"Outgoing U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley insisted Thursday night that 'in America, our political opponents are not evil,' a shark rhetorical break from her boss..."
Politico has corrected the mistake. Now, it's just "a sharp rhetorical break." That's no fun.
I love the idea of "shark rhetoric."
पोस्ट्स
१३९ टिप्पण्या:
Would have been funny if the corrected to a "sharp rhetorical beak." Goes with the Talking Heads song too.
Then they shouldn’t support evil things.
Trump loves sharks. He watches "Shark Week" On TV.
Haley - Like Flake, Corker, and Sasse is always trying to win brownie points from the MSM.
As someone one who has been deep in the in pit of evil, she should know better.
Needs a Chondrichthyite Politics tag
Unfortunately, she’s wrong. There is nothing about Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris or Diane Feinstein or Hillary Clinton or Chuck Schumer that is anything other than evil in its purest form.
Oh, give me a break. It's a sharp rhetorical break from Trump to say your political opponents aren't evil?
It goes kind of like this:
"Trump says we're evil! That's appalling and dangerous!"
"Um, you guys have been calling the right Nazis since during WWII."
"That's different. You deserve it."
I wonder if shark rhetoric can be used against insect politicians?
Her comedy is no good. Joke 1, joke 2, joke 3 ...
Trump doesn't think people are evil either. They're just opponents in a world run by the media and its idiot audience.
The inability to read Trump is amazing, but I guess it's aimed at the same audience.
I wonder if shark rhetoric can be used against insect politicians?
That's more an archerfish thing.
On the subject of sharks I took my son to see “Jaws”. During the opening credits an overweight kid strolled down to his seat at the front of the theater. He had the biggest tub of popcorn and the biggest soda the snack bar sold. Hilarity ensued and the whole movie was a hoot .
And that’s my shark story.
A "sharp rhetorical brake." Like I had on my Dodge Neon.
She made biting comments.
Trump uses "shark rhetoric." If you thrash about in response it only draws him nearer.
I like Nikki Haley. She's great. A highly successful, non-hysterical woman. I think she's a real Indian too -- not one of those faux Indians. Damn that Christopher Columbus!
In a sharp rhetorical break from Democrats, Nikki Haley says political opponents are not evil.
FIFY.
I think that categorizing your opponents as "evil" is not without it's pitfalls. If someone is evil, you can basically do whatever you want to them and be justified `cuz they're evil after all.
Traditionally the left has categorized many people on the right as "evil". This allows groups like Antifa to (at least attempt to) justify violence. It justifies the harassment and haranguing of "evil" Republican figures in public places. For themI imagine it feels good, they feel righteous in expressing their anger.
But the problem is, from a persuation standpoint it can often feel dismissive. If you're accussing someone of being "evil" simply for voting for someone or holding a particullar position, your not really engaging with them and you're not really making an argument. People don't like to be accused of being evil and obviously most people don't believe they're evil. So you have to be sure to make a clear distinction between the leaders and the followers (the political leaders are the "evil" ones and the followers are just ignorant). This has it's problems too, since you're saying the followers are stupid I guess.
shark rhetoric
Making deeply cutting remarks with a big toothy smile.
Republicans Pols love attack their own and play tone police.
The Democrats NEVER do. You can't even get them to disavow Antifa!
Its one reason, you got Trump.
More projection from the MSM.
R party as always been full of Little Lord Fontleroy's - more interested in praise from MSM, and wagging their moralistic finger at their fellow Republicans - then winning.
Mitt will be in the Senate in Jan 2019. Look for him to hook up with Sasse and do to "Virtue signaling two step" every night on TV.
Also, Mitt will be giving us him pompous opinions on foreign Policy. Look for attacks on Putin and talk of "America's role in the World".
If they are the Clinton Crime Family - they are evil.
BTW - where is Jeff Sessions? The Clintons must pay for the criminality.
We have a government of jaws, not of men.
Latest CNN Banner: Bolton and Kelly get into shouting match over Border Crossing.
Why Bolton is getting involved in Border security is anyone's guess.
Where is Jeff sessions? Been wondering that for 2 years. Maybe he thinks he's still in the Senate, and works 6 hours a day, 3 days a week.
From Nikki Haley's speech:
"Two years ago, Trump was here and made some waves with his remarks, so last year you went with Paul Ryan, who’s a boy scout and that’s fine but a little boring," Haley said to guests at the Alfred E. Smith Dinner.
"So this year, you wanted to spice things up again. I get it, you wanted an Indian woman but Elizabeth Warren failed her DNA test. Actually, when the president found out I was Indian-American, he asked me if I was the same tribe as Elizabeth Warren."
