Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show, featuring yours truly and Brian O'Neil, is a fascinating exploration of American politics, current and former. Brian and I talk extensively about the state of Democratic race for the presidency in the wake of the (abortive?) Iowa Caucuses. The picture among the Dems has become, if anything, even more confused...and I for one can't wait to see which of these stumblebums limps over the finish line!
In addition, Brian and I delve into some interesting historical questions, including the ill-fated alliance between Germany and Italy in WWII, the snow job that Colin Powell perpetrated at the United Nations in 2002, aiming to convince the world to support the invasion of Iraq, and, lastly, the dust-up between Franklin Roosevelt, the Supreme Court, and Congress in 1936-37. FDR's New Deal was under assault from the Supreme Court, which (rightly!) regarded it as unconstitutional. FDR therefore proposed forcing Justices to retire at age 70, as well as packing the Court with six additional Justices. In the end, it wasn't necessary, because the Supreme Court was bullied into compliance. The rest is history: the expansion of federal power, and the diminution of liberty, has been relentless ever since. And the Dems, in case you haven't noticed, are considering packing the Court anew. They can't abide the conservative-Trumpian majority on the Court -- and they're considering extreme measures to rectify it, if and when they re-establish Democratic control over the presidency and the Senate. You've been warned!!!
So listen in, America. You might like what you hear...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bml2B9M4uEw&feature=youtu.be
Dr. Waddy: I listened and I'll express my myself in parts; my computer is having another Dem like tantrum:
ReplyDeleteSanders won the popular vote but "Mayor P." got the delegates. Gee, now where does a Dem partisan align his or her self? If with Mayor P, then you endorse the 2016 election and thereby discredit the Dem tantrum since then. If with Sanders you discredit perhaps the Dems best hope. What to do? You are right in citing the Biden electoral loss as a sign of Dem confusion. This was supported today by a Dem Congress Rep. calling for Dem National Chair Perez (but, but, he's from an unassailable ethnic group yes?) to step down, saying "Our party is in disarray". Gad, what music to my ears.
One has to wonder, Jack, who owns the app? I know who owns it, but I am sure many folks could careless. I see Mayor P had his hand in the app as well...interesting things to ponder.
DeleteDr. Waddy: So Sanders is disappointed with Iowa Dems for the Iowa comedy. As you have pointed out, we have had the technology (enabled as I see it by Al Gore's "terribly unjust" rejection in 2000) to ensure greater accuracy in elections. Conspiracy then? Well, Bernie apparently was ambushed by that in 2016 but so it goes with anyone who crosses the Clintons(just imagine, our Dem enabled White House proprietors and eventual petty purloiners, for eight years, mind you). But gee, the Dems say only the perfidious GOP is capable of such outrage. As "revolutions" so often do, the "progressives" are once again devouring one another, as they would certainly do to us all had they the power.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: So the assured and frantic Dem spasmodic response to the reelection of our President will be Fraud!, Dishonesty!, Conspiracy! Well who are they to judge? They can't even manage their own little electoral carnival in Iowa!
ReplyDeleteHA! Thanks Jack, took the words right out of my mouth. smiles
DeleteDr. Waddy: A Cuomo draft;what a grotesque prospect. In the real America this monstrous walking ego has only to open his cavernous maw as a necessary prerequisite for consummate pontification and he loses most common sense Americans between Binghamton and Bakersfield.
ReplyDeleteNew York State is widely despised and its baleful influence is understandably feared. It is a model for a Dem dominated America, with disdainful elitists dictating to subjects no longer citizens. President Trump wisely refrained from lauding his New Yawk origin during his campaign. But Prince Cuomo would be unable to restrain himself; he would TOUT his oh so obvious patronizing New Yawk presumption. I can just see canny President Trump goading him into one of his self righteous quasi Shakespearean prerorations during the debates. He would probably be soundly rejected by a disgusted real America.
Dr. Waddy: Could Cuomo mend the acrimony? Oh, temporarily, yes. The nation would be so astonished that this pompous boor actually thinks he could be elected by a population for which he displays such obvious contempt that it would for a moment forget its understandable concern at the thought of his incipient dictatorship. Of course, if elected, he would "control" all politically incorrect expression with the speech criminalization laws he plans for NY in order to control that "terrorism" of which he disapproves.Maybe he'd reopen a few of those state prisons, the former inmates of which are on permanent vacation from responsibility in NY, the promised land now.
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy: Good street fighters like President Trump follow up on their advantage after having thrown a good block by going on offense with a well timed counterpunch. I fully expect him now to do a Joe Louis on the Dems, taking them to task for Biden/Ukraine and their futility in tasking him with false accusations.
ReplyDeleteI've never been able to figure why the Italian military performed so poorly in WWII. They had good equipment but they consistently displayed a reluctance to fight. (?)
Very much like your assertion that FDR was determined to expand government and pursue "progressive" (but untried-Jack) programs at the expense of compromising SCOTUS - SCOTUS itself! SCOTUS used to be the patronized friend of today's radicals and now that lawfulness once more prevails therein they are all too eager to make it their shill by "any means necessary", excepting that pesky democracy.
