It is All About Money

found online by Raymond

 
From Iron Knee at Political Irony:

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Some of us were hoping that once Donald Trump became the presumed GOP nominee, that the media would stop talking about him incessantly. But apparently, the media is as addicted to talking about Trump as ever. After being criticized for basically bankrolling Trump’s campaign by giving him massive amounts of free publicity, they are “making amends” by still giving him publicity, but now they are trying to balance things by giving him negative publicity.

The problem is, they are talking about things that don’t matter. For example, Saturday the New York Times published “Crossing the Line: How Donald Trump Behaved With Women in Private” where they interviewed more than 50 people who had either worked for Trump or observed his crude behavior. But this is not news. Does anyone not know that Donald Trump is a sexist pig? Hasn’t he made that abundantly clear over and over again?

The people who support Trump know it. In fact, I’d guess that some of them are happy that he doesn’t feel any need to be “politically correct” and says what he feels. And if you already dislike Trump, this article will not make any difference.

– More –
 

VP Condi Rice to Help Trump Make America Great Again

found online by Raymond

 
From Joe Hagstrom at MadMikesAmerica:

As Donald and I have pointed out, we don’t need a “unified” republican party to win the election. We already have the kooks, bigots and religious zealots behind us while Hillary doesn’t have the kooks in her party behind her. Hillary also struggles with working white men that identify with us republicans as we share their distrust of minorities and anything weird.

However, victory is not enough for Don and me. The only result we want is a complete landslide. It is with this in mind that to get that, and to keep our billionaires from funding a Mitt Romney third party run, we’re seriously considering former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice for the number 2 spot on the ticket.

Condi brings so much the ticket.

– More –
 

Complain about Everything Like They Complain about Primaries

found online by Raymond

 
From Last Of The Millenniums:

You can do the research yourself.

If Bernie wins then it’s ‘democracy in action’.

But whenever Bernie loses it’s ‘the process is rigged against us’.

I’m getting ready to accept a Donald Trump Presidency. Along with a Senate still in Republican hands as will be the House and little to no gains in State houses.

Why?

Bernie is getting ready to do as much harm to Hillary as he can.

Why?

Because Bernie doesn’t think he was ‘respected’.

– More –
 

DNC Will Add More Sanders Supporters To Key Committees

found online by Raymond

 
From Frances Langum at Crooks and Liars:

This is very good news, because history teaches that reform can come from within.

Raw Story reports that the DNC has agreed to put more Bernie Sanders supporters on the important platform and rules committees at the convention in Philadelphia:

Committee chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) reportedly agreed to add more Sanders backers to the 15-person drafting committee, after initially appointing three to the group.

– More –
 

Betraying American Allies

Representative J. Randy Forbes speaks of Chinese Uyghurs, Muslims captured in Afghanistan:

If we are fortunate enough to capture a terrorist who wants to kill innocent people, whether those people are innocent Americans, innocent British, innocent French, or innocent Chinese or some other nationality, if we’re fortunate to capture them before they kill those innocent people, we have two choices. The first choice we have is we can release them. The second choice we have is we can detain them.

Representative Jeff Miller agrees:

I ain’t never heard of a Uyghur before, until all this started coming up. And all I can tell is that they’re well fed, they’re healthy.

Their teeth are magnificent.

It would be hard to find a more militant group of Islamic warriors. They are aggressive in their hatred of communism, and they are fiercely pro‑American.

Pro‑American.

The Uyghurs are also a testament to conservative hostility against anything and anyone having anything to do with Islam.

Uyghurs have been under the domination of Communist China since Mao Zedong marched into Beijing in 1949. The Chinese government regarded the Tarim Basin, at the western edge of China, to be part of the People’s Republic. Uyghurs thought of themselves as a free and separate country, Eastern Turkestan. The Chinese government declared Uyghur separatists to be terrorists. Uyghurs regard themselves as anti‑communist, pro‑American, freedom fighters.

You can find Uyghurs all over Asia. They call Tarim Basin their homeland.