The gal is good looking and funny? And she's sufficiently right-wing? Yowzah!
The leftwinger MSM paint everything to make Trump look bad, or blame him for things that have nothing to do with him.
"Queequeg no care what god made him shark,' said the savage, agonizingly lifting his hand up and down; 'wedder Fejee god or Nantucket god; but de god wat made shark must be one dam Ingin.'"
I'm sure there's an Elizabeth Warren joke in there somewhere.
I’m both happy and sad that I am not the first commenter to draw a line from insect politics to shark rhetoric.
Judicial Watch: Federal Judge ‘Shocked’ Clinton Aide Granted Immunity by Justice Department
How sharker than a serpent's tooth.
rcocean said...
Latest CNN Banner: Bolton and Kelly get into shouting match over Border Crossing.
Why Bolton is getting involved in Border security is anyone's guess.
****************
The National Security Advisor being involved in border security issues?
Nahhhhh....
Examples of shark rhetoric.
“Need a loan?”
“Give me a week.”
“Rack ‘em!”
Where is Jeff sessions? Been wondering that for 2 years. Maybe he thinks he's still in the Senate, and works 6 hours a day, 3 days a week.
I really think that is it. Before Lyndon Johnson, the Senate was a joke. Fred Allen had "Senator Foghorn" as a character on his radio show.
They are headed back to being a joke and fast,
Watch out boy she'll chew you up. She's a maneater
Trump must replace Sessions. Is there anyone who would be perfect?
In modern prosody, whatever that is, a usually rhetorical break in the flow of sound in the middle of a line of verse has a funny name.
@Doc K,
"They are headed back to being a joke and fast"
On a PR level and productivity level, Yes, I agree. There are too many goofs there, starting with Cory "Spartacus" Booker and Elizabeth "Wigwam" Warren.
But, on a structural/Constitutional level, I actually disagree. The Left now hates the Senate. It's unDemocratic, they scream, because California has the same number of Senators (2) as Wyoming.
It's as if they just woke up to a history lesson about the compromises made to create this nation.
So, I've become a very, very big fan of the Senate, simply based on its structural role within the Constitution, and because the Left now sees it as a target.
Solzenhitsyn wrote that the line between good and evil passes through every human heart. And he was not mistaken. But there is a world of difference between the strategies and tactics that are effective when you are dealing with people who share your objectives but disagree about means, and the methods you can and indeed must use to deal with those who regard you as "deplorable", and intend to render you helpless so that they can ignore your interests.
But, on a structural/Constitutional level, I actually disagree. The Left now hates the Senate. It's unDemocratic, they scream, because California has the same number of Senators (2) as Wyoming.
Of course, they ignore Rhode Island vs Texas.
The Senate can restore its reputation by getting with the program. Will it ?
The Johnson biography makes the point about how LBJ made it significant. He went the wrong way but he was a force of nature.
I used to get worried when the Commiedia would publish stories claiming that all of Trump's horses and all of his men were at each other's throats, hate him and each other and regard him as a reckless idiot. Now I just laugh. They wish.
So only Trump is evil. Ok, got it.
Oh, the shark, babe, has such teeth, dear
And he shows them pearly white
Just a jackknife has old Macheath, babe
And he keeps it, out of sight
You know when that shark bites with his teeth, babe
Scarlet billows start to spread
Fancy gloves, though, wears old Macheath, babe
So there's never, never a trace of redNow on the sidewalk, ooh, sunny morning, uh-huh
Lies a body just oozin' life
Eek, and someone's sneakin' 'round the corner
Could that someone be Mack the Knife?
Good Nikki Haley speech, which you won't hear about from Politico.
"The Johnson biography makes the point about how LBJ made it significant. He went the wrong way but he was a force of nature."
I love this topic, one last thought. For nearly 2 centuries, the filibuster was 67 votes. In fact, the 60-vote filibuster threshhold only came in 1975.
This means that, in essence, 33 southern Dems in the solid south had a veto power over every piece of legislature this country had.
Now, we all know this effective veto power had the terrible effect of thwarting and delaying civil rights. That's pretty well documented. But think of all the other potentially crappy laws it prevented? It probably prevented the US from becoming socialist decades ago, who knows?
Yay to the Senate! (except for civil rights obstruction)
"Haley's statement was an apparent rebuke of language used by Trump"
So Politico assumed her words were directed at Trump. Being a diplomat she said "both sides," but it's pretty obvious that the hate and "mob" action has been 99.9% from the left. Althouse shouldn't fall for Politico spin.
