times before.
Both women are guilty of plagiarizing boring, uninspiring speeches of their predecessors: “hard work…respect…dreams…life….children….this nation….values”
Can you guys show me any part of these speeches that stand out as unique, interesting, unexpected?
LikeLike
“Plagiarizing Plato”
Everything’s been said
A billion times before
Novelty is dead
A plagiarism bore
LikeLike
Some former Bush2 speechwriters wrote the Melina speech.
But, she didn’t like it and tore it apart, getting some help from a “friend.”
And then they copied Michelle Obama’s speech, presenting HER words as those of Melania Trump.
What’s so interesting about this is not just the overt plagiarism – and the repeated denials, which ring hollow – but the fact that they plagiarized the wife of the sitting president, whom they’ve vilified and obstructed.
The plagiarism – and the emphatic denials of it – are symptomatic of how the current crop of Republicans do business.
LikeLike
And what would you say is characteristic of the Democratic primary season, particularly the actions and words of the campaign of its presumptive nominee, who first said she’d “look into” the transcripts of her highly-remunerative Wall Street speeches, implying that she’d release them, then refusing to do so until Bernie Sanders released his tax returns in a manner SHE saw fit. Result: Clinton never comes clean to the American people about what she said to Goldman Sachs, et al. Need I go on? She’s hardly Ms. Transparency & Honesty of 2016 or any other year.
You want to talk about the GOP and how it does business? How about the current DNC and various state Democratic organizations and how they did business during the primaries? I could go on, but the point’s been made to anyone who can take a few minutes from vilifying the man I’ve read repeated referred to as “the AntiChrist” and other charming epithets to turn their deep perceptiveness to the party that once was led by Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a patrician who betrayed his own class to save America from financial ruin.
I’m no fan of Trump, certainly will not vote for him, find much of what comes out his mouth repulsive, despise how he panders to the worst tendencies of the most fearful and hateful Americans, and hope he is not elected.
However, I’m also no fan of Hillary Clinton, certainly will not vote for her, find much that comes out of her mouth impossible to believe and often sick-making to my progressive sensibilities and values, despise how she has pandered to those women silly enough to vote for her simply because she’s female and those who know precisely what they’re getting in her – a bought-and-paid-for servant of the 1% who has repeatedly exhibited war mongering propensities – and I hope she is not elected.
In other words, a plague on both their houses and parties. If she’s the Democratic nominee, I’m out of here. I will not contribute a single penny to her and her campaign. I will spend the rest of my life trying to get America out of its two-party rut. And I will continue to call ’em as I see ’em regarding the fact that we really have just one party now: a different sort of “green party” that worships money and power, that bullies the world and spits on our own poor, minorities, and, yes, women. https://www.versobooks.com/books/2121-false-choices
#StillNotWithHer
LikeLike
Lying, cheating, plagiarism and manipulation are all the MO of Republican party. They don’t seem to care because they know they have a pack of low information voters that have fallen for it. The Republican zombies are loyal and always show up at the polls.
LikeLike
I can’t imagine that Trump’s supporters care about something as banal as plagiarism. But the fact that it was plagiarized from Michelle Obama of all people? Wife to the antichrist (and possibly the antichrist herself)? At least, according to right-wingers. That’s got to have them rending their clothes and tearing out their hair. Seriously, I think Trump is having great fun with this, coming up with new ways to get people in a tizzy just to see how long the charade will last. I think it’s quite possible he’s as amazed as the rest of us that he hasn’t been “fired”.
LikeLike
Dienne, it’s not inconceivable that he has no intention of serving as POTUS or at least not serving for long. The job would be difficult and boring for him, I suspect. And he likely knows that perfectly well.
When he ran for the GOP nod in ’08, he got basically zero traction and support. He then spent part of the ensuing 8 years with birther nonsense.