There was a time when Afghan insurgents were American allies. The United States channeled military weapons into their fight against Soviet occupation. That was when those Uyghurs who happened to be in the area joined up. They were happy to oppose the Soviet Union in league with the United States and their fellow Muslims. Members of the Taliban provided some of the training. Uyghurs did have one additional incentive. They hoped to take their new military knowledge back home for the fight for freedom against Chinese occupation and government oppression.

There was celebration after the Soviet Union withdrew and let the Afghan people have their country. Then the Taliban took over and provided shelter to Osama bin Laden’s extreme gang of thugs operating under a renegade offshoot of mainstream Islam.

After bin Laden’s September 11 attack on the United States in 2001, and the American invasion of Afghanistan, a reward was offered for turning in terrorists.

The problem with financial incentives is that shortcuts are sometimes taken. A fair number of terrorists captured were not terrorists at all. They had been falsely accused, turned in out of local grudges or pure greed. Not quite two dozen Uyghurs were among those accused and turned in for the reward.

They ended up in Guantanamo Bay.

The Bush administration quickly realized that a horrible mistake had been made. The Uyghurs were thoroughly investigated by military and intelligence experts and their innocence was confirmed. They were about as far from anti‑American terrorists as you could get.

The problem was finding a place to release them. The Chinese government wanted them back to be tried and dealt with as criminals. They made clear that any country wanting any relationship with China that was anything this side of overtly hostile had better treat the captives as terrorists. And that’s how they officially designated them: as terrorists.

After the American election in 2008, the new Obama administration began having a bit more success than the Bush administration had had. It still wasn’t easy. A few of the innocent detainees remained with no place to go. The administration wanted to experiment with placing a few in an existing Uyghur community in Northern Virginia.

Conservatives went ballistic. Obama was about to release confirmed terrorists to roam around right on the outskirts of Washington, DC.

Republicans knew they were terrorists for two reasons. The Communist government of China said they were terrorists. And President Obama said they were not.

…a terrorist who wants to kill innocent people, whether those people are innocent Americans, innocent British, innocent French, or innocent Chinese…

Newt Gingrich led the charge. He repeated the accusation by the Chinese government, calling the Uyghur prisoners terrorists. They should be sent back to China. If they were tortured by the Chinese government it should not be our problem. He demanded to know why Obama was so determined to coddle and release such dangerous people.

Rushan Abbas, a lawyer to the pro‑American Uyghurs, relayed a question from the Uyghur prisoners about Mr. Gingrich. It was a simple message:

Why does he hate us so much and say those kinds of things? He doesn’t know us.

In late December, 2013, the last of the innocent Uyghur captives found a new home in Central Europe. The Slovak Republic agreed to take them in. The Slovak government issued a statement. The Uyghurs, the official statement said, had:

“never been suspected of nor charged with a criminal act of terrorism”.

I thought about the long, needless, saga of the falsely accused Uyghurs as I heard the latest news.

During America’s occupation of Afghanistan, thousands of ordinary Afghans risked their lives helping American troops, diplomats, and agencies. For helping Americans, they have been targeted for death by the Taliban.

In 2009, a special visa program for Iraqis who had risked their lives helping Americans was extended to Afghanistan. Lives would be spared.

But this is an election year. Republicans in Congress don’t much care for refugees of any kind. They care even less for Muslims. And they make no distinction between pro‑American and anti‑American refugees. They do not care who risked their lives on behalf of the United States.

Republicans did agree that those who are risking death in Afghanistan and Iraq who were engaged in “sensitive” work for the United States, for them the promise of visas to safety will be a promise kept.

For those not in contact with sensitive work, well, life is unfair.

Like so much that comes from this Congress, the new standard of “sensitive” work seems like a perfect storm, a confluence of unfortunate conservative standards.

It is reflective of a new outburst of anti‑Muslim, anti‑refugee sentiment among the Republican base.