Literally Hitler could not be reached for comment.
Truer words
This means that, in essence, 33 southern Dems in the solid south had a veto power over every piece of legislature this country had.
Richard Russell was the "Dean of the Senate" and very racist. His personal story was quite impressive but the racism was a major factor. Many of those Senate southern Democrats were very important in other things like national defense.
Lister Hill and Walter George were very powerful Senators. A lot was seniority as they served multiple terms.
This one also deserves a "civility bullshit" tag. Soldiers are often able to retain their mutual respect while fighting to the death. This is because they recognize that their opponents are merely defending their own interests, and can admire the courage and self-sacrifice with which they do so, while still hoping fervently for their failure. Anyone admire Chuck Schumer's courage?
I'm guessing the headline writer conflated "sharp" and "snark" to get "shark".
Yay to the Senate! (except for civil rights obstruction)
Goldwater also had a principled objection to the Civil Rights Act, that it shouldn't outlaw private discrimination, given freedom of association. Maybe he was wrong, but it's been a slippery slope since then, with the idea of 'public accommodations' extended to customized wedding cakes, and the numbers of privileged groups being expanded (gays, transgenders, the obese, etc., etc.).
Maybe we should call them bitter clingers instead. Or deplorable. Maybe punch back twice as hard. Or get in their faces. Bring a gun when they bring a knife. Kick them even, when they go low.
But by all means, let's not call them evil.
By focusing on the Senate they're also ignoring the House, which is apportioned by population. And how the House and Senate balance and check each other.
Much more preferable to dictatorships, in which the left calls out Trump for "admiring" dictators, while ignoring people like Thomas Friedman who admires China for the way it gets things done.
This is why it's impossible to take political commentators seriously. Like when two New York Times editorial columns are paired that take the exact opposite position, based on whoever's in power.
There’s a Fonzie joke here... somewhere.
33 southern Dems in the solid south had a veto power -
Except there weren't 33 Solid South democrats. There were 22 senators from the 11 states of the Old Confederacy, plus Md and Kentucky.
That's 22 from the "Solid South" plus maybe 4 Senators from Kentucky and WV.
BAG: Yeah. Demographic trends show the senate will be the last refuge of the deplorables going forward. Funny, you always hear about Ca and Wy, but the MSM don't make that same point with Rhode Island and Delaware.
@James K,
Goldwater also had a principled objection to the Civil Rights Act, that it shouldn't outlaw private discrimination, given freedom of association. Maybe he was wrong, but it's been a slippery slope since then, with the idea of 'public accommodations' extended to customized wedding cakes, and the numbers of privileged groups being expanded (gays, transgenders, the obese, etc., etc.).
Totally true. I would confine anti-discrimination laws and practices and benefits ONLY to blacks, since they were truly oppressed as a matter of public policy. However, the Left has slowly morphed this into the grand "quest for diversity" and "multi-culturalism," which is bad for the country and unnecessary.
A strong civil rights bill would've been passed in 1958, if it hadn't been for the Democrat Filibuster and the ability of strong, Southern Chairmen to bottle up Bills and delay floor votes.
Its amazing that people give LBJ and the Demcorats credit for "Civil Rights" when its the Republicans who were always pushing it, and would've passed it under Ike - except the Demcorats stopped it.
IRC, except for Goldwater and a couple others all the R's voted for the 1965 Civil Rights bill.
I am unavoidable reminded of this which is somewhere every systems guy has been.
Haley breaks with Trump: how? Did Trump ever call his opponents evil, racist, or fascist?
But a little "rhetorical break" is OK, if she is positioning herself for outreach to the squishy Althouses, who like the appearance of civility, especially to keep mean men in line, even as they claim to call BS on civility BS. If Haley can move to the center without turning against us deplorables, she has a future.
That's 22 from the "Solid South" plus maybe 4 Senators from Kentucky and WV.
Good points.
Also, when the Goldwater vote is discussed, we should remember Hubert Humphrey saying that, if the law resulted in quotas, he would eat the bill.
Yes, maybe it was Haley preaching "civility"? Or may it was Haley's "dirty play" on Trump at second base?!
I am also reminded of this bit from Robyn Bennis's By Fire Above an excellent flintlock-punk adventure (though convention forces a few nods to PC):
At this, the duke looked at Bernat, who only bowed and said, "As you say, Your Grace."
His gaze swung back to Josette. "And you on the ground, going on hunts. Why aren't you in the air?"