Linda: Very intriguing comments. If Mayor P can be implicated in the generation of the Iowa Dem farce I rejoice to imagine the the wolf like feeding frenzy which could engulf the emotionally fragile left.Thanx for your encouragement on my comments too.
ReplyDeleteLinda, I would regard Mayor Pete as the primary "casualty" of the Dem confusion in Iowa, and Biden as the primary beneficiary, although the delay in reporting results doesn't seem to have changed the narrative all that much: Buttigieg has got the big "mo" and Biden doesn't.
ReplyDeleteJack, I couldn't agree more -- the Dems' "disarray" is a beautiful sight to behold! It was, in my opinion, always inevitable. The party is riven by rivalries and ideological divides. Trump has given them the gift of superficial unity (in hatred) for the past three years. In a presidential election year, though, they actually have to define what they're FOR. It could get ugly. What am I saying? It MUST get ugly.
As for Cuomo, sure, to you and me he appears a buffoon and an extremist, but the question at a brokered convention would be: how would he appear to his fellow Dem insiders? He's keeping himself above the fray for the moment, and frequently lashing out at Trump (always a crowd-pleaser). He's beaten down the NY GOP to total irrelevance. I think it's possible that the national party could embrace him in 2020, in a fit of desperation. Possible, not likely, mind you.
Oh yes, the Dems will turn on their (formerly beloved) courts in a heartbeat! It's always a question of "What have you done for me lately?"
I too don't understand why the Italians fought so poorly in WWII, especially in defense of their own homeland. I suppose they must have regarded the war as imperialist presumption and a form of toadying to the Germans, who they never trusted or liked. Or maybe it's the wine. Who knows.
Dr. Waddy: On Cuomo: his power derives solely from NYC, a lala land engine unfound in the rest of the U.S., especially when its dismissive arrogance is concentrated on a numerically defeated upstate which is at ideological noncongruence with his screed. Oh yes, he's competent in piloting it but I think his influence, which could entrance the dreamy Dems, ends at the Mason Dixon line and that vast space between Binghamton and Bakersfield. Should he be summoned at the Dem convention, the delegates would be well advised to pack little oxygen canisters since Andrew's cavernous maw typically sucks 85% of the oxygen in the room upon opening!
ReplyDeleteCan he have learned from Hillary's "basket of deplorables" faux pas?. I doubt it. First, when he as much as opens his mouth he broadcasts New Yawk arrogance. I do not mean by this to suggest that all NYC people are of this presumptuousness. I will always revere NYC's reaction to 9-11.
But Andrew would make haste to laud his unconstitutional defiance of, by definition, law of the land, Immigration Law. And that would not sit well with the real America, oh no. But Andrew is incapable of doing otherwise and in Newton, Kansas this would not go well. Of course Andrew might decline to touch down from his "fly over" campaign to even deign to speak to the real and despised America. Nah, I don't think he can carry it off.
Dr. Waddy: But I would rejoice at the nomination of Prince Andrew, Sanders or Warren because they are such reckless and contemptuous leftist adventurers and its time to put that faction to political Appomattox. Their presumptuous and shameful sojourne in our main body politic must end with their consignment to irrelevancy (and oh how they appreciate that word from their "60's generated salad days - that was how they dismissed dissent back then). Pry them out of our government bureaucracies, deny them the Federal court system, deny them funding in our public universities! All this can commence in November if we remain but true to the reality that THIS is the final fight; this is Gettysburg, this is the Battle of the Bulge and we MUST remain true now because victory IS at hand, now! "Awhile for work and after holiday!" Shakespeare's Henry IV.
ReplyDeleteWOW Jack...like Dr. Waddy, I am in awe, smiles.
DeleteWow! Well said, Jack. I, for one, am inspired by your call to arms!
ReplyDeleteBelieve me, I hope you're right about what the real America would make of the prospect of PRESIDENT Andrew Cuomo. I don't regard him as a particularly strong potential candidate, but it's all relative, and we have to consider the alternatives, many of which would be worse. If there is a brokered convention, you have to ask yourself: who will look like a savior, or at least like someone who wouldn't break the Democratic Party wide open, in that hothouse environment? The Dems would be exhausted and distraught, and they'd be looking for someone who could calm them down and placate all wings of the party. A Governor is a good bet, but maybe not Emperor Andy?
Dr.Waddy and Linda If within the Dem party there is a faction yet able to work reason instead of emotion, they might turn to Buttagieg (whose disingenuous" moderation" stands in full contrast to his fully predictable radicalism once empowered) or, (if they can in some unlikely manner, control their emotions) Klobuchar (Who I expect to be Bernie's running mate.)
ReplyDeleteInteresting speculation! Buttigieg and Klobuchar are more electable. I agree with you on that, and they have embraced the rhetoric of moderation as well. That doesn't mean, however, that the consequences of their election would be any less devastating for the country. A subtle, sly, likeable Democrat could be more dangerous than a firebrand socialist, in fact.
ReplyDelete