So when he showed up again as part of the Republican Klown Kar, I figured he wouldn’t get his campaign off the ground. That he did, and big-time, is at least as much a testament to the absurdly weak field of challengers he faced as it is a tribute to his campaign team’s acumen.
But the fact is that he whipped a field of seasoned politicians and made them look like utter clowns. So maybe he’s laughing himself to sleep every night. Maybe he’s outfoxed us all. Maybe it simply doesn’t matter what he says given his opposition both internally and from the other presumptive nominee. I’m not a political insider, but it’s hard for me to imagine a more absurd scenario than what we’ll be facing by the end of next week if intelligent Americans are seriously expected to pull the lever for either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. I know I’ll take “Other,” be it Jill Stein or a Bernie Sanders write-in. Our two “great” parties have lost their collective minds. Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and FDR must be spinning fast enough to power a small city.
LikeLike
I would love to see Trump open his acceptance speech with:
“Four score and seven weeks ago, I had a dream, that the American people should not ask not what their country can do for them, but what can they do for me.”
LikeLike
LOL
LikeLike
I read a funny comment on “Common Dreams”
The comment was something to the effect that “Melania Trump may have plagiarized Michelle Obama in her nomination speech, but Hillary Clinton has been plagiarizing Bernie Sanders for the past year in order to win the nomination”
LikeLike
Not able to resist mentioning the classic Callahan cartoon in which a man is standing in front of the help desk in front of an angry-looking woman who tells him, “Sir, this is a FEMINIST bookstore. There IS no ‘Humor Section.'”
Wonder if this crowd will see any humor in that or in your anecdote, DAM.
LikeLike
Teddy Roosevelt? The imperialist war monger. The whole history of the US is rife with exceptionalism and bullying and imposing its will on smaller weaker countries.
In any case, I understand where MPG is coming from. He sincerely despises Hillary and feels that in her own way, she is just as bad as Trump. If I felt that Hillary was just as bad as Trump, then I guess I would vote for Jill Stein or a democratic socialist even though they would lose badly. Obviously, I don’t think Hillary is as bad as Trump; she’s no saint and she’s not a demon. Bill Clinton was a big sell out to the corporate overlords: he repealed Glass-Steagall, ended welfare as we know it, his Telecommunications Act paved the road to media consolidation, pardoned Marc Rich, etc., BUT he appointed Ginsburg and Breyer to the supreme court. A small but important ray of hope in an otherwise bleak sell out of Democratic principles.
What do we do about the duopoly? We need a younger more photogenic, more charismatic Bernie Sanders.
LikeLike
“What do we do about the duopoly? We need a younger more photogenic, more charismatic Bernie Sanders.”
He may well be the last of a breed.
Possibly Zephyr Teachout . . . ?
LikeLike
You have to admire Bernie’s commitment and stamina. He never aspired to be president, but picked up the mantle because he could not stand the rigged system our government has become. We need some younger progressives that will continue to fight for the middle class, or we run the risk of turning into a fascist state.
LikeLike
The repeal of the Citizens United ruling is a must. This will never happen under a Trump court that will be in control for decades.
LikeLike
But while we’re waiting for her/him, let’s vote for 4 to 8 more years of neoliberal/neocon horror.
LikeLike
MPG
At least on the issue of Supreme Court, LIFETIME appointments- you see no difference between DT and HC?
LikeLike
We actually had “a younger more photogenic, more charismatic Bernie Sanders” in Obama, though it was all a mirage.
The thing that makes Bernie appealing is that he is REAL, not some airbrushed, charismatic, photogenic fake.
And the fact that he is a grandfatherly figure just adds to his appeal, particularly to young people.
Perhaps it is time that we started judging people based on the content of their character rather than their outward appearance, as Martin Luther King suggested.
LikeLike
That’s loco, man.