She very much wanted to remind him that he'd invited her to this hunt, and that such an invitation could not be refused. But Bernat helpfully whacked her in the ankle with his cane, to indicate the foolishness of such a course. "Mistral has six weeks of repairs ahead of her," she said instead. "And that figure assumes we'll have luftgas enough to float her, and spare parts to overhaul the steamjack."
He grunted. "Six weeks, eh?"
Josette looked him straight in the eyes. "If not longer. Apart from the crash, we took quite a thumping over Canard."
It seemed at first that he would grow angry, but then he grinned and said, "I hear that you also gave quite a thumping. In Vinzhalia, they're calling you `The Shark,' because you always get in close to bite. Did you know that?"
It occurred to Josette that any animal must get in close to bite-that, indeed, was practically part of the definition of biting. But she spoke respectfully. "I did not know that, Your Grace. By their fear, they honor me."
As a Tweeted to the NYT's if you want to decrease the "Whiteness" of the Senate, and make it more Representative of the Population just:
1) Split New York, Illinois, Florida, Texas and California into two states
2) Combined 6 states of New England into two.
3) Merge DC and Delaware with MD.
You'd get rid of 5 "racist" Northeastern states, and add 5 states with plenty minorities. Imagine Northern Illinois/Cook county or NYC/Long Island/Northern NJ as their own states.
"Also, when the Goldwater vote is discussed, we should remember Hubert Humphrey saying that, if the law resulted in quotas, he would eat the bill."
IRC, Ted Kennedy said the 1965 Immigration act would NOT result in large scale immigration nor change the demographic nature of the USA.
Its amazing how often these game-changing bills and government actions were sold to the American people with lies. I'm old enough to remember when people were still supporting Affirmative Action as just a temporary thing to help Black people make up for past discrimination.
Now, 40 years later, everyone is an AA baby except white and Asian men. And some Federal judge actually ruled that a state getting rid of AA was 'racist' and unconstitutional!
LOL - AA puts out a piece of evidence pushed by the wh*res at the Leftist Rag Politico.
Wow I've been called a Nazi, I guess that's OK and not "Evil". If that is AA's and Politico's interpretation of what Haley said and stands for - good luck with the next run for whatever political office she aspires to.
BTW, AA, since when is Politico the arbiter of truth?????
I look forward to Haley running against Hillary in 2024.
Haley is probably thinking that when she runs for President in 2020 she needs to look like the magnanimous leader compared to Warren.
Trump will be shocked when she primaries him and wins the nomination. That’s how Republicans are going to get rid of Trump.
My prediction.
The Left is ALWAYS full of shit when they talk about the Structure of the US Government or how Government processes.
Basically, whatever helps the D's at any particular moment they're for - and they immediately flip-flop to the opposite position when it hurts them.
And so, the NYT and WaPo constantly flip-flop on the Senate, or the Electoral College, or how we elect Senators, or balance of power between the 3 branches.
If the D's are the majority then the Filibuster is an "old, racist, relic of the past". If they're in the minority then its "a bulwark of the Republic" needed to prevent "The tyranny of the majority".
If she ever gets the Republican nomination in the future, Haley will learn that she, too, is literally the nth coming of Hitler.
Looks like Hillary is going to run again in 2020.
Be nice if democrats would reject her. Will they? Nah - corruption excusing runs deep.
The D's love the Senate when Delaware, Hawaii, and Six small NE states, give us 16 D Senators vs. 2 for Texas. But hate it when Alaska and 7 mountain/plain states give us 16 R Senators vs. 2 for Californian.
When the R's control the Federal Government, then the Liberals are all for "states rights" - otherwise its "only racists support states rights". when the LBJ/JFK were POTUS than we needed to give all the power to the Executive, when Nixon become POTUS, then the Liberals started talking about "The Imperial presidency".
Now, after worshiping judicial power for 60 years, the liberals are upset they can't get 5 Democrat appointed Judges and want to "pack the court".
Trump will be shocked when she primaries him and wins the nomination. That’s how Republicans are going to get rid of Trump.
You're making Trumpit look smarter with each post.
Well done.
Inga: "Trump will be shocked when she primaries him and wins the nomination. That’s how Republicans are going to get rid of Trump.
My prediction."
LOLOLOLOL
Jim at beat me to it.
I'll bet Inga read that in the lefty Gannett controlled "Military" Times....
Thought Haley had a little more sense than that. Just goes to show that you can't trust women in combat.
Haley knows she could be the odds on favorite in '24 with a base that is solid behind her based on what she has done so far.
No way she is stupid enough to follow Inga "wisdom".
