Homeland Security just issued its fourth danger bulletin this year. And both the weapons and rhetorical tactics of the first War on Terror are increasingly visible.
Glenn opposed over-reach and sacrifice of civil liberties in original GWOT (global war on terror), a position shared by (many) liberals and opposed by (most) conservatives way back then. Now Glenn opposes over-reach and sacrifice of civil liberties in DWOT (domestic war on terror), a position shared by (almost all) conservatives and opposed by (almost all) liberals. I think we should tip our collective hat to Glenn for his principled consistency.
... tip our collective hat to Glenn for his principled consistency.
Mr. Greenwald's actions are the antithesis of consistency. First he supports liberals, then he supports conservatives. He should pick a side and stick with it. You may argue that he has been consistent on his principles, and that may be true, but if you aren't willing to support your side when it is wrong, then your support doesn't mean very much.
This is the opposite of correct. If you aren't willing to *criticize* your side when it is wrong, you have no principles, and are a liability to everyone that participates in a democratic republic.
Yes and I have noticed carlson doing that these days. He was such a boy when the Bush/Gore countdowbn was going on. I still have to pinch myself to realize how much he has changed. It is qyite remarkable. He now seems to be getting much of his material from Greenwald these days.
You love him now yes. But when he becomes a target for deadly retaliation where will you be. People want a brave leader but they do not protect that person.
Yes true. Neither side owhns him. substack is so far independent enough to host him. But then they have not come down hard on substack as the others have their own problems right now.
"can't . . . trust him not to tell the truth" would mean he tells the truth, and they know they can't trust him not to. Do you get stupider than this? I can't wait to find out. *Searching*
Disagree. One should be sticking to principles, not some tribalistic “side”.
The current DNC democrats have nothing in common with what the definition of liberalism used to be: “ willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas. a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.”
You mistakenly select the wrong binary choice. Glenn isn't aligned right v left. He's liberty v authoritarian oppression. Because his political ideology is primarily to the left many in the political left see him as a traitor and apostate. They do this because they, too, see only the right v left binary choice.
"sides" are a trick of Oligarchy; they cynically tug on the strings of tribalism, so we fight amongst ourselves, and we don't see what they're up to. I prefer Truth to Tribalism. Bush 1 = Clinton = Bush 2 = Obama = Biden, as far as I can tell.
Where is your evidence that "almost all liberals" support a domestic war on terror? I don't, and I'd assume, for example, that you'd label me a "liberal" as I value science, civil rights and justice, protection of the environment and public commons, fair taxation - and oppose the military-industrial complex's stranglehold on the treasury, and corporate cash's control over elections and policy.
Sounds like we share at least some views! When capital D Democratic politicians encourage the dominant social media platforms to censor certain views, I view that as fertile soil for over-reach and compromise of civil liberties. Matt Taibbi has written about this repeatedly. And how is Facebook's previous censorship of "Let's not rule out lab leak" aging? And the Ohio chapter of the ACLU stated that a police officer "murdered" someone who was endeavoring to stab someone. I thought ACLU supported presumption of innocence. But you are right that I lack empirical data.
Yes, this shows the problem with labels, which become so loosely applied that they become almost useless. I agree ... far too many Dem. partisans are fine with censorship these days, and increasingly tolerant of compromises of civil liberties. The Patriot Act of 2001 really set the stage, and had bipartisan support, with only 63 D's and 3 R's voting against it in the House, and only Russ Feingold voting against it in the Senate. Though it was a response to the 9/11 attack, it was clear that it was a broad attack on civil liberty generally.
The corporate media, much of which is supposedly "liberal" in orientation, are first and foremost the protectors of a system that maintains order for concentrated financial power. Fox and MSDNC , et al, differ only in the same ways that the two major parties differ- i.e. on matters that are part of "the culture wars", for example. I see the culture wars themselves as primarily maintained to keep the regular people in their respective camps...divided over their feelings about race relations/gender/sexuality and a few other issues ("God, gays and guns!"); and dang it, that strategy, used for decades, still works!
The majority of D's are not truly interested in democracy, in my view, any more than the R's in many cases. They are the "soft liberal" (i.e. liberal on social identity issues, primarily). But I don't want to fall into the broad-brush trap of labeling, either.
In any case, media do what they do, and the shallowness of so much of the population is fertile ground for those who sow and spin narratives to gain unthinking acceptance - and language is cheapened in the process.
Speaking of the ACLU, they don't ALWAYS get it right (in my opinion), but they usually do, and they did get it right on the Patriot Act and other such infringements.
Fox News is considered objective (see the reports by Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on the Media, for example). Their opinions are not, but are kept separate from the news programs.
Good comment, Jack. I largely agree. Media are addicted to sowing and spinning narratives, regardless of factual accuracy. And far too much of population is thirsty only for caricatures that align with their pre-existing views. Your point on danger of labels is well taken and good advice. Thanks, and have a good day.
What makes you think they are media and not PR? Here are NBC employee donations. One donation alone to ACTBLUE from one of their employees dwarfs all their conservative donations from all employees.
"Media" is addicted to advertiser support, and lies, as well as soap operas and "The Bachelor" get great numbers...Truth fails dismally in the ratings camp....so, they lie to stay alive not to inform
why? because of fear promoted by the media and people like Chomsky that Trump was the next Mussolini, although COVID gave Trump the greatest chance to be a dictator. Yet, he was too lazy and stupid to take it.
1. Independents are the largest voter bloc. 2. Democrats tend to vote Dem. 3. Among Indies and Dems, many who think of themselves as liberal or even progressive will make what they consider "lesser of evil" choices. 4. Trump was uniquely unsuited for the Presidency and deemed by many of the electorate, "an existential threat". Neither McCain ('08) nor Romney ('12) stimulated such antipathy/fear. And it's not as if conservatives were uniformly thrilled by Trump, either. As you know, some had attacked Trump and actively supported Biden. (Which says a lot about both).
The liberal mainstream media is all over it in support of going after "terrorists" -- read Trump voters. And before I deleted facebook, liberals of all ilk were claiming they would have to be "re-educated" and were essentially terrorists. LOTS of that on there. And obviously Pelosi, that idiot, says that crap constantly. That the "insurrection" -- give me a break -- was because those people cared more about their "whiteness" than they did democracy. Asshole woman. And the politician liberals are certainly using it and lying about it as they always do. Liberal politicians are much bigger liars, though politics mostly is a sad state of affairs. That protest had nothing to do with white supremacy and everything about election integrity which is a joke right now. There is plenty of evidence out there. I'm grateful you don't support it.
I'm not sure why this is directed to me, as I don't support the DNC and eschew labels, particularly "liberal" given today's use of the term. And I'm definitely not here to defend that Party.
If one moves beyond the labels and looks to basic values, one easily finds lots of things in common with a whole lot more people. It's the labels, and then, secondly, the opinions & feelings about various cultural questions that tend to make people think in terms of "us" vs them.
"I value science, civil rights and justice, protection of the environment and public commons, fair taxation - and oppose the military-industrial complex's stranglehold on the treasury, and corporate cash's control over elections and policy."
You may have kind of stepped in it by suggesting that those values are unique to being a, "liberal". But as you note here, those are shared values. Conservatives are not illiberal. Many are actually classic liberals.
And yet, the DNC and their PR department (MSM) like to talk about, "conservatives" like we are uniquely opposed things like, "science" and "democracy" but nothing could be further from the truth.
They have expanded the culture war because they need someone to be the bad guy. In their infinite wisdom, they have decided that villifying 74 million people is a good plan to further a power grab.
Classical liberals may have to leave the Democratic Party and hold their noses and join up with the other major party. If they actually listened to what learned conservatives say, they might find that they have a lot in common with conservatives.
At the risk of again using labels- which serve more to confuse than to inform, I don't want to argue that those values I list (among others) are uniquely liberal. But I take issue with the suggestion that one side of the duopoly is more responsible for the culture wars than the other, or is more inclined to use them to further partisan goals.
Generally speaking, I've found that Republicans (ostensibly, the Party of conservatives) were at least in the past, far more likely to be supportive of foreign wars, of squelching democratic governments that didn't toe the Empire's line, etc.; and are still more ready to embrace restrictions on voting, are more tolerant of private cash's control over elections and policy.... which I see as the fundamental impediment to any form of democracy. This is not to say that some conservatives don't agree, nor that plenty of Democrats are equally undemocratic.
Both parties are responsible for using the culture war to further a partisan agenda. I just can't think of a time when the operatives of one party was so willing to cast voters on the other side as the villains. And in some cases, they are being prosecuted as such. The culture war is more like character assassination.
The treatment of Capitol rioters and activists are an example for this. After it happened, I remember thinking that the best way they could handle it is to take the same hands off approach that they used for the rioters from last summer. Instead, they decided to make an example out of them.
If Trump incited them to violence, then why are they the ones who are being held without bail in solitary confinement? Why are DNC representatives calling them traitors, insurrectionists and murderers? None of it is true but it persists.
In the hundreds of riots from last summer, I didn't hear about anyone being shot and killed by the police. If it had, it would have blown up. But when it happened to Ashli Babbitt, we are told that she deserved it because she was trying to crawl through a window.
They are now using that single event to expand domestic security and surveillance laws against US citizens. They are using it to suggest that the GOP and their voters are a threat to our, "democracy". They are using phone and bank records without warrants to find these people.
That definitely feels like a bit of an escalation to me. It kind of makes the culture war look tame. Throughout history, both parties have gone out of their way to fuck up and they have both contributed to make our country the greatest in human history.
But in the current state of affairs, left wing establishment operatives are acting like authoritarians who are drunk on power. They aren't even embarrassed about Russiagate. I've never seen anything like it.
Those two events show that equal justice under the law is hilarious bullshit. It is 100% partisan and it should raise alarm bells for all Americans.
At this point, I'm working on the assumption that widespread surveillance is inevitable and that I may end up on a list. It didn't take much to be on the list of suspects from the Capitol riot. If you flew to DC around 1/6 and you purchased something from an FFL, you were a suspect. That is pretty remarkable.
I could care less about what someone calls themselves. Authoritarianism and government interference that violates civil liberties are bad for all of us. If you can agree with that, then I would say that we have enough in common to say that we are fellow Americans. That is enough for me.
"The dominant strain of American liberalism is not economic socialism but political authoritarianism." - Glenn Greenwald.
The current "DNC left" has lost its freaking mind. I used to be a default liberal before but now am more of a black pilled liberal / right leaning liberal. There's 5 things I am unwilling to compromise - free speech absolutist, pro gun rights, anti-critical race theory/identity politics, anti corporate sponsored mass immigration and anti war. The current "left"/democrats are against all 5 of those and the current "trumpian" right leaning folks are all pro all 5 of those. I am not talking about Liz Cheney/Bush/Rick Snyder/Lincoln Project type "right" - those all supported Biden in the elections anyway. The "supportive of foreign wars, of squelching democratic governments that didn't toe the Empire's line" all supported Biden. That's why more right wingers were supportive of Tulsi Gabbard than the "DNC democrats". Somehow Tucker Carlson was the one who gave voice to Tulsi, Glenn Greenwald, Jimmy Dore, Aaron Mate as compared to CNN/MSNPC.
Here's another example of how the democrats have lost their minds. Bernie Sanders used to be very against illegal immigration. In fact, in 2015, he gave this interview to VOX (as left as they come) where he used to be completely against illegal immigration, used to call it a right wing proposal, illegals coming in and taking away jobs for a dollar or two and so on. But then he did a complete 180 flip when Trump came out against it. Now he's an open border dude. Dude abandoned his principles just because of orange man. That's another sign of the left completely losing their mind and abandoning their principles:
Media trust by Democrats is at an all time high of 73-76%. Independents is at 35% and Republicans is at the lowest 10%. Aka Democrats are buying whatever propaganda media is selling. That's one of the reasons why vast majority of the Democrats (75%) believe the Russiagate nonsense, Russian bounty hoax, believe Trump told them to drink bleach, believe officer Sicknick was killed by some right winger bashing his head with a fire extinguisher and so on. They believed for last 1.5 year that the China lab leak was just a "right wing conspiracy theory by racists". They claimed to "trust the science" but ended up falling on the wrong side of basically everything. They worship Fauci despite him being wrong on every single thing. They claim to be against "corporations" and the "rich" meanwhile their movement is being literally sponsored by the Wall Street and big tech.
"You know how to tell you're the good guys? When all the massive multi-national corporations that have questionable hiring, firing, healthcare, worker's rights, and safety track records, when celebrities with a huge problem of pedophilia and sexual misconduct promote and sponsor your cause and your Revolution has corporate sponsorship. At least this revolution has dope corporate sponsors!" - from a Tim Pool tweet.
96% of the media are registered democrats, vast majority of Hollywood, Big Tech, social media, wall street and so on support the Democrats. Even punk rock bands are now supporting Democrats and Fauci. Meanwhile claiming to be the "resistance" and "counter culture" LOL. Even Walmart, Amazon, Jeff Bezos is supporting the "raising the minimum wage" and "raising taxes" because they know that's an easy way for them to get rid of small business competition who can't afford it and can't find loopholes in the taxes or hire expensive lobbyists to lobby politicians.
Basically instead of helping the American people and investigating the lab leak, they wasted time on hoaxes after hoaxes. In this article itself, Glenn mentions how this stuff is being pushed by none other than Russiagate king Adam Schiff who has zero credibility left.
Among the conservative voters only ~4% have positive thoughts about Qanon. 31.4 percent found the movement “unfavorable,” 43.3 percent said they had “never heard” of QAnon, and 21.3 percent were undecided.
How about the BlueAnon crowd? How big is it? What percent of the Dem voters are aware of getting brainwashed daily and being in a cult?
And these data are from left leaning sources like USAToday. I would say vast majority of the Democrats have turned into BlueAnon while very few right wingers have turned into Qanon.
The definition of liberalism used to be "willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.
A political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise." I don't see anything in common with this and the current Democrats. If you support this old definition, then hate to break it to you that both you and me are in the same boat and actually considered "right" by the current "DNC democrats".
It's true that Eisenhower used the CIA (created by Truman) to murder a lot of people and that G.W. Bush invaded Iraq for no reason; but the neo-cons are an aberration. JFK got us into Vietnam. LBJ lied about a "Tonkin Gulf Incident". Clinton bombed Serbia. Obama promoted and armed Islamists to overthrow Assad and he was part of the NATO gang that destroyed Libya and destabilized Europe. So, it really can't be said definitively that the GOP is more bloodthirsty than the offspring of the KKK. Please explain how Republicans are restricting voting. Most of the Democrat's lies about voter suppression assume that blacks are either born at home with no birth certificates or that they are too stupid to figure out how to get photo identification. It is not wise to promulgate disproven lies, Jack.