I have noted that during the primaries, a lot of HRC supporters found it utterly unironic that they attacked Bernie for his age and unkempt appearance, his wife for being less than bathing-beauty beautiful, attacked Trump for his hair and his wife for being TOO hot, and squawked like chickens over anything that could be misconstrued as sexism and misogyny on the part of Clinton critics, even when the criticism had zero to do with her being a woman.
I guess I couldn’t have won the Democratic nod, either, even though I’m younger than Her Highness, because I don’t dye my hair or beard, don’t get my hair trimmed regularly, have a general NYC accent, and have been known to be a little gruff when talking about the 1%, Wall Street, neoliberalism and neoconservatism, the exploitation of women, ethnic minorities, the poor, the Third World, and the obscenity that is our health care non-system. Oh, and I was arrested a few times in the ’60s for various left-wing political activities.
LikeLike
Michael
It’s probably been obvious all along, but I am just coming to the realization that the main problem in this country is not the candidates but the people who choose them.
That’s a very big problem in a democracy. Some might say intractable.
That any Democrat would actually choose Clinton over Sanders in the primary is something that I find very difficult to understand, especially given the fact that polls showed Sanders basically trouncing Trump in every poll over the past six months (doing significantly better than Clinton in head to head mathups agaist trump)
And i have to agree that if Trump wins, the latter folks will be the ones who shoulder much of the blame, certainly more blame than the relatively few who vote for Jill Stein or other third party candidates.
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree with you more, SDP, and I’ve been saying similar things for a year or so. We could have had an honest, effective, decent candidate who would have routed Trump or any other Republican troll. Instead, we’ve got our own troll and we’re supposed to pretend she’s Mrs. Shrek, not the one who eats the Billy Goats Gruff.
Well, I really do finally understand Bartleby the Scrivener. I prefer not to.
LikeLike
Rage: snore. Prove to me that neoliberal/neocon hybrid Hillary will nominate better judges than Trump or that she can get anyone decent approved by the Senate. Are her coattails big enough to get back control of either house? She’ll be lucky to drag her corrupt, untrustworthy self across the finish line, even against Donald Trump.
LikeLike
Prove to me that neoliberal/neocon hybrid Hillary will nominate better judges than Trump or that she can get anyone decent approved by the Senate.
Bush 41: David Souter
Clarence Thomas
Clinton 1.0: Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer
Bush 43: John Roberts
Obama: Sonia Sotomayor Seat
Elena Kagan Seat
Merrick Garland ?
My evidence beats yours – hands down.
You can go back to sleep now.
LikeLike
Because Bush I or II = Trump?
And I’m most decidedly not asleep, sweetheart.
On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Diane Ravitchs blog wrote:
> RageAgainstTheTetsocracy commented: “Prove to me that neoliberal/neocon > hybrid Hillary will nominate better judges than Trump or that she can get > anyone decent approved by the Senate. Bush 41: David Souter Clarence Thomas > Clinton 1.0: Ruth Bader Ginsburg ” >
LikeLike
We can have a high degree of certainty that Republican Presidents will nominate very conservative Justices when the Senate’s controlled by Republicans. The next President could conceivably have 3 or 4 appointments. If Trump is President and the Republicans retain Senate control, then in four years, the Supreme Court could very well look like this:
Elena Kagan
Sonia Sotomayor
Clarence Thomas
John Roberts
Samuel Alito
Samuel Alito
Samuel Alito
Samuel Alito
Samuel Alito
LikeLike
By the by, each personal insult hurled at me for not toeing the neoliberal/necon New Democratic line and falling all over myself in fear and loathing of Donald Trump simply helps to prove my point. The “liberal” supporters of Hillary Clinton can’t manage to make a case FOR her; all they seem to have is a fairytale about the Big Bad Donald and the Not-So-Bad Princess-Who-Will-Save-Us. How she’s going to do that, exactly, is pretty vague, and we don’t want to discuss her lies, her foundation, her Wall Street speeches and unreleased transcripts thereof, what she and Bill have been up to in Haiti, her braving imaginary fire on the ground in Kosovo, her gloating over the death of the leader of a sovereign nation, the mandatory sentencing and gutting of welfare she supported when hubby was POTUS, etc., none of which are GOP issues because they tend to cut a little too close to their own evildoing.
Instead, we attack anyone and anything vaguely affiliated with Trump, including his non-combatant (i.e., non-politician) wife (and we do it in ways that are pretty damned sexist, a bit xenophobic, and reveal intriguing biases against women who are “too good-looking”), for ‘sins’ that have absolutely nothing to do with Trump himself. I’m still trying to figure out how something his FORMER butler said has to do with this election, but it doesn’t really matter because tomorrow’s headlines will have some new thing for “liberals” to grouse about.
Please note that I use the word “liberal” here in quotation marks advisedly: I don’t consider people who do these things to be the sorts of liberals with whom I grew up and protested the Vietnam War and ethnic/racial discrimination in the ’60s. These days, I find it useful to call myself a progressive rather than a liberal, particularly with the advent of neoliberalism as a dominant philosophy within the power elite of the once-liberal Democratic Party, a liberalism that essentially vanished under the Clintons, tried to make a comeback with Obama, and now, having been disappointed and thwarted for the last 8 years, is being kicked to the curb under Hillary, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, and the rest of the mob running the party nationally and in many states.
Well, pardon me for not supporting the faux-Democratic Party. I’ll vote for individual candidates who are actually progressives. I’ll cheer when Tulsi Gabbard, Zephyr Teachout, and others run and win. I’ll work locally for progressives. But I will not support a neolib/neocon she-wolf in fraudulent progressive-who-gets-things-done clothing. Be my guest if you want to do so, but with every personal attack you make on me and others who refuse to play, you paint yourselves as different-colored kerchief-wearing gang members. And I don’t bow to that sort of thuggery. Nor will millions of others.
LikeLike
Michael P.G.,
Please note that I have not “attacked” you or insulted you for your views. Vote for anyone you want or no one.
The reason that negative comments focus on Trump is because we have one choice and only one choice. Hillary or Donald. One of them will be elected president.
You choose not to vote or to write in. Fine.
But others are terrified by the idea of a man who has never given a minute of public service, a man who is proud that he doesn’t read, a man obsessed by celebrity for its own sake, a man who promises to promote policies that are unconstitutional (like banning Muslims or deporting 11 million immigrants).
I am not fine with everything that Hillary is likely to do. But she is far preferable to this con man who won the Republican nomination. I far prefer her as president to Donald Trump. She is smart; she reads; she listens; she has experience with foreign and domestic policy. She cares about children. The worst thing I can say about her is that she is likely to support charter schools and testing. And I will fight the Clinton administration on those issues. Trump, on the other hand, views public education with utter contempt. I can’t think of a single issue where I agree with him. He is a member of the 1/100 of the 1%. He will defend his class. He cares not a whit for working people or poor people. Who will tend the gardens at Mar-a-Lago if he deports all the immigrants?
I will vigorously support Hillary, who may be the best qualified person ever to run for president, over Donald Trump.
LikeLike
Diane, my comment about personal attacks was most definitely not directed at you, though your last two comments bordered on something I found. . . unworthy of you. What I wrote was and remains directed at a couple of people who have been more interested in making personal remarks about me than in grappling with the contradiction of “liberals” and Democrats resorting to the sort of mud-slinging usually expected from Teaparty and GOP extremists. The claim that Melania Trump’s speech has any political significance doesn’t hold water. The reaction by “liberals” all over the Internet suggests a sickness that infects both parties and shows that there’s no moral high ground in this election once we get to then end of next week and Hillary is crowned.
Choose between Her and Him? I prefer not to.
LikeLike
Michael, you keep knocking Hillary, although there are only two choices: Hillary or The Donald.
Do you want Trump elected? It sounds like your rage has overcome your reason.
Hillary or The Donald.
One of them will be elected president in November.
You don’t have to vote; you can write in Bernie.
But please hold off on your constant attacks on the only sane alternative to a flimflam man who gets his military knowledge by watching television, who wants to deport 11 million immigrants, who wants to get rid of gun control, etc. etc.
You sound like the GOP crowds chanting “Lock her up” and wearing “Hillary for Prison” buttons. Come on.
LikeLike
Flimflam man. That’s the definition of Trump I’ve been looking for! 🙂
LikeLike
“Rage” is the new word for “I disagree with your stance on this election”? My heart rate and blood pressure aren’t rising or even elevated. I simply disagree.
I’m more Bartleby the Scrivener than Hyde Park orator: given the choice of an unpredictable showman lunatic and a predictable, self-aggrandizing militarist and told I must choose one of them, I prefer not to. And that appears to madden people in both parties. However, I don’t bother talking to many Republicans. I just hope to sway the odd Democrat or Independent now and again.
LikeLike
If Supreme Court justices are such a big issue, one has to wonder whether the liberal justices themselves think so. And, if so, why didn’t they step down during Obama’s term so that they could be replaced by a Democrat? And please don’t tell me that it’s because the Republican Congress wouldn’t approve Obama’s picks – that may be true, but it will apply to Hillary too. Could it have anything to do with maybe them fearing that Obama *wouldn’t* replace them with liberal picks? That theory would be supported by Obama’s actual latest choice (and Kagan is no flaming liberal either for that matter). My guess is that the current liberal justices, most especially Ginsburg, know there is no hope for being replaced by anyone other than a corporate controlled warmonger no matter who gets elected, so they’re going to hold on as long as they have breath in their lungs and hope they can buy enough time until somehow this country shifts in a more reasonable, sustainable direction. Either that or the Rapture happens.
LikeLike
I think the answer to that is, it’s their life, literally. They enjoy the job immensely, and they know what happens to 80-year-old judges who retire.
LikeLike
Yeah, they become 80-year-old retired justices.
See, Dienne? There’s no question you can raise that the true believers can’t find a way to turn into “Vote for Not-Donald!”
And don’t dare get a little too insistent that these arguments are tissue-thin nonsense: you might get accused of “rage,” or being an “idiot,” or some other personal epithet that seeks to deflect from the fact that you’re just not playing along with the “team,” even if that team sold out to Wall Street 34 years ago. Where are Lenny Bruce, Bill Hicks, and George Carlin when we REALLY need them?
LikeLike
My suggestion is that justices choose not to retire for reasons that are deeply personal.
Don’t construe this as a personal attack, Michael, but if you find yourself feeling attacked, consider that it may have something to do with the tenor of your posts, which safely could be described as aggressive or combative. It’s my impression that you like to mix it up. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that, but given your style, you seem oddly quick to take personal offense. Referring to someone’s “rage” is a often way of belittling that person. On the other hand, you do seem really angry. It’s not nice to call someone an “idiot” (if indeed someone called you that). But people may also justifiably feel denigrated by your responses. My point being that if you’re going to go on a blog and aggressively disagree with people, strongly suggest that they are unprincipled, and describe their arguments as “nonsense,” maybe you should develop a thicker skin. I haven’t seen anyone say anything mortifying to you. From where I sit, you’re giving at least as good as you’re getting.
LikeLike
While I appreciate the advice, rest assured that my skin is more than sufficiently thick. I just find it a waste of energy to start name-calling and would appreciate it if the folks here who think of themselves as above the behavior they decry at the Republican National Convention try to operate with a bit more decorum when disagreeing with people here.
If by “mix it up,” you mean that when someone claims that radicals who voted for Eldridge Cleaver in 1968, ostensibly to help elect Nixon and trigger “der revolution” more quickly, actually cost Hubert Humphrey the White House that year, I choose to look at the data and report that this hypothesis – offered pretty much as God’s own truth – has absolutely no legs upon which to stand, then yes, I do like mixing. I note that there was no further answer from that person, not even a polite apology for shooting from the hip and trying to willfully mislead others. Don’t you think that sort of behavior warrants “mixing it up with”?
I’ve been on math education forums where I was called a child abuser for promoting progressive pedagogical ideas. One charming fellow went so far as to research people on my street who were convicted, registered sex offenders and the publishing just how close I lived to some of them. So yes, I have a thick skin. I also have a well-developed sense of humor. I seem to find that a bit lacking in some quarters here, as is evidenced by how some of my comments are taken.
I don’t routinely suggest that something is “nonsense.” But I don’t have a lot of tolerance for the political equivalent of “Intelligent Design, “creation science,” and similar oxymorons. (I hope it’s okay to use that word without having someone accuse me of implying that s/he’s a moron).
LikeLike
“I just hope to sway the odd Democrat or Independent now and again.”
It worked for me!
Your obnoxious zealotry and wrong-headed stance
has swayed me to vote for Hillary. Thanks.
LikeLike
Stay classy, Rage. You’re a credit to your race.
LikeLike
I assume you mean the human one. Class is my middle name. Thanks again.
LikeLike
You know, Rick, it’s funny how principled you are about testing, but when someone has a conscientious objection against Hillary, you become a verbal bully who’s best shots are just personal invective against your antagonist. I’m sure you’re capable of better, or at least I would hope so.
Sorry that my passionate, principled refusal to knuckle under to the DNC and its sub-creatures gets you so upset. But not very sorry. You could, of course, refrain from attacking me personally and just disagree. What a concept, eh?
LikeLike
Michael,
Many people simply assume that if you do not vote for Clinton you are paving the way for Trump. (A vote for Jesus is a vote for Trump)
They do not understand that in the vast majority of states, the third party votes (eg, for Jill Stein) will not have a significant impact on the outcome — not enough toswing the outcome (Only in a small number of states could it potentially have such an impact.)
Take NY, for example
Here are the results to a July 19 Quinnipiac poll
“Driven by a 3 – 1 lead in New York City, Democrat Hillary Clinton leads Republican Donald Trump 47 – 35 percent among all New York State voters, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
Both candidates have negative favorability ratings, 41 – 52 percent for Clinton and 32 – 61 percent for Trump, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University Poll finds.
Clinton leads among all age groups, especially among voters 18 to 34 years old, who go Democratic 53 – 18 percent. There is a yawning gender gap, with men tipping to Trump 44 – 40 percent, while women back Clinton 54 – 28 percent.
New York City voters back Clinton 63 – 20 percent, while upstate voters go to Trump 48 – 36 percent. Suburban voters are divided, with 40 percent for Trump and 39 percent for Clinton.
Both candidates suffer from lower levels of same-party support than winning candidates normally receive, as Clinton leads 82 – 10 percent among Democrats, while Trump takes Republicans 76 – 9 percent. Independent voters back Clinton 41 – 35 percent.
With third party candidates in the race, Clinton gets 45 percent, with Trump at 33 percent, Libertarian Party candidate Gary Johnson at 6 percent and Green Party candidate Jill Stein at 4 percent.
“As Republicans rally in Cleveland and Democrats prepare for their Philadelphia convention, Hillary Clinton seems to have her adopted home state votes safely locked up,” said Quinnipiac University Poll Assistant Director Maurice Carroll.
(margin of error is +- 3%)
//end quote
The upshot: adding third party choice has virtually no effect. The spread remains the same
LikeLike
SDP: you’re refusing to give in to the fear. You won’t join them so that their consciences are less troubled by knowingly voting for the “lesser of two monsters.” And anyway, THEIR monster is SO much worse than OUR monster because he wears the wrong team jacket with that ugly “R” insignia, whereas ours wears that beautiful, $12,000 Armani pantsuit with the gorgeous, righteous “D”!!! Can’t you just FEEL the difference?
I likened this a couple of weeks ago to people offering a vegetarian or a vegan a dinner of delicious dog and insisting that s/he eat it because it’s so much better than that horrid meal of cat the bad people are serving across the street.
Sorry, but I don’t consume pets, folks. Put what I WILL eat on the menu and get back to me. Meanwhile, I’m over at Seva in Ann Arbor. (p.s.: I’m not actually vegan or vegetarian, but Seva’s food kicks ass).
LikeLike
I personally want to thank Melania for giving “Late Night” a load of material. Colbert had the best routine of the evening.
I think the empty seats at this convention speaks volumes. But Donald Jr.’s assessment of the problems with education speaks volumes how far his family is removed from the realities of teaching. But Hillary falls into that category as well. By the way, that part of the speech was also taking from another source–his own speechwriter wrote it a few months ago in a conservative magazine.
LikeLike
You might want to look into the writing of Thomas Jefferson. He routinely plagiarized. . . from his own previous writing, and his composition of seminal documents in the American Revolution and the founding of the Republic are prime examples of his liberal borrowing from himself.
I’m not sure how that practice qualifies as problematic. But apparently if someone on the “wrong” side of the power struggle that is contemporary electoral politics in this country does so, it’s front-page news and proof that the enemy is in fact Satanic or worse.
LikeLike
There is even evidence that the primary author of the Declaration of Independence was not Thomas Jefferson but Thomas Paine — and, even if that is not the case, at the very least, the ideas set forth in Thomas Paine’s Common Sense and other writings found there way into the Declaration.
See The Declaration of Independence: Was it written by Thomas Paine?
see also Thomas Paine and the Declaration of Independence
LikeLike
It’s who she copied that made the headlines. Priceless!! So glad a bunch of idiots are running this convention.
LikeLike
.Despite all the sound and fury, it boils down to choice..Hillary or Trump.. and..as Diane
says, clearly Hillary not only is the best choice, it’s also that Trump would destroy Public Education if given a chance. Since Michael brought it up, the issue is not how many
people voted for Cleaver but how the radicals of that time in a deliberate way
caused disruptions that had the intention of electing Nixon and thus bringing in
The Revolution…I was part of an audience after that election that heard Tom
Hayden boast about this tactic which Hayden later himself denounced. Be that as it may,
between Nixon and Humphrey, Humphrey in retrospect was clearly the best choice
and yes, I do think , as evidence by his surge in Oct.68 that HHH would have
negotiated a end to war long before Nixon withdrew our troops…I do think
radical disruption helped elect Nixon in terms of influencing the so called
silent majority…I do agree with Bob Dylan, you don’t need a weatherman to
know which way the wind blows… Michaels rhetoric reminds me of the
arguments re Cambodian invasion and response in my college days at
SFSTATE…the tactic was to provoke the police, hope for violent confrontation,
bring a right wing response, which would lead to left wing counter response.
I was for McCarthy, then Bobby Kennedy–not HHH but looking back it
seems to me that HHH and LBJ in their stance re Civil Rights, and education–
were not our enemies…and it does seem to me that a vote for
a third party would be a vote for Trump.
Which is why the candidate I think was by far the most moral–Bernie–
is supporting HIllary and will do so in a vigorous way.
Liberalism with all its flaws, from FDR on through JFK is not the enemy.
LikeLike
“but looking back it seems to me that HHH and LBJ in their stance re Civil Rights, and education– were not our enemies”
Good that you’re alive to look back. Guess you missed that Vietnam War thingie that Lyndon and Hubert committed us to for a decade or so.
You don’t address the demolition with actual data of your ridiculous third party hypothesis in the ’68 election, I noticed. Hard to imagine that ANY facts or arguments will move you from your fantasy that we must ALWAYS go with that evil lesser. Because BOOOGIE MAN!!!
LikeLike