And yes, I am sure she will be fully prepared, like every republican over the last 70 years, for the inevitable "literally Hitler" and "female impersonator" attacks.
"Female Impersonator" was the Gloria Steinem and lefty chick attack on Kay Bailey Hutchison.
Never mind how the Republicans are going to get rid of Trump. How will the Democrats get rid of Hillary?
“Never mind how the Republicans are going to get rid of Trump. How will the Democrats get rid of Hillary?”
Have her visit the Saudi Embassy? I hear they’re good at making a body disappear.
“No way she is stupid enough to follow Inga "wisdom".”
She couldn’t wait to make Trump look like an idiot.
“You're making Trumpit look smarter with each post.
Well done.”
Trumpit is smarter than you.
"The gal is good looking and funny? And she's sufficiently right-wing? Yowzah!"
The gal is good looking and funny? and she's sufficiently left-wing? Impossible"
Have her visit the Saudi Embassy? I hear they’re good at making a body disappear.
The Saudi's would be wondering where all their staff went. Hillary claims ignorance.
I am also reading the Johnson biography, possibly because Michael K mentioned it months ago. I can't remember now where I first heard of it.
The Southern filibuster always needed a few conservative Midwestern Republicans to get to the necessary 36 votes (1/3 of 96 Senators in the 1950s). Ike's AG put forward a civil rights bill in 1957 that had all the features of the later bills in 1964. Johnson, majority leader of the Senate, arranged to cut it down to a toothless voting rights measure and then got it passed with the approval of Richard Russell and other Southerners. it was intended to make Johnson electable while not hurting segregation.
So it's true that the South was responsible for no civil rights bills passing for 82 years. But a few Republicans were implicated too.
They are, indeed, evil. Very much so.
See Inga and Ritmo, for instance.
"If you're accussing someone of being "evil" simply for voting for someone or holding a particullar position"
Depends on what that particullar position is, doesn't it? All evil positions are particullar.
I bet the elite intelects here have probably never seen Sharknado , much less the great Sharknado II. These art films perfectly describe today’s Democrat political tactics.
So if someone opposes her that means he's not evil?
Haley's tenure at the UN certainly looks like an effort to build foreign policy bona fides ahead of a potential presidential run. A Haley presidency would most likely be a step back for Trumpism. She had been critical of him during the primaries and part of her SOTU response was devoted to rebuking part of Trump's immigration policy. She's hawkish and interventionist at at time when the US needs to be disentangling itself and winding down from the Middle East.
As for the Senate, of course it is undemocratic. It was designed to be antidemocratic. The Constitution is antidemocratic. The Founding Fathers were antidemocratic. Like any good liberals up through the 19th century, they were highly skeptical (if not outright hostile) to democracy. The issues they were concerned with, monarchies, hereditary aristocracies, and established churches aren't really salient in the modern world.
“They are, indeed, evil. Very much so.”
You’re not evil, you’re just nuts.
(ominous music)
(Doorbell)
"who's there?"
"Candygram"
John Henry
J. Farmer,
I too am highly skeptical of mob rule.
A/K/A "democracy"
John Henry
This is news?
Nope. Politico got it wrong. She was talking about the Democrats and included all people just to be fair about it.
THEOLDMAN
Inga...Allie Oop said...
Haley is probably thinking that when she runs for President in 2020 she needs to look like the magnanimous leader compared to Warren.
Trump will be shocked when she primaries him and wins the nomination. That’s how Republicans are going to get rid of Trump.
My prediction.
I am just posting this here because even Inga is going to realize it is truly a stupid thing to say and it will probably be deleted at some point.
johnhenry100:
I too am highly skeptical of mob rule.
A/K/A "democracy"
To be fair to the founding fathers, they were trying to solve a pretty difficult problem. How do you reconcile individual rights with rule by consent?
Inga...Allie Oop said...
“They are, indeed, evil. Very much so.”
You’re not evil, you’re just nuts.
And a Nazi. And RAAACCISTT! And literally Hitler. Etc...
Remember if you support the second amendment Inga thinks you deserve to get shot.
Haley has to be careful, of course, that she doesn't piss off the deplorables. Whether she wants to take on Trump in 2020, or become VP instead of Pence, or simply build up her $$ for now, is an open question. But she's got "it," and politicians who have "it" can go far. Bill did and could, Hill didn't and couldn't. W and O did to some extent (though I myself happened to be allergic to the O it factor). If Oprah runs, the GOP will need Haley for sure.
tcrosse said...
I look forward to Haley running against Hillary in 2024.
I assume you expect them to find a liver donor for Hillary. There are sure to be lots of people to "volunteer" to donate organs to keep Hillary's failing alcohol poisoned wreck going.