It is short‑sighted to the point of dull‑witted foolishness. What could be less in America’s interest than deliberately delivering into the bloody hands of our enemies those who had risked their lives to help us?

Most of all, most importantly, it is just plain wrong. The immorality is stark.

As wrong as it would have been to send innocent pro‑American Uyghurs into the torture chambers of mainland China.


Subscribe to the podcast via iTunes or RSS
to get episodes automatically downloaded.

 

Trump Problem 4: Who is this guy?

found online by Raymond

 
From Vixen Strangely at Strangely Blogged:

The revelation that Donald Trump posed under the pseudonyms “John Miller” and “John Barron” to plant stories about himself this past week are weird, right? Like, who brags about their love life to news outlets under an assumed name to build up their reputation as a “player”? Take this sort of thing:

“Actresses,” Miller said in the call to Carswell, “just call to see if they can go out with him and things.” Madonna “wanted to go out with him.” And Trump’s alter ego boasted that in addition to living with Maples, Trump had “three other girlfriends.”

– More –
 

A Damaging Can of Worms – Trump and Sanders

found online by Raymond

 
From Brij Khindaria at The Moderate Voice:

Donald Trump’s triumphs and Bernie Sanders’s successes have opened a can of worms already gnawing at the core of democracy as it is understood and practiced around the world.

So far, the US election looks like a circus trying to entertain rather than a democratic contest of alternatives to structure social, economic and political life in the world’s most influential nation around policies that supporters of each contestant can fight for.

Trump provokes incredulity and some guffaws while Sanders seeds twinges of the heart by evoking dreams of fairness that no nation has ever reached and few social philosophers think attainable.

Each might incite passions and fierce fervor among slices of America’s electorate and some onlookers around the world. But the damage being inflicted to the example and practice of democracy is enormous.

– More –
 

Will Trump Prove Worthy of Ryan?

found online by Raymond

 
From Wisconsin conservative James Wigderson:

There must be days when House Speaker Paul Ryan says to himself, “Self, what did you get yourself into now?”

While others were rushing to get on the Donald Trump bandwagon, Ryan said he wasn’t ready to endorse Trump yet. It’s understandable. Ryan publicly criticized Trump for his behavior during the campaign. Given the bizarre accusation by Trump that Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s father had something to do with the assassination of President John F Kennedy, it seems Ryan needed to do a little bit more yelling at the presumed Republican nominee.

– More –
 

Why I love Christians but Hate Christianity

found online by Raymond

 
From Anonymous, Guest Posting at The Life and Times of Bruce Gerencser:

As a good evangelical, I never believed in purgatory; that is until this year when I decided that I was already living there. I don’t mean in a religious sense, but rather in the sense that I am in neither one place nor the other.

For reasons I will come to, I have all but lost my faith. But, since I have a lovely wife and good friends who are Christians, I will never really be able to walk away.

I have read a few blogs written by former Christians. Nearly all of them are written by American ex-Christians. I am from the UK, and I believe that there are a number of cultural differences between churches in the UK and America. There are many flavours of Christianity, so I can’t really generalise, but what I do know is that my experience differs from that of many of people who have lost their faith.

– More –
 

The Brunch Davidians

found online by Raymond

From driftglass:

2007 was a bad year to be Beltway pundits or a Professional Reasonable Conservatives, The serial and spectacular failures of the Bush Administration were flaying all of their pretty words to confetti, and the Democrats — who were supposed to have been drive from power for 1,000 years — were suddenly back in control of Congress and setting their sights on the White House.

Leading this mad dash away from his own long record of unstinting support and praise of the Bush Administration was David Brooks, who suddenly rediscovered Edmund Burke on his way down the fire escape, across the alley and into the Emergency Both Siderist All-Occasion bunker, there to wait out the conflagration in comfort.

In that column, the early onset of Mr. Brooks’ own Republican Detachment Disorder are clearly evident here, along with his trademark sweeping ideological generalizations of people — “suburban, Midwestern and many business voters” — who Mr. Brooks has never actually met:

– More –