I cannot help but comment on your belief that Republicans are (were) more supportive of foreign wars. Wilson and FDR were presidents when the USA joined the wars against Germany. JFK and LBJ got America into Vietnam. Bill Clinton joined NATO in bombing Serbia. Obama used mercenaries and Islamic radicals to unsuccessfully unseat Assad. During his administration, the USA once again engaged with NATO to destroy Libya and destabilize Europe. George W. Bush, the globalist, with his globalist allies in both parties, was the exception to the rule. How far back must we go to find the war-crazy Republicans? Now that Cheney and McCain are dead, the GOP is very different than you imagine.
exactly -- and it's this "fear environment" so incredibly embraced by the President's entourage, that causes a new sense of separatism and division. A "White Supremacy" brings images of white hoods, horses and torches to burn... Maybe the Dems use focus groups to select their talking points!
I just don't see the evidence for much of that. To the extent that it's true, however, count me happy. In any case, further to this, what then, do you think distinguishes the Left and Right?
The left has embraced illiberalism, interventionist foreign policy and globalism. They are the new incompetent war hawks. They are still in favor of Keynesian economic policy with a focus on wealth redistribution and selective equitable outcomes. They continue to focus on diminishing State power in an effort to consolidate it through the federal government.
The right has embraced liberalism, non-interventionist foreign policy and national sovereignty. Many conservatives seem to have largely shifted away from supply side economics to a hybrid that inudes Keynesian principles. Wealth redistribution is not a core tenant but equal opportunity still is. Corporate power and oligarchy is considered to be antithetical to a healthy society. Federalism with less centralized power is still a core tenant. Many conservatives want the never ending wars to stop. National security agencies are definitely not in favor after the last four years of Russiagate.
In some ways, the parties have swapped some underlying principles while they retained others. That aligns with a shift in voting demographics and changing attitudes for the voting populace. That is my take anyway. The shift in the last twenty years has been monumental.
Re-reading that, it occurs to me that I didn't say anything nice about the left. That is largely because the only good thing that they had going for them was at least some sense of protecting some civil liberties. Now that they have abandoned that, they have lost any redeeming qualities that they once had.
It isn't any "left" that has embraced interventionism, imperialism and war. Again, the problem of using labels- they have now become so subjective (as evidenced by your first statement) that they're meaningless.
It's also a mistake to make sweeping assertions such as about consolidation of federal power. As one some might call "lefty", I don't buy it. Indeed, I believe power should rest as closely to the people as possible... i.e. even at the municipal level, in some matters, in the states on others, and for some, in the federal , all per the Constitution.
But governance doesn't work well when it is not representative at ANY level; i.e. when private capital (corporate & other concentrated cash) determines who is elected and how policy is written into law. THAT is the fundamental problem. And both parties operate within that framework, which means that their representatives can not break from the status quo- the stranglehold held by private interests who have benefited from that status quo.
For some reason, the institutional left has embraced old GOP warhawks. That is baffling to me. But it is at least notable that right-wing voters no longer want them. The GOP owes the world an apology for Dick Cheney.
Only if he opposes *all* government violations of rights
Civil libertarian + socialism is such an obvious contradiction - in practice and in theory it’s hard to believe it can exist within one person. But hey, there it is.
It’s a euphemism. Progressives want an interventionist government that redistributes wealth and is involved in how productive enterprises conduct themselves.
Chomsky is the same. Claims to be classic liberal or anarcho-syndicalist but his actual arguments are garden variety marxist arguments. Has no problem with enslaving the productive for the benefit of the not so productive
Lots of talk about “ democracy”. This obscures the real issue which is that of liberties. 51% of people voting away my property is not a validation of the theft. It’s still theft.
Democracy is where people who cannot conduct their own lives take control over the people who can.
Actually Pete I take that back. Keep going, it is testament to everyone why governments in one year are expanding power at an alarming pace and will get away with it
Which part? If 51% of the people vote to eliminate the First Amendment is that legitimate? If not…why not?
No, Milton Friedman did not argue that. What he did say is that there is danger in government being involved in the economy because they create a coalition with business and that is what creates the potentially “feudal” outcomes.
Without the force of government, a business has zero means of being coercive. None.
I appreciate your point. Very much. I note, however, that it can be a big ask for folks committed to leftist governance to see the contradictions. They don't believe in voluntary exchange ("free markets"). That's what makes them lefty. But otherwise believe in individualism and "freedom".
George Orwell was an obvious proponent of liberal democracy, but even he stuck to "democratic socialism" to the end of his life. Even he couldn't see the contradictions. Maybe he would have gotten there had he not succumbed to tuberculosis (?) at age 49 (?).
Since production and exchange are primary aspects of human existence on planet earth, especially in a civilized society, saying that one cannot freely exchange with others without the permission of so ruling class, yet simultaneously claiming to be an advocate of liberty, is such an obvious contradiction and incoherent philosophically, I cannot take it seriously
What "free markets"? Perhaps if there had never been a need for people to organize governments to protect individual rights (incl. property) and provide collective defense, to efficiently/effectively create infrastructure, emergency services, public health protections, etc., and everything was either done or not purely as a function of whether "the market" had produced it, then perhaps we'd still have a "free market". It would be a very different world than the one we're in.
But as it is, that isn't the case. So it is that even the first ripples of 'interference' in the otherwise "free market" skewed it. For example, government creation of the federal highway system more or less set the tone for auto-dominated transportation, and along with its placement of water and sewer and other utilities shaped how cities were built, which land was more valuable / usable, which companies (people) would profit and which would go under, etc. etc. etc.
The "free market" , except in very limited usage, is a complete myth.
You leave the dreadful impression you’ve never read anything about the philosophy behind a constitutional republic.
The ONLY proper role of government is the DEFENSE of individual rights. That’s it.
Since I haven’t argued for the elimination of such a government, either you are hearing voices in your head or maybe you are arguing with someone else.
'Now Glenn opposes over-reach and sacrifice of civil liberties in DWOT (domestic war on terror), a position shared by (almost all) conservatives...' Huh? Since when have conservatives ever opposed the expansion of the surveillance state, or the powers of law enforcement?
There were always conservatives who opposed it like Rand Paul or Mike Lee, but establishment war mongering Republicans were for it at the time. Most are not now.
Yes, I cannot believe the hubris of some of these elitist pro establishment Republicans. Just like the Democrats, they like them vs. us and know more than we do how we should live.
One or two more election cycles will destroy the old guard Republican establishment, I am convinced. The Republican establishment has been warmongering since WWII. It would stand to reason that it will take a few new voter drubbings to destroy the Statist rot.
GOP establishment was full of corrupt warmonger. But Republicans have always been junior partners in the growing oligarchy in this country. The Dems are the senior partners.
As if it was a natural act of the reflexes, most conservatives supported (and continue to support) the whistle-blowing of Edward Snowden and every Democrat I know believes he should be hanged by the neck until dead for exposing the lies and treachery of the Obama administration.
You probably know too few D's. I used to be one... and along with many others I know, applaud Snowden. But it's a mistake (IMO) to cast Snowden in partisan terms. The abuses he uncovered have been going on for a long time under many administrations. But in a way you're right... far too many D's / liberals will hate or at least abandon Snowden (and particularly Assange) because their releases made some D's look very bad.
But libertarians own the "conservative" party now (or are at least ascendant), and libertarians to a person support pardoning Snowden. The politicians of the "conservative" party will follow their voters sooner rather than later.
I mostly agree. I might phrase it this way: the neo-cons are clearly heading towards oblivion (Bill Kristol, anyone?). I think that does result in the GOP trending more libertarian.
I don't know what it means to be a 'conservative' or a 'libertarian' anyway. Their positions have morphed into a jumble of hypocritical and contradictory talking points.
I'm no political scientist, but, in 2021, a 'conservative' seems to be someone who believes in the constitution of the United States, small government, and who is an enemy of public schools' programming children to hate the country. A libertarian, has always been, and always will be, someone who believes in liberty and freedom. Someone opposed to the war on drugs most likely could be considered a libertarian. Someone who believes that parents should have a voice in how their children are raised and educated would most likely be considered libertarian. A libertarian and/or a conservative is certain to be disgusted by the power of the teachers unions to keep children from being educated and both libertarians and conservatives most certainly are disturbed by the "cancel culture" and how only leftist, racist, and radical views are allowed to be voiced on social media and in most of the media. It is only the term "liberal" that has changed. A classical liberal was a free-thinking individual capable and willing to consider new ideas. Liberals have been lost and ignored in modern politics. They have been co-opted by progressives, communists, and anarchists. They no longer have a voice in either of the major political parties.
Him not pardoning them was a major disappointment to me. While the buck stops with him, blame also goes to Mitch for threatening him with impeachment if we went further with it which was reported on January 19th.
How’s he a fake though? He never promised pardons of Assange Snowden. So it’s not like he didn’t “deliver” on it.
Real conservatives have always opposed it just like Friedman opposed Vietnam, and Norquist opposed Bush spying in 2006.
SEE BELOW
------------
"Public hearings on this issue are essential to addressing the serious concerns raised by alarming revelations of NSA electronic eavesdropping." -- Grover Norquist, president, Americans for Tax Reform
They oppose surveillance state targeting them and oppose Democratic politicians encouraging social media platforms to censure statements made by conservatives.
Since never. They turned a blind eye to everything in the Patriot Act and the massive increase in government power pushed through by Darth Vader (Cheney)
Yes we should. He has paid dearly for his stance on all this. They are out to get him particularly since the #Snowden papers were given to him. They want to have him pay for that with his life. But he has become too VISIBLE to assassinate. For now anyway. Many have gone under the earth before him for less.
Actually, the "liberals" in Congress at the time said they opposed the GWOT, sometimes, but then would vote for Bush's anti-terror measures lest they be accused of "aiding the terrorists." Both R's and D's vote to strengthen their election changes and enlarge their donors' coffers.
Unfortunately for the Left, there aren't enough back stabbing Mitt Romneys around to support their insane delusions.
They know that they committed election fraud, but they can't understand how they were able to get away with it. That's why they're trying to smear anyone who might oppose them as a right wing extremist or a terrorist. By the way, those Antifa assholes who burned down your building? Those aren't terrorists.
The ballots will be audited and the truth shall be known. That fact scares the hell out of them.
Joe Biden did not receive 12 million more votes than Barack Obama. They got overzealous with their "counting".
I voted for Trump twice and couldn't agree with you more. If he runs again, the Democrats will win.
Tulsi wouldn't run as a Republican. She's an actual principled and real liberal like Greenwald. Both of them favor leftwing policy that doesn't have a home in the GOP tent, but both are highly respected by millions of conservatives for their commitment to the principles of liberalism.
Gabbard is nothing more than another lapdog. If she had any guts she wouldnt have endorsed Quid Pro Joe a few months after her own party pulled McCarthyism on her.
We're all neoliberals in the US. I would call it an authoritarian tent, except it's not really a tent anymore - it's more of a "this is the party line" hyper conformity thing. It's fraying, I hope. I like the lefties on this sub stack except for the occasional actual Leninist I encounter (like earlier today) and am hopeful actual liberals (as in people who are committed to liberalism, not the political sense of the word although that, too) will rise up. They are essential to the proper functioning of these United States.
I don't think my party is a hell of a lot better, frankly. Some 40% now think I'm basically a communist and perhaps part of a child sex trafficking ring due to not having a tattoo of God Emperor Trump on my right butt cheek. I was almost beat up in a bar in Savannah after the election for not agreeing that "The election was stolen!" Thankfully, there are actual authoritarianism is slightly less fashionable in the GOP, although traitors like Mike Flynn suggesting martial law are definitely authoritarians, and Trump should have been impeached for entertaining those ideas in my view. I voted for him twice, but despise him after that. Disgusting.
All the real liberal hippies from the 60s in Berkeley that I know seem amazingly close to conservative libertarian views but with the change that defense spending should be done on social spending.
Well... Trump has always had the same ideas, and they're far outside of the contemporary Democratic Party. He may have been registered as a Dem at various times in hyper Democrat NYC, but that doesn't mean that he ever fit that well in with that party. Tulsi actually favors a lot of leftwing policy ideas. She isn't a conservative at all. She could potentially end up being a successful third party candidate. Definitely she is far too outside of contemporary progressive thought to successfully win a Democratic primary.
I would love to see that happen, but I think the progressives' dominance of the Democratic Party will continue unabated for some time. They're incredibly powerful and wealthy, and also dominate the entire news media, academia and the education industry, and basically all government bureaucracy except for law enforcement. Increasingly, their dominance even stretches into the military. They are by far the most powerful and dominant force in American politics, but their ideas tend to turn most voters off.
All true - and troubling. But I can overlook most of that for her having most publicly called out the witch - which is far from typical for a pol of any stripe (DJT did it, but he really wasn't a politician, although it's most interesting how well he fit into today's politics). That really was a big deal that was quickly bomb holed.
She's far from perfect, but I'd settle for good over perfect. I certainly understand mileage may vary.
But we need him and his most diehard followers to back the anti-State party, so libertarians need to treat him with respect, and not pull a Hillary-deplorables-mistake.
I find that it is usually sufficient to make it clear that I support his supporters and fair treatment even if not necessarily Trump himself. I have been quite honest from the primary on that I do not and have never liked Trump the man. Part of the reason I took that middle ground position in the 2016 convention process where his supporters were NOT always treated fairly was exactly the reason you state: someday we would have to work with these folks again.
*Most* Trump supporters I deal with get that, and frankly, the ones that do not will be of very limited use going forward.
You are 100% correct - Donald Trump is too damn old. I'm a few months older than he is and I have a hard time just getting around. He's done his bit. Unfortunately, he lost his second term (or it was stolen.) I'm not sure who the Republicans have (Ted Cruz is constitutionally NOT eligible, not to mention he's an asshole) but then Democrats don't have anybody either. By the way, Bernie Sanders is an old man too. So is Pelosi - damn, they're ALL old!!!
I love him for being so in love with himself that he was willing to throw himself out there into politics and thereby make my dreams of fucking over the uniparty, even in a little way, a reality.
People worship war criminals like Bush, Obama, Clintons while calling an open book like orange man a "piece of shit". Amazing. Everyone's a piece of shit to some extent - I prefer those who are open about it which Trump's always been for decades. He's always been a womanizer and a showboater and everyone worshipped him for it, gave him TV shows and Playboy magazine covers for decades until he became a Republican. Then he became worse than Hitler.
You're really not very familiar with the conservative world, are you? Perhaps you don't know that the most widely respected conservative intellectual for decades is Thomas Sowell, a black man, and the list goes on. For several years, the most popular Republican was Condi Rice, a black woman whom most people (including Republicans) assume is a lesbian.
Senator Scott is wildly popular in South Carolina and his stature and popularity is growing in the party. Most likely, he'll have a difficult time vaulting into a presidential nomination, but that will be due to the difficulties that almost all politicians have in running for the presidency from the Senate, not his race or ethnicity.
We're really sick of this crap. Get out more, talk to more people, and read more widely.
I went to school and lived in South Carolina for more than a decade and have family there, I am 100% familiar with Tim, his politics, and conservatives.
Why would you even mention Sowell or Condoleeza when we are discussing Tim Scott? Sowell isn't an elected official and Rice was appointed. Fox News isnt suddenly trotting either of them out on the front page as they are Scott, further proving my point.
Ron DeSantis has been impressing me. Today he signed the bill to ban biological men in competing in women sports. Hard to imagine we need a "law" to ban such nonsense but here we are.
I was referring to the conservative media suddenly thrusting him to the forefront of their message as a counter to the identity politics of the DNC, Fox News is a great example of this.
This country has always been about majority rules with minority rights. All of a sudden the DNC wants to change that because a group that makes up 10% of our country votes their way almost exclusively.
IMO, the correct way to fight that isn't to suddenly trot out your own person of color to counter the arguments. It is to counter the arguments with reason and rational thought and remind voters that you support people of all races, all creeds, all sexual orientations and you support them all EQUALLY.
Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of Tim Scott politics, but stuff that was in his bills are just as racist.
Go check out that link and head down to SEC. 502. COMMISSION ESTABLISHMENT AND MEMBER8 SHIP.
You really think that would be good legislation? You really think we need race-specific commissions in the USA? I thought we defeated segregation with blood and tears in the 1960s.
Why on earth would we want to go back to that? Oh right because the DNC gets to energize their base with and paint the nuts on the "right" as indicative of the entire right so they get even more energization.
The true correction that has to come to politics is a breaking of the two party system. Once we start there, we can begin to see actual organic movements coming together for real change for the people.
Listen to Richard Baris and Robert Barnes about Tim Scott. Dude was a back stabber who would talk shit about Trump behind his back - despite Trump supporting him on multiple bills and things like opportunity zones. Never trusting him again.
There are really big differences between the War on Terror and the current leftwing domestic terrorism hype. Surveillance in the War on Terror was conducted against foreign terror groups and their followers and sympathizers in the US, and it followed a series of successful and not successful large-scale terror acts, eg there were very real threats, and who knows what was averted. It wasn't a political cover to destroy domestic political enemies as this current attempt so blatantly is.
So what is going on? Increasingly, entertainment (all left) and business elites (both left and right) carry water for China's authoritarian Communist Party. Run of the mill Democrats have gotten into state power hardcore with the mask mandates, etc. Just today I read someone on the Miami subreddit suggesting that lockdowns be used as a deterrent to Miami's current gun crime spree. And Democratic Party leadership has decided that being a conservative basically makes one a domestic terrorist or at least a sympathizer.
All of the above follows a steady flow of violence at LEFTwing rallies that produced dozens of deaths, hundreds of injuries, and around $2 billion in property damage, but quick everyone, "Let's outlaw those crazy rightwing domestic terrorists," and attempt to grab permanent political party power.
This is communism with an iPhone and Insta. It's all about permanent party power, which is all that communism really is when its practice is boiled down. Forget about socialism and pro-worker mumbo jumbo - China is the most successful communist government in history, and progressives are lusting after that kind of power whether they're directly cognizant of that or not. And just like the CCP, once the Democrats have the kind of power they strive for (and won't get most likely), they'll probably dispense with most of the social welfare state anyway. It's just for show. The actual goal is power and $.
I think you miss the point that the "party power" is the two parties which are really one, and the original "WOT" was all about introducing comfort on domestic surveillance -- domestic pacification being the long-term goal of those with reins on both Democrats and Republicans.
You can keep telling yourself this fairy tale, but show me another time in US history where a single slice of American voters were able to perform a mass shutdown on the right of assembly of millions (millions of people were in previously active online conservative groups) as well as the shuttering of conservative-oriented business. I'll answer that for you: there isn't one.
This has nothing to do with conservatives or the GOP. I'm a frequent critic of my political party, so don't mistake my comments as driven by some partisan fanboy stuff. This is all unprecedented in US history.
Certainly the increasingly working class-centric GOP, especially since Trump, is the primary domestic threat to globalist dominance. I definitely see where you are going with this idea. We'll see. I'm hoping that principled liberals can rescue the US left from its descent into authoritarianism, but from a historical perspective, it's hard to separate leftism from authoritarianism. It's always the primary tactic.
160 years or so of waiting for the promised sheep herder by day, philosopher by night, which is basically the only paragraph where Marx ever actually said anything about communism.
I agree. What I fail to understand is how the postmodern movement became so thoroughly socialist. One might think that the postmodernist tenet of there being no objective reality would preclude an economic system that is based on central planning and perfect knowledge.
I've actually read a lot of Marx. Marxism was really defined by his intellectual followers. His work was almost entirely a critique of mid 1800s capitalism. I'm not defending or endorsing his work, but merely stating what it actually was. Our beef is with the people who followed him of whom Lenin is arguably the most important. There is even speculation that Engels wrote The Communist Manifesto.
Critics of the contemporary authoritarian push on the part of the Democrats should understand that they essentially knee-capped a bunch of conservative organizing two days after the Capitol Riot. The biggest one was removing the close to a million member Walkaway Group from Facebook. Besides being the new home for people leaving the Democratic Party, it was the most important conservative LGBT group and hosted talks all over the country by ex-Democrat LGBT people.
It was a huge threat the Democrats' continued attempt to permanently hold the LGBT vote, so they snuffed it out.
"DP Wilson" -- you are still obsessed with "left vs right", "red vs blue" not seeing that it has been 1% vs. 99% for long, long time.
Soo parroting about "bad Communism" while we don't have democracy at ALL.... Ever heard about fascism? Btw -- socialism is future of humanity -- a far more humane form of society.
“Venezuela is fundamental threat to USA” -- declared St. Obama formally initiating regime change.
What he meant is “Socialism is a threat to capitalism”… hence imperial War-party endless wars -- against Bolivia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, Libya, China…..
Socialism is an economic system that has been tried repeatedly and always with the tool of state terror. It's always been a total and complete failure. You might want to update your halcyon view of communism and also actually familiarize yourself with the last 200 years of history. The world and its history is what it is, not what you project onto it.
Progressives are not 1% - they're more like 15-20%, and they are both the architects and adherents of the Democrats' current authoritarian zeal. Please stop blaming that on its victims. Conservatives have lots of warts, but that's beside the point.
The left are the people wielding the baseball bat and always have been. They're also the people who continue to carry water for murderous despots, who, when they're most successful, succeed only at creating police states dominated by a single party. And despite literally centuries of evidence, people continue to celebrate and praise this.
Social security is a policy chosen by people in a free and democratic system. It has nothing to do with communism. And you have no idea what my opinion is of it or any other aspect of our social welfare state.
You people are so tremendously ignorant and poorly informed. And continue to be dangerous.
What are you talking about? I used to be a Marxist. Unlike most leftists, I've also read most of the important literature in what is a very intellectual tradition. I wasn't indoctrinated into anything, and if you want to attack my comment or me, which is what you did, have more meat on the bones.
Note the media silence about major wins for democracy in Bolivia and Venezuela, "godless" socialist countries against which CIA is actively conducting illegal coups, sanctions and regime changes.
Since Biden will likely be Obama-2 remember the astonishing statement by St. Obama:
“Venezuela is fundamental threat to USA” -- declared St. Obama formally initiating regime change.
What he meant is “Socialism is a threat to capitalism”… hence imperial War-party endless wars -- against Bolivia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, China, and 20+ other countries…..
Major "wins" for "democracy." Do you know any Venezuelans? I would recommend talking with them and also familiarizing yourself with actual detail rather than political slogans. Also, familiarize yourself with the term "colectivos" as it is used in Venezuela then get back to us about how "democratic" they are.
Get out and talk with people more. The world is not your projection screen, communist.
Want nationalized healthcare? Go for it. It's not socialism - it's a choice that a free country can vote for if they want. Why are you so poorly informed?
Regarding Law and Order and many other shows and movies - Hollywood is totally owned by the Left who freely practice their own form of McCarthyism, but they love money even more than politics, so they create products to satisfy audiences.
Newsflash - that's all Left people who are in power ever have been and will be: people who pretend to care whilst enriching themselves. You are one of their useful idiots.
Try being an open conservative and try to get a career started in entertainment. Eastwood was already one of the biggest stars in the world just as Kelsey Grammer was.
If you don't know anything about a subject, don't opine. I work in entertainment and have for decades. I know what I'm talking about. You don't.
Honestly, why do you even read Greenwald? Why do you think I respect the guy - he's one of the only people on the left speaking out about its egregious and awful behavior. Do you think Greenwald thinks it's a joke that I have to worry about being fired from work for something as anodyne as being a Republican? No, he thinks it's disgusting that I have to live like that and so do several of his colleagues on the left who also write on substack, people like Bari Weiss.
Honestly, what is wrong with you people? This is how all of you justify the Left's repressive tactics which HAVE NO JUSTIFICATION. Repression is NEVER OK. You have no soul.
Look, jerk, do you have to constantly be worried about getting fired from work due to your politics? And I can assure you - mine are quite benign.
Honestly, you people are disgusting authoritarians. It's what the left is and always have been. And even when it's pointed out, accurately, I might add, you defend it. You all are shameful and inhuman. You lack decency.
GG explains that both 9/11 and the recent capitol event are used for a power grab.
The pandemic was precisely the same, at every level of government.
It is easy to keep blaming all of these sociopaths in government. But the fact is, Governors who locked down their states saw their approval ratings go to 80%. Bush was a laughing stock out of his element and then when he put all of these policies in place he became more popular.
When people realized the NSA was collecting data many conservatives and liberals were apathetic and took the view “hey what do you have to hide?”
Americans are responsible for ceding all of their liberties to these professional lying sociopaths. Ultimately, this is what people keep allowing.
I'm also dismayed by those 80%, but don't forget that they were lied to. Most people overestimated the danger of COVID by 10x or more. Bush ended his Presidency with low popularity, and DeSantis' future is looking brighter than Cuomo's and Newsom's.
They were lied to. I think that makes it worse not better. It demonstrates they refuse to think for themselves, it also confirms they have non principles and are willing to sacrifice their liberty for perceived safety. It’s just pathetic
It’s probably 75-80% of the population. Maybe worse. That’s the real problem.
What people don’t understand is politics and elections is the last step. It’s not the cause, it’s the effect. It’s the effect of a cowardly, collectivist, people. This is how it looks.
You can’t create a trough and expect that the pigs won’t try to feed out of it and arrogate it to themselves
My point is *enough* people are fooled, and even want to be fooled. They are the real cause. Government (inherently parasitic) just feeds off of their weakness.
The sad part is I know people who have celebrated the application of the no-fly list to "domestic terrorists" because they fear and despise the rural heathen who voted for Trump. To a one, they are all college educated and mostly Ivy League. They perceive themselves to be of the elite because of their educational credentials even if their careers have been middling at best.
When I objected, I was immediately accused of being a racist who was fine with the no-fly list being applied to Muslims, etc... with no evidence of such. Mind you, these are people I've known for decades. I was not going to get the benefit of the doubt in regards to my character simply because I transgressed against their political inclinations.
How is it that you know so many Ivy League-ers with whom you don't seem to share the same values? Are you a colleague of theirs? Why do you define their careers as middling? Did they all tell you that they consider themselves elite and that they despise the rural heathens? Just curious. Your post is full of conservative talking points and seems a little contrived.
Because I went to school with them. A significant portion of graduates from our university went to work for the government, primarily federal. The most vehement among them are mid-level bureaucrats. Of those I know who have had sterling careers, they have been mostly silent. As far as the scorn for and fear of the rural heathens, that was specifically communicated to me by several people. Does it characterize all of them? No.
It is a generalization, however those that don't share their viewpoints are generally quiet about it. My politics developed later and quite frankly, I didn't pay much attention to theirs until they became quite vocal and insistent about it during the Trump administration. The virtue signaling has been constant.
And thanks for being polite. It's a rarity on the internet.
It's a fair criticism that I'm over-generalizing and stereotyping. I've just been a little taken aback by some of my former friends that I thought were a little more rational. I should be more specific in the future.
Unfortunately, they weren't mistakes. What they did was absolutely intentional. I used to give Bush the benefit of the doubt on intentions, but I've come to realize that his intentions were never good.
Being put on the no-fly list as a result of a bureaucratic error is what made me a hard-core skeptic of the surveillance state. After numerous pat-downs and extra searches, some of which resulted in missed flights, a gate agent finally told me that my name was similar to another one that was actually on the no-fly list. We had the same birthday. This level of incompetence was enraging. We were different genders and the government couldn't figure it out. Innocent citizens get harassed and potential terrorists get a pass.
The TSA should be abolished. But now it's a jobs program, so it won't ever be. OBL wasn't going to try that again, and neither was anyone else, given the other changes made. Besides which, the whole security theater thing doesn't protect us from anything, just makes idiots feel good. Just like something else more recently.
Since my wife and I are long-time left-wing political activists, who've certainly done our best, in our small way, to give the PTB grief, we were very disappointed, the last time we flew (for a funeral, so it was just as well), to discover that, rather than the no-fly list, we were on an expedited list.
When we asked why, to the clerk's great surprise, we were told it was random. Security theater at its purest, in other words.
Either that or just wear a bow tie and sportcoat to the voir dire while reading the Financial Times and suggest loudly that you don't like poor people.
The true definition of "domestic extremist" per CNN, MSNBC, etc.: "any US person who did not vote for Joe Biden, or who is unhappy with the current state of DC politics"
I actually have a problem with people not using proper flag etiquette. Not that I object to the flag, but so many people let the thing get dirty or hit ground. The previous owners of my property were like this, they had their whole roadside covered in flags in various states of decay. I burned them all.
Before I got to the middle of this article I had to go into the bathroom because I thought I was going to vomit. My rage is intensified by my impotence... What the hell is happening?!
How can those of us who categorically oppose these malevolent narratives and destructive policies band together to stop this? Waiting for 2022, and then 2024, isn't going to cut it. We won't have a nation in 4 months much less 4 years.
That's the response that they want you to have. Be patient. Everything that they do can and will be undone.
The House is absolutely not going to be in their hands next year. They almost lost it while they were actively cheating in 2020. The dumbasses forgot to vote downballot on the pre-printed Biden ballots. (It would have been too time consuming to do that at the same time)
We haven't had a nation for many years. It's already over, and has been for a long time. It's never coming back. And there are no new Earthen hemispheres to have another do-over. Homo sapiens are just a hopelessly incapacitated accident, and were never meant to do anything but engorge ourselves on whatever makes our neurotransmitters spew to our dumb pleasure.
well, @mad cactus, i can't say i disagree with you, at least on my "bad days." on my better days, i return to "a patriots' history of the united states" to be reminded of the founding of our country, and the behaviors and methods in use today that are as old as our time. of course our media landscape, and dare i say many of our citizenry, are off their rockers today, but the fundamentals that drove change then -- even bloody change -- are all in place now. which is a long was of saying, this too shall pass (i hope).
The most chilling part of this war on US citizens is that there is nothing we can do to stop it. The leftwing establishment controls the schools, the universities, the entertainment industry, the flow of information on social media, the propagandist media, and the federal police force. The “elections” are a joke- easily manipulated to get the desired results. I have no faith in this country and its people anymore.
I know situation is dire but "Somewhere out there, there's a little girl who's Mom is a stripper, Dad is a crackhead, and her Grandfather is the President of the United States." it's a modernized American Tale
The People frequently forget that their eternal enemy IS the State. That is what Classical Liberalism, Capitalism, and this country's Declaration/Constitution are all about.
But we're nearly 250 years on and it's clear those documents are, at best, woefully outdated and outmatched. We need something else that goes much further.
Harkening back like they're scripture to guide us is foolish.
I think people are having a hard time realizing that the time to fight has come again. Trying to avoid the bloodshed inherent in trying to do anything different. It won't be bloodless, for sure.
When real white supremacists like Richard Spencer, war criminals like Bush, Cheney’s, flint Michigan poisoner Rick Snyder all switch parties to support your candidate, you may need to get off the moral high ground and do some self reflection.
What’s even more amazing is the absolute silence from DNC leftists who called orange man fascist dictator, divider, Russian puppet for 5 years while now being completely silent when Biden is actually doing the fascist stuff and dividing people and giving Putin access to the Nordstream gas for Europe. Zero self awareness.
I’m a heck of a lot more worried about U F O’s and space aliens crossing our solar system then I am about domestic terrorists and white supremacists. They’re food for the feeble minded.
This is a direct result of "journalists" not questioning the results of the 2020 election. With even just a small amount of "mainstream" media spotlighting the possibility of an illegitimate election, the pressure would be on the corrupt deep state to keep covering their tracks. Instead, they are doubling down on the big lie that "right wing extremists" are a threat to the entire nation. Don't get me wrong, most of us here know the old media are completely corrupted deep state sycophants and can't be trusted, but those in power would see that as a threat and their focus would be drawn from trying to demonize their opposition to trying to legitimize their rule.
Yes, this election should have been investigated fairly, just like the origins of virus. Calling them "journalists" is a joke. Which is why I read Glenn and Matt Taibbi. Don't always agree with Matt, but he is doing important work.
The 2020 election was illegitimate because as in 2016 the "left" (the DNC led by Obama & Hillary) derailed the Sanders and Gabbard campaigns with absurd McCarthy era smears of "Russian asset" and "Assad apologist". It's not an overstatement to call this "election interference".
If you are willing to accept the DNC would go to underhanded lengths to remove Sanders and Gabbard, is it such a stretch to think they wouldn't use underhanded means to remove Hitler . . . I mean Trump?
As you indicate those security bulletins are just plows tilling the fields of public opinion and planting the seeds of paranoia and distrust. All so that votes can be gleaned and new restrictive laws can be passed by a cowered Congress. This also feeds into the Military Industrial Complex's need for unending wars and tax money to keep its war machine grinding away. Biden sure picked an almost non-existent threat. Domestic Terrorism is just a dog whistle to target white men and woman not aligned with the DNC. The murder of Ashley on Jan 6 by a police officer has been deep sixed from day one. The shooter has never been identified and the media shown little or no interest in this case since it was only an unarmed white woman. This false meme of white supremacists hiding under every rock is almost as laughable as most of Old Joe's attempts to put together two sentences that make sense. NO American is falling for this stupidity. The Asian's being attacked scare is being played down since most attackers are mind addled Blacks and that does not fit the Biden, DNC narrative. All the while the media plays the role of enabler of lies and false stories of white terror groups roaming the streets of America. Most of the terror groups are run by BLM and Antifa with the support of the DNC and people like VP Harris. America is not fooled and the world is having a great laugh at our bumbling and incoherent President's attempts to get thru the day. The corporate media has become childish comic book pumping up the administrations many scare tactics. The censorship by big Tech will in the end destroy them as their "mistakes" and outright terror tactics will not be forgotten. What a putrid stew this administration is trying to serve to the American public. Most are not partaking. Mid-term elections should be some indication of how the wind is blowing.
Very true but I have lost hope in election integrity and in the wisdom of our populace. Things will have to get dramatically worse before they potentially can get better
Glenn opposed over-reach and sacrifice of civil liberties in original GWOT (global war on terror), a position shared by (many) liberals and opposed by (most) conservatives way back then. Now Glenn opposes over-reach and sacrifice of civil liberties in DWOT (domestic war on terror), a position shared by (almost all) conservatives and opposed by (almost all) liberals. I think we should tip our collective hat to Glenn for his principled consistency.
Its sad that we have to celebrate journalists actually behaving like journalists but here we are.
The devil always loved vanity the best.
... tip our collective hat to Glenn for his principled consistency.
Mr. Greenwald's actions are the antithesis of consistency. First he supports liberals, then he supports conservatives. He should pick a side and stick with it. You may argue that he has been consistent on his principles, and that may be true, but if you aren't willing to support your side when it is wrong, then your support doesn't mean very much.
This is the opposite of correct. If you aren't willing to *criticize* your side when it is wrong, you have no principles, and are a liability to everyone that participates in a democratic republic.
Yes and I have noticed carlson doing that these days. He was such a boy when the Bush/Gore countdowbn was going on. I still have to pinch myself to realize how much he has changed. It is qyite remarkable. He now seems to be getting much of his material from Greenwald these days.
That's your problem, not Glenn's. He's on the side of principles. Not on the side of some labeled Party or cultural camp.
It's also Glenn's problem, because both liberals and conservatives know they can't really trust him not to tell the truth.
And independents like myself love him for telling the actual truth instead of the party line truth.
Get your head out of your fucking ass.
You love him now yes. But when he becomes a target for deadly retaliation where will you be. People want a brave leader but they do not protect that person.
Ill be right here in Norcal with the rest of the gun-toting conservatives in CA.
(He's fooling with you.)
Why do you want Glenn not to tell the truth? Or are you just being facetious and am I missing the sarcasm?
What I want has nothing to do with it. Someone who tells the truth is always going to be distrusted by both sides.
Which is fine by me as long as they stick to principles.
yes
Wait a minute. You actually meant to say what you said?? As a criticism?
Yes, you have been fooled by one of this forums excellent satirists. (Join the club!)
The lack of cheekiness concerns me.
How are people even liking this? Is this some kind of Tribalism Over Truth movement? Because if it is, that's how I know humanity is not worth saving.
Yes true. Neither side owhns him. substack is so far independent enough to host him. But then they have not come down hard on substack as the others have their own problems right now.
"can't . . . trust him not to tell the truth" would mean he tells the truth, and they know they can't trust him not to. Do you get stupider than this? I can't wait to find out. *Searching*
Fuck them.
Problem solved.
You wouldn't know the truth if it slapped you upside your vapid head.
(And you wouldn't know the satire if it.....)
I’m printing out this post and framing it on my wall.
There is no "TRUTH!" As Jesus said to Pilate, "My truth is not yourtruth."
He pays dearly for that. Most are too afraid.
Disagree. One should be sticking to principles, not some tribalistic “side”.
The current DNC democrats have nothing in common with what the definition of liberalism used to be: “ willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas. a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.”
pssst…satire.
Many people stick to principles they cherish. Perhaps most of these are just IDEOLOGY the veil - the mask - that covers the REAL.
You mistakenly select the wrong binary choice. Glenn isn't aligned right v left. He's liberty v authoritarian oppression. Because his political ideology is primarily to the left many in the political left see him as a traitor and apostate. They do this because they, too, see only the right v left binary choice.
Pick a side and stick with it or you’re not principled?
That’s fucking retarded.
Never mind picking sides can eat my ass.
Greenwald supports intellectual honesty, not an ideology.
I 100% disagree. Glenn calls out anyone who is full of shit or massive hypocrites.
Lately (since about 08) thats been the DNC.
I may not agree with Glenn politically but I find him to be arguably the most consistent journalist out there along with Brian Krebs and Rob Wolchek.
"sides" are a trick of Oligarchy; they cynically tug on the strings of tribalism, so we fight amongst ourselves, and we don't see what they're up to. I prefer Truth to Tribalism. Bush 1 = Clinton = Bush 2 = Obama = Biden, as far as I can tell.
I believe you've caught your limit here NoSuch. Reel in your line and come back tomorrow.
If that’s their day job, they shouldn’t quit.
I’ll endeavor to distract the authorities if they promise to continue!
Is this satire?
I can't speak for GG, but I think he would say that civil liberties are his "side," not a political party.
Partisan silliness
This is about loyalty to the truth.
Excellent job! Look at the length of the thread consisting of folks who claim to be a discerning bunch.
Glass houses, bro. You’ve said some dumb shit too.
I'm listening...
As stated.
You sure? Next time look for an invisible smiley.
Best caricature of a corporate Democrat ever. So morally smug he regards his own hypocrisy as a virtue. Brilliantly done, sir.
Excellent sarcasm, bravo.
Where is your evidence that "almost all liberals" support a domestic war on terror? I don't, and I'd assume, for example, that you'd label me a "liberal" as I value science, civil rights and justice, protection of the environment and public commons, fair taxation - and oppose the military-industrial complex's stranglehold on the treasury, and corporate cash's control over elections and policy.
Sounds like we share at least some views! When capital D Democratic politicians encourage the dominant social media platforms to censor certain views, I view that as fertile soil for over-reach and compromise of civil liberties. Matt Taibbi has written about this repeatedly. And how is Facebook's previous censorship of "Let's not rule out lab leak" aging? And the Ohio chapter of the ACLU stated that a police officer "murdered" someone who was endeavoring to stab someone. I thought ACLU supported presumption of innocence. But you are right that I lack empirical data.
Yes, this shows the problem with labels, which become so loosely applied that they become almost useless. I agree ... far too many Dem. partisans are fine with censorship these days, and increasingly tolerant of compromises of civil liberties. The Patriot Act of 2001 really set the stage, and had bipartisan support, with only 63 D's and 3 R's voting against it in the House, and only Russ Feingold voting against it in the Senate. Though it was a response to the 9/11 attack, it was clear that it was a broad attack on civil liberty generally.
The corporate media, much of which is supposedly "liberal" in orientation, are first and foremost the protectors of a system that maintains order for concentrated financial power. Fox and MSDNC , et al, differ only in the same ways that the two major parties differ- i.e. on matters that are part of "the culture wars", for example. I see the culture wars themselves as primarily maintained to keep the regular people in their respective camps...divided over their feelings about race relations/gender/sexuality and a few other issues ("God, gays and guns!"); and dang it, that strategy, used for decades, still works!
The majority of D's are not truly interested in democracy, in my view, any more than the R's in many cases. They are the "soft liberal" (i.e. liberal on social identity issues, primarily). But I don't want to fall into the broad-brush trap of labeling, either.
In any case, media do what they do, and the shallowness of so much of the population is fertile ground for those who sow and spin narratives to gain unthinking acceptance - and language is cheapened in the process.
Speaking of the ACLU, they don't ALWAYS get it right (in my opinion), but they usually do, and they did get it right on the Patriot Act and other such infringements.
Fox News is considered objective (see the reports by Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on the Media, for example). Their opinions are not, but are kept separate from the news programs.
Good comment, Jack. I largely agree. Media are addicted to sowing and spinning narratives, regardless of factual accuracy. And far too much of population is thirsty only for caricatures that align with their pre-existing views. Your point on danger of labels is well taken and good advice. Thanks, and have a good day.
Media is addicted to lying
What makes you think they are media and not PR? Here are NBC employee donations. One donation alone to ACTBLUE from one of their employees dwarfs all their conservative donations from all employees.
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/patrick.henry1776/viz/NBCPoliticalDonations2020/Sheet1
"Media" is addicted to advertiser support, and lies, as well as soap operas and "The Bachelor" get great numbers...Truth fails dismally in the ratings camp....so, they lie to stay alive not to inform
Seriously!
No, the problem is the media forgot who they were working for just like the politicians.
Both of them think they are working for themselves and really they work for us.
Many before me have said it, but I'll repeat it again, There is no "left" in America."
So if the "actual left' isnt voting DNC and the conservatives arent voting DNC how did Joe Biden get 12m more votes than Obama did?
fraud
Hummm!!!! an early Christmas present from Google, Facebook, WAPO, NYT, etc...
why? because of fear promoted by the media and people like Chomsky that Trump was the next Mussolini, although COVID gave Trump the greatest chance to be a dictator. Yet, he was too lazy and stupid to take it.
They voted against Trump.
1. Independents are the largest voter bloc. 2. Democrats tend to vote Dem. 3. Among Indies and Dems, many who think of themselves as liberal or even progressive will make what they consider "lesser of evil" choices. 4. Trump was uniquely unsuited for the Presidency and deemed by many of the electorate, "an existential threat". Neither McCain ('08) nor Romney ('12) stimulated such antipathy/fear. And it's not as if conservatives were uniformly thrilled by Trump, either. As you know, some had attacked Trump and actively supported Biden. (Which says a lot about both).
Then the Dems MUST have MASSIVELY cheated.
The liberal mainstream media is all over it in support of going after "terrorists" -- read Trump voters. And before I deleted facebook, liberals of all ilk were claiming they would have to be "re-educated" and were essentially terrorists. LOTS of that on there. And obviously Pelosi, that idiot, says that crap constantly. That the "insurrection" -- give me a break -- was because those people cared more about their "whiteness" than they did democracy. Asshole woman. And the politician liberals are certainly using it and lying about it as they always do. Liberal politicians are much bigger liars, though politics mostly is a sad state of affairs. That protest had nothing to do with white supremacy and everything about election integrity which is a joke right now. There is plenty of evidence out there. I'm grateful you don't support it.
How the fuck can you be a liberal and support the DNC?
What evidence of success can you point to in the major cities around the US where thy have had total control since the late 1960s?
I'm not sure why this is directed to me, as I don't support the DNC and eschew labels, particularly "liberal" given today's use of the term. And I'm definitely not here to defend that Party.
It was a rhetorical question in general. I just cant understand what they are pointing to and saying "success, look how good we can do".
Exactly. Nobody wants to be Baltimore. Or Chicago. Or Seattle. Or New York. Or Philadelphia. Or Portland. Or Detroit. Or San Francisco....
Sounds like a lot of conservative values to me
If one moves beyond the labels and looks to basic values, one easily finds lots of things in common with a whole lot more people. It's the labels, and then, secondly, the opinions & feelings about various cultural questions that tend to make people think in terms of "us" vs them.
"I value science, civil rights and justice, protection of the environment and public commons, fair taxation - and oppose the military-industrial complex's stranglehold on the treasury, and corporate cash's control over elections and policy."
You may have kind of stepped in it by suggesting that those values are unique to being a, "liberal". But as you note here, those are shared values. Conservatives are not illiberal. Many are actually classic liberals.
And yet, the DNC and their PR department (MSM) like to talk about, "conservatives" like we are uniquely opposed things like, "science" and "democracy" but nothing could be further from the truth.
They have expanded the culture war because they need someone to be the bad guy. In their infinite wisdom, they have decided that villifying 74 million people is a good plan to further a power grab.
Classical liberals may have to leave the Democratic Party and hold their noses and join up with the other major party. If they actually listened to what learned conservatives say, they might find that they have a lot in common with conservatives.
The left is the illiberal platform now.
At the risk of again using labels- which serve more to confuse than to inform, I don't want to argue that those values I list (among others) are uniquely liberal. But I take issue with the suggestion that one side of the duopoly is more responsible for the culture wars than the other, or is more inclined to use them to further partisan goals.
Generally speaking, I've found that Republicans (ostensibly, the Party of conservatives) were at least in the past, far more likely to be supportive of foreign wars, of squelching democratic governments that didn't toe the Empire's line, etc.; and are still more ready to embrace restrictions on voting, are more tolerant of private cash's control over elections and policy.... which I see as the fundamental impediment to any form of democracy. This is not to say that some conservatives don't agree, nor that plenty of Democrats are equally undemocratic.
Both parties are responsible for using the culture war to further a partisan agenda. I just can't think of a time when the operatives of one party was so willing to cast voters on the other side as the villains. And in some cases, they are being prosecuted as such. The culture war is more like character assassination.
The treatment of Capitol rioters and activists are an example for this. After it happened, I remember thinking that the best way they could handle it is to take the same hands off approach that they used for the rioters from last summer. Instead, they decided to make an example out of them.
If Trump incited them to violence, then why are they the ones who are being held without bail in solitary confinement? Why are DNC representatives calling them traitors, insurrectionists and murderers? None of it is true but it persists.
In the hundreds of riots from last summer, I didn't hear about anyone being shot and killed by the police. If it had, it would have blown up. But when it happened to Ashli Babbitt, we are told that she deserved it because she was trying to crawl through a window.
They are now using that single event to expand domestic security and surveillance laws against US citizens. They are using it to suggest that the GOP and their voters are a threat to our, "democracy". They are using phone and bank records without warrants to find these people.
That definitely feels like a bit of an escalation to me. It kind of makes the culture war look tame. Throughout history, both parties have gone out of their way to fuck up and they have both contributed to make our country the greatest in human history.
But in the current state of affairs, left wing establishment operatives are acting like authoritarians who are drunk on power. They aren't even embarrassed about Russiagate. I've never seen anything like it.
Those two events show that equal justice under the law is hilarious bullshit. It is 100% partisan and it should raise alarm bells for all Americans.
At this point, I'm working on the assumption that widespread surveillance is inevitable and that I may end up on a list. It didn't take much to be on the list of suspects from the Capitol riot. If you flew to DC around 1/6 and you purchased something from an FFL, you were a suspect. That is pretty remarkable.
I could care less about what someone calls themselves. Authoritarianism and government interference that violates civil liberties are bad for all of us. If you can agree with that, then I would say that we have enough in common to say that we are fellow Americans. That is enough for me.
"The dominant strain of American liberalism is not economic socialism but political authoritarianism." - Glenn Greenwald.
The current "DNC left" has lost its freaking mind. I used to be a default liberal before but now am more of a black pilled liberal / right leaning liberal. There's 5 things I am unwilling to compromise - free speech absolutist, pro gun rights, anti-critical race theory/identity politics, anti corporate sponsored mass immigration and anti war. The current "left"/democrats are against all 5 of those and the current "trumpian" right leaning folks are all pro all 5 of those. I am not talking about Liz Cheney/Bush/Rick Snyder/Lincoln Project type "right" - those all supported Biden in the elections anyway. The "supportive of foreign wars, of squelching democratic governments that didn't toe the Empire's line" all supported Biden. That's why more right wingers were supportive of Tulsi Gabbard than the "DNC democrats". Somehow Tucker Carlson was the one who gave voice to Tulsi, Glenn Greenwald, Jimmy Dore, Aaron Mate as compared to CNN/MSNPC.
Here's another example of how the democrats have lost their minds. Bernie Sanders used to be very against illegal immigration. In fact, in 2015, he gave this interview to VOX (as left as they come) where he used to be completely against illegal immigration, used to call it a right wing proposal, illegals coming in and taking away jobs for a dollar or two and so on. But then he did a complete 180 flip when Trump came out against it. Now he's an open border dude. Dude abandoned his principles just because of orange man. That's another sign of the left completely losing their mind and abandoning their principles:
https://youtu.be/vf-k6qOfXz0
Some data:
https://news.gallup.com/poll/321116/americans-remain-distrustful-mass-media.aspx
Media trust by Democrats is at an all time high of 73-76%. Independents is at 35% and Republicans is at the lowest 10%. Aka Democrats are buying whatever propaganda media is selling. That's one of the reasons why vast majority of the Democrats (75%) believe the Russiagate nonsense, Russian bounty hoax, believe Trump told them to drink bleach, believe officer Sicknick was killed by some right winger bashing his head with a fire extinguisher and so on. They believed for last 1.5 year that the China lab leak was just a "right wing conspiracy theory by racists". They claimed to "trust the science" but ended up falling on the wrong side of basically everything. They worship Fauci despite him being wrong on every single thing. They claim to be against "corporations" and the "rich" meanwhile their movement is being literally sponsored by the Wall Street and big tech.
"You know how to tell you're the good guys? When all the massive multi-national corporations that have questionable hiring, firing, healthcare, worker's rights, and safety track records, when celebrities with a huge problem of pedophilia and sexual misconduct promote and sponsor your cause and your Revolution has corporate sponsorship. At least this revolution has dope corporate sponsors!" - from a Tim Pool tweet.
96% of the media are registered democrats, vast majority of Hollywood, Big Tech, social media, wall street and so on support the Democrats. Even punk rock bands are now supporting Democrats and Fauci. Meanwhile claiming to be the "resistance" and "counter culture" LOL. Even Walmart, Amazon, Jeff Bezos is supporting the "raising the minimum wage" and "raising taxes" because they know that's an easy way for them to get rid of small business competition who can't afford it and can't find loopholes in the taxes or hire expensive lobbyists to lobby politicians.
Basically instead of helping the American people and investigating the lab leak, they wasted time on hoaxes after hoaxes. In this article itself, Glenn mentions how this stuff is being pushed by none other than Russiagate king Adam Schiff who has zero credibility left.
Among the conservative voters only ~4% have positive thoughts about Qanon. 31.4 percent found the movement “unfavorable,” 43.3 percent said they had “never heard” of QAnon, and 21.3 percent were undecided.
How about the BlueAnon crowd? How big is it? What percent of the Dem voters are aware of getting brainwashed daily and being in a cult?
https://www.westernjournal.com/new-poll-shatters-lefts-qanon-narrative-4-trump-supporters-believe/
https://www.suffolk.edu/-/media/suffolk/documents/academics/research-at-suffolk/suprc/polls/issues-polls/2021/2_22_2021_marginals_pdftxt.pdf?la=en&hash=90BD0E21168399E259262CD994978737F5D7F929
And these data are from left leaning sources like USAToday. I would say vast majority of the Democrats have turned into BlueAnon while very few right wingers have turned into Qanon.
The definition of liberalism used to be "willingness to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.
A political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise." I don't see anything in common with this and the current Democrats. If you support this old definition, then hate to break it to you that both you and me are in the same boat and actually considered "right" by the current "DNC democrats".
It's true that Eisenhower used the CIA (created by Truman) to murder a lot of people and that G.W. Bush invaded Iraq for no reason; but the neo-cons are an aberration. JFK got us into Vietnam. LBJ lied about a "Tonkin Gulf Incident". Clinton bombed Serbia. Obama promoted and armed Islamists to overthrow Assad and he was part of the NATO gang that destroyed Libya and destabilized Europe. So, it really can't be said definitively that the GOP is more bloodthirsty than the offspring of the KKK. Please explain how Republicans are restricting voting. Most of the Democrat's lies about voter suppression assume that blacks are either born at home with no birth certificates or that they are too stupid to figure out how to get photo identification. It is not wise to promulgate disproven lies, Jack.
I cannot help but comment on your belief that Republicans are (were) more supportive of foreign wars. Wilson and FDR were presidents when the USA joined the wars against Germany. JFK and LBJ got America into Vietnam. Bill Clinton joined NATO in bombing Serbia. Obama used mercenaries and Islamic radicals to unsuccessfully unseat Assad. During his administration, the USA once again engaged with NATO to destroy Libya and destabilize Europe. George W. Bush, the globalist, with his globalist allies in both parties, was the exception to the rule. How far back must we go to find the war-crazy Republicans? Now that Cheney and McCain are dead, the GOP is very different than you imagine.
exactly -- and it's this "fear environment" so incredibly embraced by the President's entourage, that causes a new sense of separatism and division. A "White Supremacy" brings images of white hoods, horses and torches to burn... Maybe the Dems use focus groups to select their talking points!
EVERYTHING you name (including science) is valued by the RIGHT in the U.S. today.
I just don't see the evidence for much of that. To the extent that it's true, however, count me happy. In any case, further to this, what then, do you think distinguishes the Left and Right?
The left has embraced illiberalism, interventionist foreign policy and globalism. They are the new incompetent war hawks. They are still in favor of Keynesian economic policy with a focus on wealth redistribution and selective equitable outcomes. They continue to focus on diminishing State power in an effort to consolidate it through the federal government.
The right has embraced liberalism, non-interventionist foreign policy and national sovereignty. Many conservatives seem to have largely shifted away from supply side economics to a hybrid that inudes Keynesian principles. Wealth redistribution is not a core tenant but equal opportunity still is. Corporate power and oligarchy is considered to be antithetical to a healthy society. Federalism with less centralized power is still a core tenant. Many conservatives want the never ending wars to stop. National security agencies are definitely not in favor after the last four years of Russiagate.
In some ways, the parties have swapped some underlying principles while they retained others. That aligns with a shift in voting demographics and changing attitudes for the voting populace. That is my take anyway. The shift in the last twenty years has been monumental.
Re-reading that, it occurs to me that I didn't say anything nice about the left. That is largely because the only good thing that they had going for them was at least some sense of protecting some civil liberties. Now that they have abandoned that, they have lost any redeeming qualities that they once had.
It isn't any "left" that has embraced interventionism, imperialism and war. Again, the problem of using labels- they have now become so subjective (as evidenced by your first statement) that they're meaningless.
It's also a mistake to make sweeping assertions such as about consolidation of federal power. As one some might call "lefty", I don't buy it. Indeed, I believe power should rest as closely to the people as possible... i.e. even at the municipal level, in some matters, in the states on others, and for some, in the federal , all per the Constitution.
But governance doesn't work well when it is not representative at ANY level; i.e. when private capital (corporate & other concentrated cash) determines who is elected and how policy is written into law. THAT is the fundamental problem. And both parties operate within that framework, which means that their representatives can not break from the status quo- the stranglehold held by private interests who have benefited from that status quo.
For some reason, the institutional left has embraced old GOP warhawks. That is baffling to me. But it is at least notable that right-wing voters no longer want them. The GOP owes the world an apology for Dick Cheney.
It was not opposed back then by Rand Paul, so there are some conservatives who always got it. Rand was my choice for those very reasons.
Good point.
Only if he opposes *all* government violations of rights
Civil libertarian + socialism is such an obvious contradiction - in practice and in theory it’s hard to believe it can exist within one person. But hey, there it is.
I don't think GG is a Socialist. I think he is a Classical Liberal.
I believe he would call himself a “progressive”
It’s a euphemism. Progressives want an interventionist government that redistributes wealth and is involved in how productive enterprises conduct themselves.
Chomsky is the same. Claims to be classic liberal or anarcho-syndicalist but his actual arguments are garden variety marxist arguments. Has no problem with enslaving the productive for the benefit of the not so productive
Lots of talk about “ democracy”. This obscures the real issue which is that of liberties. 51% of people voting away my property is not a validation of the theft. It’s still theft.
Democracy is where people who cannot conduct their own lives take control over the people who can.
Check out the pictures on your money. Hint…it ain't your picture.
So the government forcibly takes over the monetary system and by virtue of that act whatever you produce becomes theirs?
Dude you would be better off saying nothing than something this brain dead
Actually Pete I take that back. Keep going, it is testament to everyone why governments in one year are expanding power at an alarming pace and will get away with it
Who do you think creates the monetary system…the tooth fairy?
“I disagree on democracy”
Which part? If 51% of the people vote to eliminate the First Amendment is that legitimate? If not…why not?
No, Milton Friedman did not argue that. What he did say is that there is danger in government being involved in the economy because they create a coalition with business and that is what creates the potentially “feudal” outcomes.
Without the force of government, a business has zero means of being coercive. None.
“ Without the force of government, a business has zero means of being coercive. None.”
Errr…private security goons?
If you don't know whether he is left or right of the spectrum, that means he is doing his job.
You might be right but I not think you are
I appreciate your point. Very much. I note, however, that it can be a big ask for folks committed to leftist governance to see the contradictions. They don't believe in voluntary exchange ("free markets"). That's what makes them lefty. But otherwise believe in individualism and "freedom".
George Orwell was an obvious proponent of liberal democracy, but even he stuck to "democratic socialism" to the end of his life. Even he couldn't see the contradictions. Maybe he would have gotten there had he not succumbed to tuberculosis (?) at age 49 (?).
Since production and exchange are primary aspects of human existence on planet earth, especially in a civilized society, saying that one cannot freely exchange with others without the permission of so ruling class, yet simultaneously claiming to be an advocate of liberty, is such an obvious contradiction and incoherent philosophically, I cannot take it seriously
What "free markets"? Perhaps if there had never been a need for people to organize governments to protect individual rights (incl. property) and provide collective defense, to efficiently/effectively create infrastructure, emergency services, public health protections, etc., and everything was either done or not purely as a function of whether "the market" had produced it, then perhaps we'd still have a "free market". It would be a very different world than the one we're in.
But as it is, that isn't the case. So it is that even the first ripples of 'interference' in the otherwise "free market" skewed it. For example, government creation of the federal highway system more or less set the tone for auto-dominated transportation, and along with its placement of water and sewer and other utilities shaped how cities were built, which land was more valuable / usable, which companies (people) would profit and which would go under, etc. etc. etc.
The "free market" , except in very limited usage, is a complete myth.
You leave the dreadful impression you’ve never read anything about the philosophy behind a constitutional republic.
The ONLY proper role of government is the DEFENSE of individual rights. That’s it.
Since I haven’t argued for the elimination of such a government, either you are hearing voices in your head or maybe you are arguing with someone else.
'Now Glenn opposes over-reach and sacrifice of civil liberties in DWOT (domestic war on terror), a position shared by (almost all) conservatives...' Huh? Since when have conservatives ever opposed the expansion of the surveillance state, or the powers of law enforcement?
There were always conservatives who opposed it like Rand Paul or Mike Lee, but establishment war mongering Republicans were for it at the time. Most are not now.
The same shitlord RNC lifer-types we now see all over the DNC like rats on a carcass.
These people dont want to serve the people they want to empire build. They aren't even for the parties they are for themselves.
Yes, I cannot believe the hubris of some of these elitist pro establishment Republicans. Just like the Democrats, they like them vs. us and know more than we do how we should live.
Yes, there were corporate Republicans like Duncan Hunter, corrupt to the core, who stabbed conservatives in the back. I am sick of them.
One or two more election cycles will destroy the old guard Republican establishment, I am convinced. The Republican establishment has been warmongering since WWII. It would stand to reason that it will take a few new voter drubbings to destroy the Statist rot.
GOP establishment was full of corrupt warmonger. But Republicans have always been junior partners in the growing oligarchy in this country. The Dems are the senior partners.
You could be right! I hope so. They are still causing a lot of damage.
As if it was a natural act of the reflexes, most conservatives supported (and continue to support) the whistle-blowing of Edward Snowden and every Democrat I know believes he should be hanged by the neck until dead for exposing the lies and treachery of the Obama administration.
You probably know too few D's. I used to be one... and along with many others I know, applaud Snowden. But it's a mistake (IMO) to cast Snowden in partisan terms. The abuses he uncovered have been going on for a long time under many administrations. But in a way you're right... far too many D's / liberals will hate or at least abandon Snowden (and particularly Assange) because their releases made some D's look very bad.
I dont agree with pardoning Snowden for a variety of reasons (chief among them that I havent seen all the evidence).
I also struggle with how that was handled and more and more it seems like it was done to win elections, just like everything is in the USA.
Most conservatives support pardoning Snowden? Name one in congress that has.
But libertarians own the "conservative" party now (or are at least ascendant), and libertarians to a person support pardoning Snowden. The politicians of the "conservative" party will follow their voters sooner rather than later.
I mostly agree. I might phrase it this way: the neo-cons are clearly heading towards oblivion (Bill Kristol, anyone?). I think that does result in the GOP trending more libertarian.
I don't know what it means to be a 'conservative' or a 'libertarian' anyway. Their positions have morphed into a jumble of hypocritical and contradictory talking points.
I'm no political scientist, but, in 2021, a 'conservative' seems to be someone who believes in the constitution of the United States, small government, and who is an enemy of public schools' programming children to hate the country. A libertarian, has always been, and always will be, someone who believes in liberty and freedom. Someone opposed to the war on drugs most likely could be considered a libertarian. Someone who believes that parents should have a voice in how their children are raised and educated would most likely be considered libertarian. A libertarian and/or a conservative is certain to be disgusted by the power of the teachers unions to keep children from being educated and both libertarians and conservatives most certainly are disturbed by the "cancel culture" and how only leftist, racist, and radical views are allowed to be voiced on social media and in most of the media. It is only the term "liberal" that has changed. A classical liberal was a free-thinking individual capable and willing to consider new ideas. Liberals have been lost and ignored in modern politics. They have been co-opted by progressives, communists, and anarchists. They no longer have a voice in either of the major political parties.
Rand Paul was personally requesting Snowden and Assange pardons:
https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/17/rand-paul-president-trump-should-pardon-edward-snowden/
I notice that Trump did nothing. He could have owned the Dems by doing that…but he’s just a blowhard and a fake.
Him not pardoning them was a major disappointment to me. While the buck stops with him, blame also goes to Mitch for threatening him with impeachment if we went further with it which was reported on January 19th.
How’s he a fake though? He never promised pardons of Assange Snowden. So it’s not like he didn’t “deliver” on it.
I need an editor. I should have said that all the conservatives I personally know support Snowden.
pretty select sample - giving you credit for good taste in people.
Rand Paul was personally requesting Snowden and Assange pardons:
https://thefederalist.com/2020/12/17/rand-paul-president-trump-should-pardon-edward-snowden/
I know a lot of people from the_donald who wanted them pardoned too.
Why do you think war criminals like Bush, Liz Cheney, Lincoln Project neocons etc all supported Biden?
Real conservatives have always opposed it just like Friedman opposed Vietnam, and Norquist opposed Bush spying in 2006.
SEE BELOW
------------
"Public hearings on this issue are essential to addressing the serious concerns raised by alarming revelations of NSA electronic eavesdropping." -- Grover Norquist, president, Americans for Tax Reform
Funny how these conservatives you speak of are never the ones elected to office. And what a courageous statement from the great Norquist.
Its not funny, its sad.
But what does that have to do with anything?
This is why I specified "TRUE CONSERVATIVES" instead of "SHITLORD BUSH LIFER CRIME FAMILY".
Its incredible how one or two powerful families like the Bushs/Clintons/Kennedys can shape entire generations of thought.
And how entrenched their support becomes among hangers-on.
I am friends with Grover. But then I was the bug on the wall at the vast right wing conspiracy.
They oppose surveillance state targeting them and oppose Democratic politicians encouraging social media platforms to censure statements made by conservatives.
Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan come prominently to mind.
Since never. They turned a blind eye to everything in the Patriot Act and the massive increase in government power pushed through by Darth Vader (Cheney)
As soon as their own ox started to be gored. “Law and Order”conservatives indeed.
Yes we should. He has paid dearly for his stance on all this. They are out to get him particularly since the #Snowden papers were given to him. They want to have him pay for that with his life. But he has become too VISIBLE to assassinate. For now anyway. Many have gone under the earth before him for less.
Actually, the "liberals" in Congress at the time said they opposed the GWOT, sometimes, but then would vote for Bush's anti-terror measures lest they be accused of "aiding the terrorists." Both R's and D's vote to strengthen their election changes and enlarge their donors' coffers.
(Except 1 (one), of course.)
(I was referring to GG's Brazilian solon spouse. Sorry my humor wasn't clear.)
Unfortunately for the Left, there aren't enough back stabbing Mitt Romneys around to support their insane delusions.
They know that they committed election fraud, but they can't understand how they were able to get away with it. That's why they're trying to smear anyone who might oppose them as a right wing extremist or a terrorist. By the way, those Antifa assholes who burned down your building? Those aren't terrorists.
The ballots will be audited and the truth shall be known. That fact scares the hell out of them.
Joe Biden did not receive 12 million more votes than Barack Obama. They got overzealous with their "counting".
Right on!! Audit the votes. Prove the fraud. Nothing else matters til that corrupt election is exposed.
Just like the covid lab leak stuff now finally becoming main stream, maybe next will be the elections…
The only way that thug cop Derek Chauvin was even indicted was to burn down a police station.
Many of those votes were anti-Trump. This argument makes me laugh.
Many of those votes were dead too.
I voted for Trump twice and couldn't agree with you more. If he runs again, the Democrats will win.
Tulsi wouldn't run as a Republican. She's an actual principled and real liberal like Greenwald. Both of them favor leftwing policy that doesn't have a home in the GOP tent, but both are highly respected by millions of conservatives for their commitment to the principles of liberalism.
Gabbard is nothing more than another lapdog. If she had any guts she wouldnt have endorsed Quid Pro Joe a few months after her own party pulled McCarthyism on her.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/mar/19/tulsi-gabbard-ends-presidential-campaign-backs-bid/
I literally linked her endorsing Biden on Mar 19, 2020.
This was a mere three months after she sued the other party elite for McCarthyism.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/tulsi-gabbard-sues-hillary-clinton-defamation-over-russian-asset-remark-n1120176
Unfortunately, the Democrats also don't have room in their neoliberal tent for Tulsi Gabbard.
We're all neoliberals in the US. I would call it an authoritarian tent, except it's not really a tent anymore - it's more of a "this is the party line" hyper conformity thing. It's fraying, I hope. I like the lefties on this sub stack except for the occasional actual Leninist I encounter (like earlier today) and am hopeful actual liberals (as in people who are committed to liberalism, not the political sense of the word although that, too) will rise up. They are essential to the proper functioning of these United States.
I don't think my party is a hell of a lot better, frankly. Some 40% now think I'm basically a communist and perhaps part of a child sex trafficking ring due to not having a tattoo of God Emperor Trump on my right butt cheek. I was almost beat up in a bar in Savannah after the election for not agreeing that "The election was stolen!" Thankfully, there are actual authoritarianism is slightly less fashionable in the GOP, although traitors like Mike Flynn suggesting martial law are definitely authoritarians, and Trump should have been impeached for entertaining those ideas in my view. I voted for him twice, but despise him after that. Disgusting.
These are troubling times. God help us.
A "real liberal" is not what people call liberals today. A "real liberal" stands for freedom for all, and that means not supporting leftists.
All the real liberal hippies from the 60s in Berkeley that I know seem amazingly close to conservative libertarian views but with the change that defense spending should be done on social spending.
Well... Trump has always had the same ideas, and they're far outside of the contemporary Democratic Party. He may have been registered as a Dem at various times in hyper Democrat NYC, but that doesn't mean that he ever fit that well in with that party. Tulsi actually favors a lot of leftwing policy ideas. She isn't a conservative at all. She could potentially end up being a successful third party candidate. Definitely she is far too outside of contemporary progressive thought to successfully win a Democratic primary.
No independent voter would ever vote for Gabbard after how she caved to the DNC in 2020.
"No independent voter that is tired of the tired two party system of bullshit they have been selling us." is what I should have said.
Feel free to vote for the DNC lifer though who toed the party line, I am sure she will really upset the apple cart.
NOT
Trump is far from a Saint, but he was probably pissed at all the payoffs he had to make to liberal New York politicians. Now they are turning on him.
This is my problem. He complained about the swamp which was dead on but hes just as fucking swamp and just as much of a RINO.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/detroit-city/2021/01/20/trump-pardons-ex-detroit-mayor-kwame-kilpatrick/3955404001/
Why the fuck else would he pardon a crooked fucking lifer DNC politican on his way out of office.
"Definitely she is far too outside of contemporary progressive thought to successfully win a Democratic primary."
I am skeptical of this claim. Lay Dem voters are ready, imo, to cast off the Dem establishment just like the Rep voters who came through in 2016.
I would love to see that happen, but I think the progressives' dominance of the Democratic Party will continue unabated for some time. They're incredibly powerful and wealthy, and also dominate the entire news media, academia and the education industry, and basically all government bureaucracy except for law enforcement. Increasingly, their dominance even stretches into the military. They are by far the most powerful and dominant force in American politics, but their ideas tend to turn most voters off.
She'd have my vote regardless of the letter after her name. Despite her 2A stance.
She is ant 2A plus she endorsed Biden and voted present to impeach Trump. Typical democrat.
All true - and troubling. But I can overlook most of that for her having most publicly called out the witch - which is far from typical for a pol of any stripe (DJT did it, but he really wasn't a politician, although it's most interesting how well he fit into today's politics). That really was a big deal that was quickly bomb holed.
She's far from perfect, but I'd settle for good over perfect. I certainly understand mileage may vary.
Agreed, Trump needs to sit this next election out. Too much of a lightening rod and that will overwhelm any message.
Plus he's too old.
Trump wont kiss the party's asses. That alone makes him a better candidate than any of the others.
We want our elected officials to work for US not the fucking parties.
You think that Trump worked for you? That’s adorable.
Inadvertently. Anything that pisses off the uniparty is a step in the right direction.
You just made up a quote that I didn't make and then flippantly attacked me for it.
Today in you might be a moron dnc voter
But we need him and his most diehard followers to back the anti-State party, so libertarians need to treat him with respect, and not pull a Hillary-deplorables-mistake.
I find that it is usually sufficient to make it clear that I support his supporters and fair treatment even if not necessarily Trump himself. I have been quite honest from the primary on that I do not and have never liked Trump the man. Part of the reason I took that middle ground position in the 2016 convention process where his supporters were NOT always treated fairly was exactly the reason you state: someday we would have to work with these folks again.
*Most* Trump supporters I deal with get that, and frankly, the ones that do not will be of very limited use going forward.
Very well said, as usual. (I am comfortable in Trumpian circles, and around those that feel as you do.)
You are 100% correct - Donald Trump is too damn old. I'm a few months older than he is and I have a hard time just getting around. He's done his bit. Unfortunately, he lost his second term (or it was stolen.) I'm not sure who the Republicans have (Ted Cruz is constitutionally NOT eligible, not to mention he's an asshole) but then Democrats don't have anybody either. By the way, Bernie Sanders is an old man too. So is Pelosi - damn, they're ALL old!!!
How is Ted Cruz not constitutionally eligible?
"How is Ted Cruz...?" An old discussion and one I still believe is incorrect. Since I have said it all before, I'll just link to an old article ;-) https://radishsaltant.blogspot.com/2016/04/citizenship-constitution-and-morality.html
That was a dumb argument on the birther side.
I 100% disagree even if I cannot stand Trump.
The one and only thing Trump has going for him that no other politician does is that he isnt a lifer piece of shit politician.
Hes brand new to this.
Trump is, however, a lifer piece-of-shit human being.
I love him for being so in love with himself that he was willing to throw himself out there into politics and thereby make my dreams of fucking over the uniparty, even in a little way, a reality.
One of the greatest summaries of DJT politically that I have ever heard.
Yeah. Credit where it’s due!
Fuck I wish I could unlike your post and like it again.
Guess you just have lousy taste in men.
The thing you said and the thing HBI said are both true.
I think you just have lousy reading skills.
People worship war criminals like Bush, Obama, Clintons while calling an open book like orange man a "piece of shit". Amazing. Everyone's a piece of shit to some extent - I prefer those who are open about it which Trump's always been for decades. He's always been a womanizer and a showboater and everyone worshipped him for it, gave him TV shows and Playboy magazine covers for decades until he became a Republican. Then he became worse than Hitler.
Its kind of crazy but imo both of you are right.
I dont disagree but also find it odd that he was the least piece of shit among all the other candidates. Crazy times.
So, you're going to keep voting for Democrats.
All write in candidates for me lately in national elections.
As much as I like Tim Scotts politics, would the media or you be as gung-ho about him if he was white?
Im tired tired tired of identity being part of the value of the message.
You're really not very familiar with the conservative world, are you? Perhaps you don't know that the most widely respected conservative intellectual for decades is Thomas Sowell, a black man, and the list goes on. For several years, the most popular Republican was Condi Rice, a black woman whom most people (including Republicans) assume is a lesbian.
Senator Scott is wildly popular in South Carolina and his stature and popularity is growing in the party. Most likely, he'll have a difficult time vaulting into a presidential nomination, but that will be due to the difficulties that almost all politicians have in running for the presidency from the Senate, not his race or ethnicity.
We're really sick of this crap. Get out more, talk to more people, and read more widely.
I went to school and lived in South Carolina for more than a decade and have family there, I am 100% familiar with Tim, his politics, and conservatives.
Why would you even mention Sowell or Condoleeza when we are discussing Tim Scott? Sowell isn't an elected official and Rice was appointed. Fox News isnt suddenly trotting either of them out on the front page as they are Scott, further proving my point.
He's simply popular, not being "trotted out."
I mentioned Sowell and Rice due to their popularity. It's relevant.
But of course I'm arguing with someone who thinks conservatives are all racists, so...
Perhaps the guy who refers to Scott as a horse being trotted around has more racist views than we do?
All I can think of is Sarah Palin when someone brings that up.
Same theory, different identity :(
Ron DeSantis has been impressing me. Today he signed the bill to ban biological men in competing in women sports. Hard to imagine we need a "law" to ban such nonsense but here we are.
Anyone who works for the people and not the parties, which sadly means it is a short list.
As an example I thought John Murtha was a piece of shit who I hated his politics but I felt he worked hard for his constituency.
I am sitting here thinking right now and there aren't any candidates at the national level who I truly support.
I was referring to the conservative media suddenly thrusting him to the forefront of their message as a counter to the identity politics of the DNC, Fox News is a great example of this.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tim-scott-republican-rnc-ad-biden-address
This country has always been about majority rules with minority rights. All of a sudden the DNC wants to change that because a group that makes up 10% of our country votes their way almost exclusively.
IMO, the correct way to fight that isn't to suddenly trot out your own person of color to counter the arguments. It is to counter the arguments with reason and rational thought and remind voters that you support people of all races, all creeds, all sexual orientations and you support them all EQUALLY.
Don't get me wrong, I like a lot of Tim Scott politics, but stuff that was in his bills are just as racist.
https://www.scott.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/JUSTICEActText.pdf
Go check out that link and head down to SEC. 502. COMMISSION ESTABLISHMENT AND MEMBER8 SHIP.
You really think that would be good legislation? You really think we need race-specific commissions in the USA? I thought we defeated segregation with blood and tears in the 1960s.
Why on earth would we want to go back to that? Oh right because the DNC gets to energize their base with and paint the nuts on the "right" as indicative of the entire right so they get even more energization.
The true correction that has to come to politics is a breaking of the two party system. Once we start there, we can begin to see actual organic movements coming together for real change for the people.
Listen to Richard Baris and Robert Barnes about Tim Scott. Dude was a back stabber who would talk shit about Trump behind his back - despite Trump supporting him on multiple bills and things like opportunity zones. Never trusting him again.
Is there a video or transcript of this? I'd love to see/read it.
Beware of him. He’s known to back stab people including Trump.
Trump has done so much that I am more then willing to support him. Desantis is awesome as well
plus 1
Its time the people took back control of the government from the elite shitlords.
Isn't it America who should be the first country to do this?
So close, yet so far.
Listen to yourself. Take back control of the government. The very structure at the root of so many issues.
The state is for one thing only: power and getting more of it. Doesn't matter who runs it.
Sure it does, if the people who run it keep it from being so omnipresent in our lives that it has 100% control.
You've never needed a savior.
The lazy american voter has been conditioned so badly that they have started to need government to do everything.
There are really big differences between the War on Terror and the current leftwing domestic terrorism hype. Surveillance in the War on Terror was conducted against foreign terror groups and their followers and sympathizers in the US, and it followed a series of successful and not successful large-scale terror acts, eg there were very real threats, and who knows what was averted. It wasn't a political cover to destroy domestic political enemies as this current attempt so blatantly is.
So what is going on? Increasingly, entertainment (all left) and business elites (both left and right) carry water for China's authoritarian Communist Party. Run of the mill Democrats have gotten into state power hardcore with the mask mandates, etc. Just today I read someone on the Miami subreddit suggesting that lockdowns be used as a deterrent to Miami's current gun crime spree. And Democratic Party leadership has decided that being a conservative basically makes one a domestic terrorist or at least a sympathizer.
All of the above follows a steady flow of violence at LEFTwing rallies that produced dozens of deaths, hundreds of injuries, and around $2 billion in property damage, but quick everyone, "Let's outlaw those crazy rightwing domestic terrorists," and attempt to grab permanent political party power.
This is communism with an iPhone and Insta. It's all about permanent party power, which is all that communism really is when its practice is boiled down. Forget about socialism and pro-worker mumbo jumbo - China is the most successful communist government in history, and progressives are lusting after that kind of power whether they're directly cognizant of that or not. And just like the CCP, once the Democrats have the kind of power they strive for (and won't get most likely), they'll probably dispense with most of the social welfare state anyway. It's just for show. The actual goal is power and $.
I think you miss the point that the "party power" is the two parties which are really one, and the original "WOT" was all about introducing comfort on domestic surveillance -- domestic pacification being the long-term goal of those with reins on both Democrats and Republicans.
You can keep telling yourself this fairy tale, but show me another time in US history where a single slice of American voters were able to perform a mass shutdown on the right of assembly of millions (millions of people were in previously active online conservative groups) as well as the shuttering of conservative-oriented business. I'll answer that for you: there isn't one.
This has nothing to do with conservatives or the GOP. I'm a frequent critic of my political party, so don't mistake my comments as driven by some partisan fanboy stuff. This is all unprecedented in US history.
Oh don't worry. It will come around. The current aim at the right is only temporary, to get the left onboard.
Certainly the increasingly working class-centric GOP, especially since Trump, is the primary domestic threat to globalist dominance. I definitely see where you are going with this idea. We'll see. I'm hoping that principled liberals can rescue the US left from its descent into authoritarianism, but from a historical perspective, it's hard to separate leftism from authoritarianism. It's always the primary tactic.
Dude, don't you know that once we cede all power to the State so it can usher in utopia, it will just wither away as it becomes unnecessary?
160 years or so of waiting for the promised sheep herder by day, philosopher by night, which is basically the only paragraph where Marx ever actually said anything about communism.
Give him credit for weaving a sophistry so appealing that it still persists after more than a century of shockingly horrific failures.
It's perhaps more appropriate to condemn Marxists rather than Marx himself. He only sketched out the vaguest description of communism.
The best fables leave much to the imagination. Obama comes to mind in that regard.
I agree. What I fail to understand is how the postmodern movement became so thoroughly socialist. One might think that the postmodernist tenet of there being no objective reality would preclude an economic system that is based on central planning and perfect knowledge.
I've actually read a lot of Marx. Marxism was really defined by his intellectual followers. His work was almost entirely a critique of mid 1800s capitalism. I'm not defending or endorsing his work, but merely stating what it actually was. Our beef is with the people who followed him of whom Lenin is arguably the most important. There is even speculation that Engels wrote The Communist Manifesto.
Critics of the contemporary authoritarian push on the part of the Democrats should understand that they essentially knee-capped a bunch of conservative organizing two days after the Capitol Riot. The biggest one was removing the close to a million member Walkaway Group from Facebook. Besides being the new home for people leaving the Democratic Party, it was the most important conservative LGBT group and hosted talks all over the country by ex-Democrat LGBT people.
It was a huge threat the Democrats' continued attempt to permanently hold the LGBT vote, so they snuffed it out.
They're gangsters.
Great piece. All true.
"DP Wilson" -- you are still obsessed with "left vs right", "red vs blue" not seeing that it has been 1% vs. 99% for long, long time.
Soo parroting about "bad Communism" while we don't have democracy at ALL.... Ever heard about fascism? Btw -- socialism is future of humanity -- a far more humane form of society.
“Venezuela is fundamental threat to USA” -- declared St. Obama formally initiating regime change.
What he meant is “Socialism is a threat to capitalism”… hence imperial War-party endless wars -- against Bolivia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, Libya, China…..
Defund US military terrorism
Socialism is an economic system that has been tried repeatedly and always with the tool of state terror. It's always been a total and complete failure. You might want to update your halcyon view of communism and also actually familiarize yourself with the last 200 years of history. The world and its history is what it is, not what you project onto it.
Progressives are not 1% - they're more like 15-20%, and they are both the architects and adherents of the Democrats' current authoritarian zeal. Please stop blaming that on its victims. Conservatives have lots of warts, but that's beside the point.
Socialism? Western Fascists embargo every country that tries it…to”prove” that it doesn’t work.
You first take a baseball bat to somebody's kneecaps, and then mock them that they can't dance.
The left are the people wielding the baseball bat and always have been. They're also the people who continue to carry water for murderous despots, who, when they're most successful, succeed only at creating police states dominated by a single party. And despite literally centuries of evidence, people continue to celebrate and praise this.
What year is it again? 1956 before Kruschev's speech?
Yes, it's been a complete and utter failure, and it's also been accompanied by somewhere between 100-200 MILLION people killed in its name.
What is it with the Keep The Communist Flame Alive! crowd around here?
Yes. Social security is mass murder.
Social security is a policy chosen by people in a free and democratic system. It has nothing to do with communism. And you have no idea what my opinion is of it or any other aspect of our social welfare state.
You people are so tremendously ignorant and poorly informed. And continue to be dangerous.
VOA shill, are we?
Do you know anything about the 20th Century? Anything at all?
I see -- you are well indoctrinated. I was born in a "Communist" country -- have seen both sides, however.
What are you talking about? I used to be a Marxist. Unlike most leftists, I've also read most of the important literature in what is a very intellectual tradition. I wasn't indoctrinated into anything, and if you want to attack my comment or me, which is what you did, have more meat on the bones.
Please.
Note the media silence about major wins for democracy in Bolivia and Venezuela, "godless" socialist countries against which CIA is actively conducting illegal coups, sanctions and regime changes.
Since Biden will likely be Obama-2 remember the astonishing statement by St. Obama:
“Venezuela is fundamental threat to USA” -- declared St. Obama formally initiating regime change.
What he meant is “Socialism is a threat to capitalism”… hence imperial War-party endless wars -- against Bolivia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Syria, Cuba, China, and 20+ other countries…..
Defund US military terrorism
Major "wins" for "democracy." Do you know any Venezuelans? I would recommend talking with them and also familiarizing yourself with actual detail rather than political slogans. Also, familiarize yourself with the term "colectivos" as it is used in Venezuela then get back to us about how "democratic" they are.
Get out and talk with people more. The world is not your projection screen, communist.
We'll all starve to death if we have healthcare.
Want nationalized healthcare? Go for it. It's not socialism - it's a choice that a free country can vote for if they want. Why are you so poorly informed?
Still believing in a fairy tale of "red and blue" -- served by the propaganda of 1%-ers and their immensely profitable War industry....
Pls red carefully e.g. this article -- we are being played like a violin by oligarchs of both right-wing parties:
The link to outstanding "Scrum" article is:
https://thescrum.substack.com/p/the-rrrrussians-come-again
BOP for the win
And you know this by faithfully consuming Western media.
We will defeat you.
Who’s “we”? Got a mouse in your pocket?
Entertainment? Law and Order? Clint Eastwood?
Regarding Law and Order and many other shows and movies - Hollywood is totally owned by the Left who freely practice their own form of McCarthyism, but they love money even more than politics, so they create products to satisfy audiences.
The performance of California Democrats in particularly shows me that they are just Republicans who pretend to care.
Newsflash - that's all Left people who are in power ever have been and will be: people who pretend to care whilst enriching themselves. You are one of their useful idiots.
Try being an open conservative and try to get a career started in entertainment. Eastwood was already one of the biggest stars in the world just as Kelsey Grammer was.
If you don't know anything about a subject, don't opine. I work in entertainment and have for decades. I know what I'm talking about. You don't.
I also love how those who carried out the blacklists in the 1950s are all pouty now…like you.
Honestly, why do you even read Greenwald? Why do you think I respect the guy - he's one of the only people on the left speaking out about its egregious and awful behavior. Do you think Greenwald thinks it's a joke that I have to worry about being fired from work for something as anodyne as being a Republican? No, he thinks it's disgusting that I have to live like that and so do several of his colleagues on the left who also write on substack, people like Bari Weiss.
Honestly, what is wrong with you people? This is how all of you justify the Left's repressive tactics which HAVE NO JUSTIFICATION. Repression is NEVER OK. You have no soul.
I’ve been following Greenwald since about 2006. The only reason you seem to follow him is that he criticizes…quite rightly…liberals.
You seem to have found a stash of your grandparent’s John Birch Society drivel.
Piss off. I've never supported any blacklist.
Look, jerk, do you have to constantly be worried about getting fired from work due to your politics? And I can assure you - mine are quite benign.
Honestly, you people are disgusting authoritarians. It's what the left is and always have been. And even when it's pointed out, accurately, I might add, you defend it. You all are shameful and inhuman. You lack decency.
Waaaahhhh…everybody picks on us!
IT'S MY GODAMN LIVELIHOOD, JERK. It's not whining - it's about paying the fucking bills and not living in fear. You are disgusting.
GG explains that both 9/11 and the recent capitol event are used for a power grab.
The pandemic was precisely the same, at every level of government.
It is easy to keep blaming all of these sociopaths in government. But the fact is, Governors who locked down their states saw their approval ratings go to 80%. Bush was a laughing stock out of his element and then when he put all of these policies in place he became more popular.
When people realized the NSA was collecting data many conservatives and liberals were apathetic and took the view “hey what do you have to hide?”
Americans are responsible for ceding all of their liberties to these professional lying sociopaths. Ultimately, this is what people keep allowing.
“In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us.” - Dostoevsky
Love Dostoevsky!!
Sad but true
yes
I'm also dismayed by those 80%, but don't forget that they were lied to. Most people overestimated the danger of COVID by 10x or more. Bush ended his Presidency with low popularity, and DeSantis' future is looking brighter than Cuomo's and Newsom's.
They were lied to. I think that makes it worse not better. It demonstrates they refuse to think for themselves, it also confirms they have non principles and are willing to sacrifice their liberty for perceived safety. It’s just pathetic
I wouldn't say that about everyone, but it does apply to New Hampshire, the "Live Free or Die" state. Those are some real poseur license plates.
It’s probably 75-80% of the population. Maybe worse. That’s the real problem.
What people don’t understand is politics and elections is the last step. It’s not the cause, it’s the effect. It’s the effect of a cowardly, collectivist, people. This is how it looks.
You can’t create a trough and expect that the pigs won’t try to feed out of it and arrogate it to themselves
yes
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”
- Lincoln (paraphrased)
Famous quote. Not sure it’s relevant.
My point is *enough* people are fooled, and even want to be fooled. They are the real cause. Government (inherently parasitic) just feeds off of their weakness.
yes
This Covid pandemic is far worse than anyone suspects at this time. Unless they have been studying #Virilio as the War Colleges have been doing.
Everybody here - welcome to the no-flight list.
The sad part is I know people who have celebrated the application of the no-fly list to "domestic terrorists" because they fear and despise the rural heathen who voted for Trump. To a one, they are all college educated and mostly Ivy League. They perceive themselves to be of the elite because of their educational credentials even if their careers have been middling at best.
When I objected, I was immediately accused of being a racist who was fine with the no-fly list being applied to Muslims, etc... with no evidence of such. Mind you, these are people I've known for decades. I was not going to get the benefit of the doubt in regards to my character simply because I transgressed against their political inclinations.
The folks you describe that I know have been placed on my "No Park" in my driveway list.
How is it that you know so many Ivy League-ers with whom you don't seem to share the same values? Are you a colleague of theirs? Why do you define their careers as middling? Did they all tell you that they consider themselves elite and that they despise the rural heathens? Just curious. Your post is full of conservative talking points and seems a little contrived.
Because I went to school with them. A significant portion of graduates from our university went to work for the government, primarily federal. The most vehement among them are mid-level bureaucrats. Of those I know who have had sterling careers, they have been mostly silent. As far as the scorn for and fear of the rural heathens, that was specifically communicated to me by several people. Does it characterize all of them? No.
It is a generalization, however those that don't share their viewpoints are generally quiet about it. My politics developed later and quite frankly, I didn't pay much attention to theirs until they became quite vocal and insistent about it during the Trump administration. The virtue signaling has been constant.
Thanks for your response.
And thanks for being polite. It's a rarity on the internet.
It's a fair criticism that I'm over-generalizing and stereotyping. I've just been a little taken aback by some of my former friends that I thought were a little more rational. I should be more specific in the future.
Unfortunately, they weren't mistakes. What they did was absolutely intentional. I used to give Bush the benefit of the doubt on intentions, but I've come to realize that his intentions were never good.
Being put on the no-fly list as a result of a bureaucratic error is what made me a hard-core skeptic of the surveillance state. After numerous pat-downs and extra searches, some of which resulted in missed flights, a gate agent finally told me that my name was similar to another one that was actually on the no-fly list. We had the same birthday. This level of incompetence was enraging. We were different genders and the government couldn't figure it out. Innocent citizens get harassed and potential terrorists get a pass.
The TSA should be abolished. But now it's a jobs program, so it won't ever be. OBL wasn't going to try that again, and neither was anyone else, given the other changes made. Besides which, the whole security theater thing doesn't protect us from anything, just makes idiots feel good. Just like something else more recently.
What do you expect them to do, use their brains? How droll.
Since my wife and I are long-time left-wing political activists, who've certainly done our best, in our small way, to give the PTB grief, we were very disappointed, the last time we flew (for a funeral, so it was just as well), to discover that, rather than the no-fly list, we were on an expedited list.
When we asked why, to the clerk's great surprise, we were told it was random. Security theater at its purest, in other words.
If I'm on the no-fly list am I exempt from jury duty?
No, and it will be only patent cases.
Getting kicked off the jury during voir dire is a piece of cake. Two words: "jury nullification".
Either that or just wear a bow tie and sportcoat to the voir dire while reading the Financial Times and suggest loudly that you don't like poor people.
Ouch!
The true definition of "domestic extremist" per CNN, MSNBC, etc.: "any US person who did not vote for Joe Biden, or who is unhappy with the current state of DC politics"
add to that list:
gun owner
drives a pick up
currently employed
white
"hard working"
home owner
etc
etc
*some are redundant - i.e. driving a pick up and owning a gun
Anyone who can do math! Or can use the internet! - Biden
Flag stickers on bumpers, and flying flags at home
I actually have a problem with people not using proper flag etiquette. Not that I object to the flag, but so many people let the thing get dirty or hit ground. The previous owners of my property were like this, they had their whole roadside covered in flags in various states of decay. I burned them all.
I'd be surprised if proper flag etiquette of even taught anymore. We learned in grade school, and I never forgot.
Before I got to the middle of this article I had to go into the bathroom because I thought I was going to vomit. My rage is intensified by my impotence... What the hell is happening?!
How can those of us who categorically oppose these malevolent narratives and destructive policies band together to stop this? Waiting for 2022, and then 2024, isn't going to cut it. We won't have a nation in 4 months much less 4 years.
That's the response that they want you to have. Be patient. Everything that they do can and will be undone.
The House is absolutely not going to be in their hands next year. They almost lost it while they were actively cheating in 2020. The dumbasses forgot to vote downballot on the pre-printed Biden ballots. (It would have been too time consuming to do that at the same time)
So true. They were in a big rush. Trump did way better then they expected. The cheating and fraud had to be vastly increased
Thank you, I hope you're right!
We haven't had a nation for many years. It's already over, and has been for a long time. It's never coming back. And there are no new Earthen hemispheres to have another do-over. Homo sapiens are just a hopelessly incapacitated accident, and were never meant to do anything but engorge ourselves on whatever makes our neurotransmitters spew to our dumb pleasure.
well, @mad cactus, i can't say i disagree with you, at least on my "bad days." on my better days, i return to "a patriots' history of the united states" to be reminded of the founding of our country, and the behaviors and methods in use today that are as old as our time. of course our media landscape, and dare i say many of our citizenry, are off their rockers today, but the fundamentals that drove change then -- even bloody change -- are all in place now. which is a long was of saying, this too shall pass (i hope).
https://patriotshistoryusa.com/
We didn't have a democracy for 70+ years.
Yep. And the founders made it so EXACTLY because pure democracy IS tyranny. (Read the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist papers.)
Ah, yes…democracy(some conditions apply).
Or Thucydides.
Good advice 🙃
This dude is not my president. Stands to reason he'd need to crack down. Lack of legitimacy does that.
Same caveat applies. She was on the same ticket.
And she has even less legitimacy. I suspect JRB got at least one legitimate delegate in the primaries.
Also harder to re-elect
DNC giving tulsi the nomination is a pie in the sky dream. And if they do, then we should start wondering how she got compromised.
What a wonderful campaign that will be.
The most chilling part of this war on US citizens is that there is nothing we can do to stop it. The leftwing establishment controls the schools, the universities, the entertainment industry, the flow of information on social media, the propagandist media, and the federal police force. The “elections” are a joke- easily manipulated to get the desired results. I have no faith in this country and its people anymore.
I know situation is dire but "Somewhere out there, there's a little girl who's Mom is a stripper, Dad is a crackhead, and her Grandfather is the President of the United States." it's a modernized American Tale
Bahahahahahahaha....needed that one.
Humbly request permission to steal that quote!
The media was supposed to be holding this cuntwagons responsible.
Instead they became complicit and sold out the people for pennies.
*puts on tinfoil hat*
maybe the media and the DNC are one and the same?
Good. Now you can figure out what to do about it.
Sadly agree
I fear the Democrat Party more than anything - it's evil.
I fear the CIA and FBI more, primarily because they're faceless, nameless, unelected, and wholly unaccountable.
Tough choice. Fear and despise them both. Not a big fan of many Republicans either
I trust you don't use Amazon then...it's a wholly owned subsidiary of the CIA since 2012 when they bought Jeff Bezos for $600M
I avoid it to the extent possible, just like I avoid Google.
DuckDuckGo is working well for me
And Brave browser!
Except -- that both are unavoidable.. ;-((
Very true
I don't disagree - they have been weaponized by the Democrats
but they do have good stenographers....at WaPo, NYT, etc
Truly scary times when the government has gone full on enemy of the people and the people have done very little to deserve it.
You lost me there--when have the people anywhere ever done anything to deserve it?
I am trying to be a little bit objective and possibly see some reason for their overbearing control, but I see your point.
The People frequently forget that their eternal enemy IS the State. That is what Classical Liberalism, Capitalism, and this country's Declaration/Constitution are all about.
The enemy is the state.
Cites founding documents of a state.
Hmm.
Documents that limited the power of said state to the bare minimum: protecting the rights of the people.
This was unheard of at the time.
Of course.
But we're nearly 250 years on and it's clear those documents are, at best, woefully outdated and outmatched. We need something else that goes much further.
Harkening back like they're scripture to guide us is foolish.
I think people are having a hard time realizing that the time to fight has come again. Trying to avoid the bloodshed inherent in trying to do anything different. It won't be bloodless, for sure.
There’s always a fight, but it should avoid bloodshed.
When real white supremacists like Richard Spencer, war criminals like Bush, Cheney’s, flint Michigan poisoner Rick Snyder all switch parties to support your candidate, you may need to get off the moral high ground and do some self reflection.
What’s even more amazing is the absolute silence from DNC leftists who called orange man fascist dictator, divider, Russian puppet for 5 years while now being completely silent when Biden is actually doing the fascist stuff and dividing people and giving Putin access to the Nordstream gas for Europe. Zero self awareness.
“Mueller will be teaching a class on the Trump Russia collusion at U of VA”
What in the honest fuck.
It's almost as delicious as Ken Starr turning a blind eye to sexual harassment and assault when he was Chancellor of Baylor.
I’m a heck of a lot more worried about U F O’s and space aliens crossing our solar system then I am about domestic terrorists and white supremacists. They’re food for the feeble minded.
Another distraction and war industry agenda -- note that only military notices "UFOs" -- not astronomers ;-))
Not worried about UFOs, space aliens, domestic terrorists, white supremacists, or little old ladies crossing the street. It's all BS.
If only the fence around the Capitol protected the rest of us from the threat coming from within the razor wire!
Thanks !! This however is not BS.
The link to outstanding "Scrum" article is:
https://thescrum.substack.com/p/the-rrrrussians-come-again
Try getting a sense of humor.
But M. Boris might be right that the State is using another non-issue as distraction. (I DID like your humor!)
It's as if Snowden never happened. As if Clapper was never shown to be a liar. As if the doctored Fisa warrants were never uncovered.
We walk around like zombies, even if we're shown the danger again and again.
I suspect this most recent incursion on our rights is an excuse to find political dissidents rather than security threats.
Dissent = threat.
Suspect? It’s pretty much obvious now.
This is a direct result of "journalists" not questioning the results of the 2020 election. With even just a small amount of "mainstream" media spotlighting the possibility of an illegitimate election, the pressure would be on the corrupt deep state to keep covering their tracks. Instead, they are doubling down on the big lie that "right wing extremists" are a threat to the entire nation. Don't get me wrong, most of us here know the old media are completely corrupted deep state sycophants and can't be trusted, but those in power would see that as a threat and their focus would be drawn from trying to demonize their opposition to trying to legitimize their rule.
Yes, this election should have been investigated fairly, just like the origins of virus. Calling them "journalists" is a joke. Which is why I read Glenn and Matt Taibbi. Don't always agree with Matt, but he is doing important work.
The 2020 election was illegitimate because as in 2016 the "left" (the DNC led by Obama & Hillary) derailed the Sanders and Gabbard campaigns with absurd McCarthy era smears of "Russian asset" and "Assad apologist". It's not an overstatement to call this "election interference".
If you are willing to accept the DNC would go to underhanded lengths to remove Sanders and Gabbard, is it such a stretch to think they wouldn't use underhanded means to remove Hitler . . . I mean Trump?
A "stretch"? Nay, It would be absurd to think they would not!
As you indicate those security bulletins are just plows tilling the fields of public opinion and planting the seeds of paranoia and distrust. All so that votes can be gleaned and new restrictive laws can be passed by a cowered Congress. This also feeds into the Military Industrial Complex's need for unending wars and tax money to keep its war machine grinding away. Biden sure picked an almost non-existent threat. Domestic Terrorism is just a dog whistle to target white men and woman not aligned with the DNC. The murder of Ashley on Jan 6 by a police officer has been deep sixed from day one. The shooter has never been identified and the media shown little or no interest in this case since it was only an unarmed white woman. This false meme of white supremacists hiding under every rock is almost as laughable as most of Old Joe's attempts to put together two sentences that make sense. NO American is falling for this stupidity. The Asian's being attacked scare is being played down since most attackers are mind addled Blacks and that does not fit the Biden, DNC narrative. All the while the media plays the role of enabler of lies and false stories of white terror groups roaming the streets of America. Most of the terror groups are run by BLM and Antifa with the support of the DNC and people like VP Harris. America is not fooled and the world is having a great laugh at our bumbling and incoherent President's attempts to get thru the day. The corporate media has become childish comic book pumping up the administrations many scare tactics. The censorship by big Tech will in the end destroy them as their "mistakes" and outright terror tactics will not be forgotten. What a putrid stew this administration is trying to serve to the American public. Most are not partaking. Mid-term elections should be some indication of how the wind is blowing.
Very true but I have lost hope in election integrity and in the wisdom of our populace. Things will have to get dramatically worse before they potentially can get better