The democrats will not nominate any of the people that are currently on the list.
Bloomberg is the most likely winner at this point.
The republican party is unified now and the voters hold control of the party. There wont be anymore traitors like Romney or McCain winning the nomination for a while.
That means democrats will not be able to slip any mediocre minds like Obama or Hillary through. Obama and Hillary could beat a Romney because the base knew what he was.
They will have to find more intelligent people. Spartacus and Jerry Brown's Mistress have demonstrated repeatedly they are very mediocre minds. Warren is obviously finished. Biden is the epitome of mediocre. Gillebrand is pathetic.
It will be someone not in the normal crew.
What about Pence stepping aside in 2020 and Haley taking his place?
Leftists heads would explode.
Trump's legacy to the Left: A 2024 minority female REPUBLICAN candidate for POTUS.
Lefties will have to come up with a much better Kavanaugh-tyoe smear. Maybe something like the Indian government trying to steal the election from Nikki.
Did Trump ever call his political opponents evil? Maybe he did and I missed it. Anyone have some examples? I guess you could argue that calling the fake news media an enemy of the people comes close, but fake news is a bad thing.
If Nikki Haley is the best the deplorables can hope for, we're doomed.
Our 2 year old grand daughter was recently telling us about going on a bear "hut" (she meant "hunt"). If you don't have kids (or grandkids) under 5, do a search on Youtube for "Going on a Bear Hunt. (or click here.)
Anyway she kept telling us that the bear had "shark teeth" but of course with 2 year old enunciation, we couldn't tell if she meant "sharp" teeth or "shark" teeth.
Either way, she insisted that she was not scared.
"Haley - Like Flake, Corker, and Sasse is always trying to win brownie points from the MSM."
Yeah, that's it. That's always it with any cuck who disagrees with Trump.
Muh principles.
If Nikki Haley is the best the deplorables can hope for, we're doomed.
If that's the best comment you can come up with, we're doomed.
J. Farmer,
I didn't mean my comment to be in anyway critical of yours. Just in case it may have sounded that way.
I fully agree that the founding fathers had a tough job finding that fine balance between representative govt but not mob rule (democracy)
That we have the oldest constitution in the world is a testament to how good a job they did.
Also that only 14 changes have been needed in 130 years or so. Plus the prohibition round trip.
Remember too that each of the states was an independent state (country) too. Each with their own cultural ethnic and political heritage.
The guys who put this together were like gods in their wisdom.
John Henry
"Republicans Pols love to attack their own and play tone police.
The Democrats NEVER do. "
Well this may not be an "attack" but it still surprised me.
I thought it was politically stupid too (but hey, I'm all for things that lead to Sinema losing in the Senate race.)
@johnhenry100:
I didn't mean my comment to be in anyway critical of yours. Just in case it may have sounded that way.
Not at all.
I agree they did a remarkable job, but the Constitution is changed by means other than the formal amendment process. Judicial interpretation, for example.
I don't know if Trump ever called his domestic political opponents "evil", but having watched them at work on the Kavanaugh nomination, I call them "evil".
But I agree with Haley that we "shouldn't" call our domestic political opponents "evil".
But it's a two-way street.
As for "President Haley", I don't think UN Ambassador has ever been a stepping stone to the Presidency. Trump is going to run for reelection in 2020, and Haley would be crazy to try to take the nomination away from him, unless something very strange happens in the next two years. In 2024, Pence will likely be the front runner for the nomination (Nixon after Ike, Bush after Reagan, Whats-his-Name after Clinton). If Haley wants to challenge that, she's going to have to do something for the next couple of years. She's already been Governor of SC, and Republicans hold both Senate seats, so her best bet is for Lindsey Graham to retire so she can run for his seat in 2020. If she wins, she'll be well situated to get the Republican nomination to be the first woman President.
But the chances are that the 2024 Presidential election will be won by the Democrat nominee (Kennedy after Ike; Nixon after Kennedy-Johnson; Carter after Nixon-Ford; GW Bush after Clinton; Obama after GW Bush; Trump after Obama). Reagan ended Carter's Presidency after one term, and GWH Bush extended the Republican Presidency for one term after Reagan, but then Clinton ended GHW Bush's Presidency after one term. My guess is that after the Democrat nominee in 2020 (Hillary, Pocohontas, Harris, Whoever) loses in 2020, the Democrats will get their act in gear and nominate an electable liberal, and Haley or Pence or Whoever will lose.
