RANGER AGAINST WAR: They Shot Their Trump Card <

Friday, August 05, 2016

They Shot Their Trump Card

Shut up Kyle!
Shut your Goddamn Jew mouth.
You’re the reason that there's war
in the Middle East
 --South Park

That's just the way it is
Some things will never change
--The Way It Is, Bruce Hornsby

And you may ask yourself
Where does that highway go to?
And you may ask yourself
Am I right? Am I wrong?
--Once in a Lifetime, Talking Heads

It was recently revealed that the Democratic Party (i.e., the Clinton campaign) attempted to discredit Mrs. Clinton's sole opponent, Mr. Sanders, by disseminating the word that he was an atheist, instead of Jewish (which he in fact, is.)

Are we to believe that dismissed Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was to blame for the dirty doings in order that Mrs. Clinton may not have still more smut attached to her already tetchy image?

As the first Jewish congresswoman elected from Florida and a hard-working graduate of a Florida state school, it strains credulity to believe that Mrs. Wasserman Schultz would sink so low against one of her fellows.

Unless she was a pathologically self-loathing Jew, she alone did not hatch this plan but was directed to do so by higher ups. Remember, Mrs. Wasserman Schultz was Mrs. Clinton's campaign co-chair in Clinton's unsuccessful 2008 presidential bid. Old loyalties die hard.

I did not know Mr. Sanders was Jewish, but it is now obvious: his campaign was doomed to failure out of the gate. Anyone in his right mind knows that a Jewish quasi-Socialist will not win election to the presidency of the United States. Whether atheist or Jew, does it really matter as far as unelectability for the Presidency in the U.S.?

Vermont is another country; a Jewish -Socialist can be Senator there but in few other places. What were they thinking? Fronting Sanders seems a put up, to make it APPEAR that we have a viable democracy in the United States. After all, it would be unseemly for Mrs. Clinton to run opposed. Too Banana Republic; too Soviet.

But  Mr. Sanders was never a viable candidate, and that he won as many votes as he did is a measure of the dissatisfaction of the electorate. A vote for Sanders was a no-confidence vote against Mrs. Clinton (who was the presumptive nominee from the start.) Sanders was the Democrat's Trump, and now they have none.

Who would be Mr. Sanders' constituents, he, an older white, Jewish man? He does not command the black vote nor the meso-feminist vote, which goes to the establishment Mrs. Clinton. He would not even corner the small Jewish vote.

Bernie got as far as he did on the disaffected lower-middle class white male and female vote -- precisely those who chose the non-establishment Trump on the Republican side.

You who voted for Sanders may think that spending their time also disdaining Trump was time well spent, but you have no candidate now. You drank the cherry Kool Ade Mrs. Clinton mixed for you, and now you have nothing. For the liberal True Believers, the best they can say now is, weakly, "We must not have a Republican".

It is a measure of the yearning of the Democratic base for something other than the Clinton dynasty that Mr. Sanders was able to garner such a following, and a damning reveal of the desperation of the Clinton group to even attempt the smear of Mr. Sanders.

Jews in the U.S. may hold positions of authority which exploit their humor, intelligence, wit and capabilities. You may have your Rahm Emanuels, Judah Benjamins and Admiral Hyman Rickovers. Jews have won many Nobel and Pultizer Prizes, served as Supreme Court justices and served admirably in the armed forces (though after World War II they often could not be hired in the peacetime industries in which they had distinguished themselves during war because of anti-Semitism.) Hillary Clinton's daughter is married to a Jew. They may be doctors and lawyers, but not Indian chiefs.

Anti-semitism is the last great unbreeched bigotry in this nation, but we do not recognize it because Jews' successes are so outsized to their small numbers.

The boundaries to holding the office of Presidency will be breached in the order in which they were laid: First, a black man (15th Amendment), then a woman (19th Amendment). But before a Jew will be every other minority. Today, an Arab-descended Muslim man would be a good choice, a sort of holding out of the olive branch ("Sorry about that whole war thing.") Following Barack Hussein Obama, it is not far-fetched.

However, he will have to be Muslim in the way that Louisiana Governor Piyush "Bobby" Jindal is Indian: fully Anglicized, Hart Schaffner Marx, hair waxed and parted on the side. This will demonstrate the movement toward homogenization which is a necessary good today.

So it will be a woman after the first black President (who was quick to assure voters that he was Christian, and not Muslim, like his father and stepfather.) But should it be this woman, so freighted with problems of her own making, done in the name of clawing her way to the top?

In light of the recent revelations, Mrs. Clinton shows herself to be despotic and tyrannical, moreso than her Republican opponent has ever had the opportunity to be. She should be held to account, versus making her lady in waiting take the fall.

But this, the press will not allow. They have made our choice for us.

[cross-posted @ milpub.]

Labels: , , , ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Once again I find myself humbled by your intellect and insights. Much to ponder here.

I like talking to people of all ages, stations in life and perspectives, generally. In my admittedly limited sample population I find that young people with some college (I live in a college town) were very much for Sanders. They cared not a bit that he is Jewish. Never entered the equation. They say he was screwed by the evil witch. Interestingly, the women of this demographic don't care about Hillary as the first female POTUS. It doesn't mean anything to them b/c in their experience whatever disparity in women's rights may have existed in the past is gone. Evaporated. The young folks care about issues that are relevant to them. Period.

Which points to a larger truth. A lot of the things that progressives are "fighting for" are largely issues of the past. Their banner is anachronistic. They're really squeezing that fruit hard to get the last drop of juice out of it.

Now some say Trump is also a throwback. I think that is slander. He is addressing the important issues of the times, ex; immigration, terrorism, or more importantly immigration+terrorism, the economy+deficit and rampant political corruption.

Aside from any judgment as to whether or not his solutions are effective, moral or whatever; he is at least speaking to what is on people's minds *and is relevant*. Clinton is not. With her it's all retro all the time. So she appeals to the old liberals of the 60s and 70s and maybe early 80s gen. That said, she has demographics on her side. Baby boomers are a big block. To me that just evidences her cynicism. We know she doesn't really believe it.

Who really believes that, in this day and age of Obama, black generals, doctors, lawyers, actors, sports stars, etc., white racism is, in any significant way, holding back African Americans and that police are out to genocide them? That's civil rights era retro. When was the last time you read about a gay person being beaten or killed for being gay - other than when the Muslim slaughtered a nightclub full? Muslims that Clinton wants to bring in because diversity.

Clinton is a throw back. She panders to achieve that which has already been achieved. Too many citizens are not fooled, despite what terrible labels are assigned to them.


Friday, August 5, 2016 at 9:57:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

Avedis: Too kind.

Agreed: "A lot of the things that progressives are 'fighting for' are largely issues of the past." Today, yesterday's events are very old news, indeed. Of course, G. Santayana's warning still holds, and ignorance of the past is a great hobbling of so many citizens.

What has not been forgotten is the disdain which academia and pop culture has inculcated toward the white male over decades. However, as decay sets in to the society, we move on to new concerns, as you say. The nomination of Trump is a very powerful statement in a still-functioning democracy.

What has surprised me in the last few days is the glimmer of understanding being voiced by some liberals that perhaps we have taken the wrong road with all of the hatred being spewed by the press.

Robert Parry wrote (after a groveling opening):

"[T]his Trump bashing also has dangerous implications because some of his ideas deserve serious debate rather than blanket dismissal."

Amazing. It took this person only a year+ to come to this realization re. the man who may well be our next President. But still, he is one of the few.

Saturday, August 6, 2016 at 1:27:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous David said...

I am not in the least bit surprised that Democratic insiders attempted to sabotage an outsider candidate. It is interesting to me that they were apparently so much better at it than Republican insiders were. I'm not sure what to think on that but maybe part of it is that alienated groups also had Trump to pick from and found him more appealing than Sanders, I guess.

I don't envy you your next four years, though. If you think it's bad that someone would criticize their opponent's religion, presumably it also irks you when someone claims that it would be a conflict of interest for a fellow American with the wrong national ancestry to judge cases involving their companies in court, to pick an entirely non-hypothetical example.

Or one who implies that their opponent should be assassinated. Or who feels that what America really needs is more proactive use of nuclear weapons.

All I can say is what I've said before, which is that anyone who thinks a billionaire real estate investor is a threat to the status quo is actually going to threaten the status quo in any way that you will find appealing is dreaming.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 8:04:00 PM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

Well, you've got it right, David, we've become an irked, knee-jerk Republic. There is precious little reason being demonstrated in the press, and emotion rules. Pity -- the presidency is serious business.

Especially disappointing for me is that I find no quarter on the liberal-Democratic side. These inflamed people resemble nothing I can identify as sensible, and their hatred and madness is palpable, even through the barrier of the written word.

Per your last para: It's just like with Obama's "hope' and "change" thing. Not.

Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 11:09:00 PM GMT-5  
Anonymous David said...

The hatred on the left is palpable? From what I gather the RNC held a trial in absentia of Hillary Clinton complete with chants she should be locked up. I hesitate to draw the too easy comparison to 1984.

I hope you won't take my comments as a defence of Clinton; I'm taking a contrarian perspective here the same way I do the opposite direction with several friends of mine who have become inexplicably enamored with Clinton. The problem I see is that America is being torn apart by political sectarianism in a way I don't remember ever seeing before. I would like to believe that right-wingers who were so critical of Democrats for being led by the nose towards supposed "hope and change" eight years ago would be a little less inclined to eat up an absurd populist-authoritarian message of their own from a wealthy showman, but I guess that's how it works.

As I say, I don't envy you the next four years, whichever happens in November. I feel as if we're re-watching the end of the Roman Republic here, frankly, and it's not a nice feeling.

Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 12:24:00 AM GMT-5  
Blogger Lisa said...

I appreciate your perspective, and yes, the corrosive and hateful partisanship can achieve nothing good.

There is great frustration in this country, but people seem only to know how to pull into their own caves of similars. As Toffler and others warned, the social platforms which connect us will also rive us.

Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 11:39:00 PM GMT-5  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home