Shark Rhetoric in 1959
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyM7AJiC0Nk
Jamal Khashoggi case: Journalist 'died after fight' - Saudi TV
It said deputy intelligence chief Ahmad al-Assiri and Saud al-Qahtani, senior aide to Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, were dismissed over the affair.
The news bulletin said 18 Saudi nationals have now been detained as part of the continuing probe.
As was expected, the Saudis are now conceding that Khashoggi was killed in the consulate in Istanbul. This course of action had been looking ever more likely for the last several days.
Francisco: "Trump's legacy to the Left: A 2024 minority female REPUBLICAN candidate for POTUS."
It would take about 15 seconds for the lefties/LLR's to declare Nikki to be neither a "real woman" nor a "real minority".
She would be "White-hispanic"-ed so fast your head will spin.
THEN, she will be Hitler-ed.
J. Farmer said:
"As for the Senate, of course it is undemocratic. It was designed to be antidemocratic. The "Constitution is antidemocratic. The Founding Fathers were antidemocratic. Like any good liberals up through the 19th century, they were highly skeptical (if not outright hostile) to democracy."
******************
Pure, direct democracy is majority rule, often aka mob rule. The Framers deliberately chose a "representative democracy" aka a Republic to thwart such tendencies. A direct democracy in the US would mean political dominance by about ten states; the rest would count for nothing. The electoral College and 2-Senators per state were to prevent that from occurring and to give every state real power in national affairs. THOSE were issues the Framers worried about, and they very much are "salient in the modern world"
J. Farmer: "The issues [the Framers] were concerned with, monarchies, hereditary aristocracies, and established churches aren't really salient in the modern world."
Lessee....two Adamses...two Roosevelts...a string of Kennedys in national and state offices..ditto the Bushes.. two Clintons...Michelle thinking of running for office...
Not salient at all!
snort
Anyone following the REAL golden showers story involving Claire McCaskills scumbag husband?
There is no amount of spinning Inga and LLR Chuck can do to pull her ample fat out of the fire now.
@Jay Elink:
The electoral College and 2-Senators per state were to prevent that from occurring and to give every state real power in national affairs. THOSE were issues the Framers worried about, and they very much are "salient in the modern world"
That had to do with the practical realities of actually forming a national government. On an ideological level, the founders were largely elite men highly skeptical of democracy.
Not salient at all!
Political nepotism is endemic. That is not quite the same thing as the kinds of hereditary aristocrats the founders had in mind. This was mostly grounded in their belief that a legitimate government obtained legitimacy through the consent of the governed and not through a divine right obtained through heredity.
Whatever the arguments over states rights versus federalism or the apportionment of representation, the arguments are not grounded in fears of monarchy or the establishment of an official church.They are about one political party fearing loss of power to another political party.
"The Facebook Hacker Pro software saves everyone’s time and money."
--
Awesome. Like, when hacking someone's Facebook, you don't want to spend any more time than necessary.
Blogger Drago said...
Anyone following the REAL golden showers story involving Claire McCaskills scumbag husband?
I guess he is the one that owns the airplane she uses and thinks every "normal person" uses.
I understand he has made millions from her office. She was the child of two politicians.
As was expected, the Saudis are now conceding that Khashoggi was killed in the consulate in Istanbul.
You, of course, assume the royal family was behind this.
The saintly Iranian mullahs would never think of such a thing.
@Michael K:
You, of course, assume the royal family was behind this.
I didn't say anything about assuming "the royal family was behind this."
The saintly Iranian mullahs would never think of such a thing.
Never said anything like that either.
BTW, today's latest lefty BS hottest of the hot takes is from none other than LLR Chuck's "professional" lefty hack "journalist" John Harwood.
Tom Elliott
@tomselliott
Follow Follow @tomselliott
More
NBC's @JohnJHarwood claims that @realDonaldTrump referencing "mobs" is actually racist code for "non whites," "immigrants" and "terrorists (?)"
There you go LLR Chuck!
Just another in an endless stream of lefty hack journalists praised by our very own LLR!
Michael K: "You, of course, assume the royal family was behind this."
It gets better of course.
Saudi Royal Family: "The family is estimated to comprise 15,000 members, but the majority of the power and wealth is possessed by a group of about 2,000 of them"
Well, that narrows it down.
It's a clan federation fight, Salman was Rahman, one of the three clans that rebelled against ibn said in 1930, against the Turkic affiliated thunayans (Prince turki) other groups like talal (who were outsiders of a sort if the corleomes vs the tattaglia and the Bahraini suggest themselvee.
Ajman (dang autocorrect) as compared to say Prince Farhan, he didn't seem that much of a threat.
Blogger J. Farmer said...
@Michael K:
You, of course, assume the royal family was behind this.
I didn't say anything about assuming "the royal family was behind this."
The saintly Iranian mullahs would never think of such a thing.
Never said anything like that either.
Do I hear some scrambling to back away ?
The possibility that rogue elements ("Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest ?") did this for their own reasons is starting to sink in to our always certain expert.
@Michael K:
Do I hear some scrambling to back away ?
The possibility that rogue elements ("Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest ?") did this for their own reasons is starting to sink in to our always certain expert.
I am backing away from nothing. Go back and read anything I wrote about the subject. I always expressed agnosticism on what happened to Khashoggi. When Ann first blogged about this last week, I wrote: "The case is highly suspect, and if I were a betting man (which I am), I would put money on the proposition that Saudi Arabia played some role in Khashoggi’s disappearance."
I also wrote on another post: "The same people who caution against a rush to judgment to blame Saudi Arabia are similarly rushing to judgment that this is all fake in an effort to discredit the regime. The truth is, we don't know what happened."
Well we shall see what comes of this, will the Turks be held liable for any exaggerations they made, Shirley you jest.
Farmer: "I am backing away from nothing. Go back and read anything I wrote about the subject."
Alternatively, just stick pins in your eyes.
Alternatively, just stick pins in your eyes.
Opinions differ.
Political opponents aren't foreign powers, generally. Opponents may disagree, but are still Americans. Seems like a perfectly innocuous phrase, unless I failed to get the context. (haven't read the article yet)
Blogger J. Farmer said...
That had to do with the practical realities of actually forming a national government.
There was no national government nor was there any intention of having one. We are the "United States" not the United Provinces or such.
We were founded as no more of a single country than the EU is. We were a collection of independent, sovereign, countries (States) which delegated some powers to a central authority to wield for the good of all.
The words "national", "nation" and derivatives do not appear anywhere in the Constitution. Nor does the word "country".
Evan after the War Between the States, Amendments recognized this. For example, 13th Amendment:
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Emph added.
Not places subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, as some sovereign entity. Rather, places subject to the jurisdiction of the individual states.
Prior to the revolution, each colony was subject, individually, to the King of England. Each was independent of the others. After the Revolution, the former colonies were each sovereign countries, independent of each other and independent of anyone else. The founders understood the meaning of the word "state" and wrote the constitution accordingly.
In the past couple hundred years the word has become so corrupted, not just in the US but worldwide. For example, Mexico, Brazil and other countries have divisions that they call "states" but which have no sovereignty. That completely beggars the meaning of the word.
We are the United STATES and we would do well to remember it.
John Henry
Continuing in response to J Farmer
The president is elected by the States, not by the people. He serves the states, not rules them. He "presides"
When he is sworn in he takes the following oath:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
Article II, Section One, Clause 8, of the United States Constitution.
Nothing about defending, protecting, preserving the people in any way. His primary function is to protect the Constitution. Without it, nothing else matters. With it, we are safe. Subject to various burps and hiccups.
The president serves the sovereign states and that is the reason he (or she. Looking at Nikki Haley) is elected by the states via the electoral college and not directly by the citizens of those various states.
John Henry
"If she ever gets the Republican nomination in the future, Haley will learn that she, too, is literally the nth coming of Hitler."
Unfortunately, all too true - all facts will be completely ignored, as usual, by the media and the left. And yet, Haley's very successful history in the public eye, couple with the fact that she is literally American Indian - voted for by those evil, racist, sexist southerners as their state governor - will be completely ignored.
@Darkisland:
I agree with a lot of what you have written, and it looks like whatever differences you have with me are primarily about nomenclature. "Federal" or "central" government would have been a better choice of words than national, but recall that the national vs. federal distinction was not as well excepted at the time of the drafting. From Federalist No. 39:
The proposed Constitution, therefore, is, in strictness, neither a national nor a federal Constitution, but a composition of both. In its foundation it is federal, not national; in the sources from which the ordinary powers of the government are drawn, it is partly federal and partly national; in the operation of these powers, it is national, not federal; in the extent of them, again, it is federal, not national; and, finally, in the authoritative mode of introducing amendments, it is neither wholly federal nor wholly national.
-The Conformity of the Plan to Republican Principles
Her parents are from India. She was born in SC. Their clothing line Exotica was featured in the local clothes store in the small town in SC where my mother-in-law lived. This was many years ago and I had no idea that Nikki's family owned it till I read it in an article about her family.
She slips from statesman to politician so smoothly it's scary.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा