You can listen to the entire 2-hour interview on Twitter, here.
ADDED: Kennedy is polling at a surprising 20%, so there is, unsurprisingly, an effort to crush him. One approach — and I think this is in the memo — is to portray him as right wing. Another approach — seen below, from the Onion — is to portray him as nothing but that famous name:
पोस्ट्स
८५ टिप्पण्या:
The establishment MSM has a whole lotta discrediting to do across the ideological spectrum.
His “surprisingly high polling numbers” trail by Biden’s by 42.5.
2012 Democrats:
Say No To Big Pharma!
Screw Halliburton! NO NEW WARS!
Occupy Wall Street! Down with Corporate Greed!
2023 Democrats:
We’re going to take your job if you don’t take the vax.
WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE’RE NOT BOMBING MOSCOW! SLAVA UKRAINI!
DiD yOu SeE ThAt AweSOme dISNeY PrIDe fLoAT!!!
Go Bobby, go!
What’s wrong with closing the Mexican border?
Love the headline that he "pushes right-wing ideas and misinformation"
First, the not-so-subtle connection of the NYT saying right-wing ideas and misinformation go hand in hand.
Second, that because they disagree with his assessment they will publicly portray his stances as misinformation.
Third, that his stances are right-wing rather than traditionally liberal/democrat in nature but against the current stances of liberals/democrats.
Now that's all just a dissection of a single part of a headline. Now I'm actually going to go read the article.
Democrats as the interventionist war party...they flip-flopped versus the Vietnam and Carter era lefty peacenik ethos. It started with Clinton's (1) Israel/Palestine interference, (2) the comic-book-silly US actions in Haiti, and (3) returning Elian Gonzalez to Castro's Cuba. Following this consider Obama's (1) Syrian adventurism, (2) the Party's ultra naïve reaction to the "Arab Spring," (3) Ukraine politics circa 2014 and Putin taking Crimea, and (4) Hillary's Russia reset button.
Without G.W. Bush going into Iran and angering the pacifistic left, the "left wing" NATO/Globalist/Pentagon/Defense Industry pro-war cabal would have been more obvious.
I don't blame Biden for this trend because Biden is a mentally-handicapped, greased-palm puppet with no free will of his own nor any potential for free will. This is led by a shadowy cabal of oligarchs (e.g., dark money party donors; tech firms, etc.).
Clinton in Haiti: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Uphold_Democracy
Clinton and Cuba: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli%C3%A1n_Gonz%C3%A1lez
I’m no fan of Biden, but I’m not sure I buy the notion the Biden loves war. He may enjoy getting graft from the defense industry, but I’d blame the Democrat Party of War on Feinstein and Pelosi more then Biden.
The Democratic Party has always tended to be as enthusiastic for our wars as the Republicans. In the vote to initiate war with Afghanistan, only one member of the House voted the correct vote--"NO"--Democrat Barbara Lee. All other members of the House in both parties voted for that disaster. (To the Dems' partial credit, there were some Dems in the House who voted against the Authorization for Use of Military Force against Iraq, and in the Senate, as well.) But, to say the Dems, now or ever, are "anti-war," is a lie.
FURTHER ADDED: Kennedy is polling at a surprising 20%, so there is, unsurprisingly, an effort to promote him. At Fox News, by Steve Bannon, by the right wing blogosphere. One approach — and this ironically fits the Trumpists’ current narrow anarchical goals — is to portray him as right wing. Another approach — which might actually work with a QAnon crowd that thinks JFKJr (!) will be Trump’s Vice President — is to remind everyone of his famous name.
Biden botched the Afghanistan withdrawal.
Russia never invaded anyone until Obama and Biden were at the helm.
They engaged in a friendly back-and-forth with the likes of Tulsi Gabbard, the former Democratic congresswoman turned right-wing commentator;
Everyone we don't like is alt-right. I was disappointed at the lack of comments--this seems like a topic on which the Times readers would take the Times to school. Which is probably why they don't allow comments.
Some running commentary on the article itself,
NYTimes portrays RFK's "vaccine skepticism" as right-wing aligned and part of promoting "other conspiracy theories". Didn't state what his stances are when they used this portrayal.
Further down in the article, they state, "...he has used his campaign platform — and his famous name — to promote misinformation and ideas that have little traction in his party" So now they are specifically attacking his entire platform. This was immediately followed by the statement, "Mr. Kennedy spent nine uninterrupted minutes attacking Mr. Biden as a warmonger and claimed that their party was under the control of the pharmaceutical industry"
So they are positioning Biden's warmongering and party influence by Pharma as misinformation.
Lastly, they fact-check the things they claim are flat out wrong - often with mis-leading rationales as to why he's wrong.
This is a political hatchet job of the roughest sort and it's impressive in how much effort they put behind it.
Began with Biden? No. We need to go back to our Nobel Peace Prize president - and his war criminal SOS. Think Libya, Syria, Afganistan, Yemen, Somalia, whereever drones can fly.
Biden got us out of Afganistan. Messy, but done.
Isn't it amazing how the NY Times never ever EVER deviates from the Democratic Party Establishment narrative? Not for a thousandth of a second. Not by a thousandth of an inch. You read the stories and can immediately tell what memos went out, and what orders were given. The Democratic Party Establishment says "jump", and the NY Times says "how high".
Biden has the lowest approval rating in 70 years, his main challenger (despite facing 98% media hostility) has already snagged a fifth of The Party away from him, and yet that challenger is labeled a longshot. Why? Tis likely Kennedy has way more support right now than Biden had four years ago. What's the logic behind the "longshot" description?
The reason is simple -- the Democratic Party Establishment can control Biden. He is their puppet dancing on their strings. He runs nothing, controls nothing, knows nothing, says nothing but what they tell him to say. I doubt he even knows what day of the week it is.
None of that will be true of Kennedy should he be the nominee. And so the man must be diminished, if not destroyed, and the NY Times is happy to do the deed. The Democratic Party Establishment has issued their decree it, and so it shall be done.
The dems were always the party of war. WwI, WWII, Vietnam, Libya, Syria, and now Ukraine.
I listened to about an hour of that show when it first happened. Seems like the media and the Dems are working very hard to keep people from hearing what RFK has to say. They want to smother his candidacy and his message in the cradle. He's another candidate who's not approved by the Regime, not approved by upper management. For that reason alone, it's important to give him a listen, IMHO.
With that in mind, here is a great interview with RFK by Sharyl Attkisson. (54 minutes) It's better than the twitter one in a number of ways because SA keeps the conversation on track and to the point. It's not as rambling. She's a good interviewer and a serious journalist.
Episode 188:
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/188-robert-f-kennedy-jr-no-holds-barred-on-corruption/id1478351211?i=1000615429579
Here's the transcript:
https://sharylattkisson.com/2023/06/robert-f-kennedy-no-holds-barred/
SA has a really good podcast. Here's another worthwhile episode:
184. What really happened in the 2020 election? A Sharyl Attkisson Investigation
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/184-what-really-happened-in-the-2020-election-a/id1478351211?i=1000612722057
LOL, Obama was the guy who "chose" Biden as his VP, and who sat back idly by as Biden was somehow appointed proconsul for Ukraine, looked the other way at all of the corruption, and his CIA and State Department backed the coup which overthrew the democratically elected government of that country. Biden was the insurance policy from the neocon deep state, just like Dick Cheney was the same thing for George W Bush.
The Neocons love the Democrats. Democrats make such breathless true believers. Of course this means that military industrial complex has turned on the very demographic that has traditionally supported and sustained US militarism. It will be interesting to see how demonizing the same classes of people who have traditionally provided the soldiers for US military policy works out.
I believed in the Iraq War. It wasn't really until our government, and the cabal which controls it, started declaring that anybody who opposed the neocons' new favorite political party, the Democrats, are automatically nazis, that I began to question it. This shame I will take to my grave.
The Democrat party did not become the party of war.
It has always been the party of war going back 150 years or more.
John LGBTQ Henry
"and he believes that violence is a legitimate political tool for achieving America’s objectives abroad."
So basically, America has become a state sponsor of terrorism.
Right now I have one foot on the Trump bandwagon and the other on the Kennedy. No, bandwagon is the wrong metaphor. I’m surfing with one foot on the Trump sturgeon and the other on the Kennedy sturgeon. I sure hope they don’t diverge too radically—I’m getting too old to do the splits.
BECAME the party of war? BECAME???? help me out, will you?
Mexican War? Which Party?
Civil War? Which Party? (who fired the 1st shot? who? come ON, tell me WHO?)
WWI? Which Party?
WWII? Which Party?
Korean Conflict? Which Party?
Vietnam? Which Party?
Kosovo? Which Party?
The Ukraine? Which Party?
What's that leave US?
The Spanish War
The Gulf war
The "war on Terror"
and, of COURSE; Each of those were completely supported by the democrats (at least at the start)
BECAME? You keep using the word.. I no think that word means what You think it means
I saw an article, either in The Atlantic or The New Republic back in the Seventies, that said 'Democrats are the War Party.' As others here have pointed out, it's been that for much longer.
Oops! i (obviously!) forgot Andy Jackson (the slave owning FOUNDER of the democrat party),
and his genocidal war on the Cherokee
Meade said...Right now I have one foot on the Trump bandwagon and the other on the Kennedy. No, bandwagon is the wrong metaphor. I’m surfing with one foot on the Trump sturgeon and the other on the Kennedy sturgeon. I sure hope they don’t diverge too radically—I’m getting too old to do the splits.
I'm with ya Meade. I figure Trump is the eventual GOP nominee. Since Wisconsin is an open primary state, I'll cross over and vote for RFK in the Democrat Primary.
Calling the democrat party an "anti war" party, would be like..
Calling the democrat party a "anti racism" party
“But, to say the Dems, now or ever, are "anti-war," is a lie.”
1968: McCarthy, RFK
1972: McGovern
2001: Trump
Meade said...
“But, to say the Dems, now or ever, are "anti-war," is a lie.”
1968: McCarthy, RFK
1972: McGovern
2001: Trump
so, Meade.. you're Saying, that the democrats Are Only Pro-War, When They're In Power?
Just changed my Florida voter ID to Democrat with the intent of voting for RFK Jr in the Primaries. The last time I was registered as a Democrat was 1979. RFK - like Matt Tiabbi - have political beliefs on the other side of the road from me. Yet they, and Tucker Carlson are Truth Tellers. Refreshing in this day and age. I suspect my political party affiliation will change again but for now any chance I get to vote for a Truth Teller I'm going to take.
They have such a simple set of rules for propaganda, and it works.
Whatever you feel you have to do to win, if normies won't like it, first accuse the other side. For instance, Hillary and Joe Biden colluded with the Ukrainians to interfere in the US election in 2016. The "whistleblower" for impeachment, according to White House logs, which Steve McIntyre has done such a great job combing through, was in meetings with Ukrainian politicians in Biden's offices, the very politicians who fed this fake story to the New York Times in April of 2016. which led to the resignation of Trump's campaign manager.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/us/politics/what-is-the-black-ledger.html
They eventually found a technical violation of some rule which would normally result in a fine, and sent Manafort to prison, but his "Black Ledger" turned out to be fake, concocted by the Ukrainians, at the behest of the Democrats, and was never presented as evidence against Manafort. But the rulebook said that if you are going to do this, you have to accuse the opponent of collusion, in order to muddy the waters around your own criminal activity. And it works amazingly well.
"How many fingers do you see!?" (holds up four fingers)
"Four!"
"Wrong again!"
BZZXZZTZXZT!
It was an own goal, of course, because it ended up putting Kellyanne Conway into the job, and she ran the winning campaign.
That's what I am going to do, Heartless.
They have such a simple set of rules for propaganda, and it works.
Whatever you feel you have to do to win, if normies won't like it, first accuse the other side. For instance, Hillary and Joe Biden colluded with the Ukrainians to interfere in the US election in 2016. The "whistleblower" for impeachment, according to White House logs, which Steve McIntyre has done such a great job combing through, was in meetings with Ukrainian politicians in Biden's offices, the very politicians who fed this fake story to the New York Times in April of 2016. which led to the resignation of Trump's campaign manager.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/15/us/politics/what-is-the-black-ledger.html
They eventually found a technical violation of some rule which would normally result in a fine, and sent Manafort to prison, but his "Black Ledger" turned out to be fake, concocted by the Ukrainians, at the behest of the Democrats, and was never presented as evidence against Manafort. But the rulebook said that if you are going to do this, you have to accuse the opponent of collusion, in order to muddy the waters around your own criminal activity. And it works amazingly well.
"How many fingers do you see!?" (holds up four fingers)
"Four!"
"Wrong again!"
BZZXZZTZXZT!
It was an own goal, of course, because it ended up putting Kellyanne Conway into the job, and she ran the winning campaign.
He'll be ridin' 2 white sturgeons when he comes
He'll be ridin' 2 white sturgeons when he comes
"Make the World Safe for Democracy" was the (war) slogan of Progressive Democrat icon Woodrow Wilson.
The fact that they're not hitting him harder over his belief in the fake idea that vaccines against polio and measles cause autism suggests that that belief still holds some sway on the left.
What’s surprising is that Marianne Williamson is polling at 8%, that’s Haley plus Pence.
He'll be ridin' 2 white sturgeons whne he comes
He'll be ridin' 2 white sturgeons when he comes
"One approach — and I think this is in the memo — is to portray him as right wing."
LOL. But it's all that's necessary. A "right-wing" label from the MSM is all it takes for tens of millions to make up their "mind".
They're holding extreme right-wing in reserve. No need to bring out the heavy guns just yet.
“so, Meade.. you're Saying, that the democrats Are Only Pro-War, When They're In Power?“
Sure seems like it. LBJ… Clintons… Obama… Biden…
gilbar said...
Meade said...
“But, to say the Dems, now or ever, are "anti-war," is a lie.”
1968: McCarthy, RFK
1972: McGovern
2001: Trump
so, Meade.. you're Saying, that the democrats Are Only Pro-War, When They're In Power?
So, gilbar, you are confirming that pro-war is a winning message with the Democrats as none of the people you list as opposed to war won?
“so, Meade.. you're Saying, that the democrats Are Only Pro-War, When They're In Power?“
"Sure seems like it. LBJ… Clintons… Obama… Biden…"
In a nutshell. Heads they win. Tails we lose.
Left Bank of the Charles,
"His 'surprisingly high polling numbers' trail by Biden’s by 42.5."
Another way to look at it is that an incumbent president seems to command as little as 60% support within his own party for re-nomination, depending on the day and who's polling.
I don't write that to gloat. (I'm already poll-fatigued from the Trump fans who insist the nomination is all over already.) But if I were Team Biden, I would find this worrisome.
His Tablet interview is eye-opening.
Miles superior as a candidate to Biden.
I predict Biden fails to win the Democrat nomination. Either Kennedy or Williamson will surprise him. They are both smarter and nicer and more honest than our criminal-in-chief.
Here's Williamson on abortion
Over the years, an overly secularized left became stridently amoral on the issue of abortion. This made me squirm, not only because I felt it was wrong but because I could see that it aroused a deep reaction in those whose social and political leanings were more conservative than mine. Over the years we began to lose the social consensus that abortion should be legal, in part because of those who kept continually trying to argue that in essence it’s no big deal.
But it is a big deal. Abortion is not just about “a woman and her body.” It’s also about a woman and her God, her sense of what is right and wrong, a woman and her own internal compass, a woman and her life and how she is called to live it. When I heard a young woman on a panel describe an abortion as no bigger deal than a pap smear, I remember two things: 1) feeling nauseated, and 2) thinking, “This has gotten insane. We’re going to lose this.”
“ Sure seems like it. LBJ… Clintons… Obama… Biden…”
Wilson, FDR, Truman… someone pointed out that the Dems getting us into wars goes back 150 years. But they did fire the first shots of the Civil War, and Jackson did attack the Cherokee (and the other Civilized Tribes). It’s one of the big constants of the Dem Party, as well as being the Racist Party.
Interesting that it was a Kennedy that recommended Biden as Obama’s running mate, a long long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.
Wow! Reading this thread of who's more-peaceful-than-thou posts.
I would love to see a DeSantis v. Kennedy '24 election. It would be a throwback to Kennedy/Nixon in '60. Men their 40s, talking about the future, rather than 2 old guys competing to be Lame Duck.
Media: Anything that steps off the corrupt democrat elite mob-plantation approved group-think is 'Right wing disinformation!"
& on behalf of the elite - Antifa(D) will throw a concrete milkshake at you.
Great idea. Let 60s antiwar radicals take over, make the military a source of hippie fantasy propagation and then get belligerent. Smooth.
"...quoted in "Robert Kennedy Jr., With Musk, Pushes Right-Wing Ideas and Misinformation."
Of course. This coming from the paper that gave us the Russia Collusion case. Hillary didn't mean to store classifieds on a server in her bathroom, and anyway...who doesn't these days?. The vax will stop the virus, will slow the virus, requires a booster every 4 months, oh...nevermind. Masks...well just...masks. Hunter's laptop is nothing. Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation. Hunter's laptop is...uh...it shouldn't have been made public. Hunter's laptop is now censored. Joe didn't just fall again. There was a prone body someone mistakenly left on the stage. And beside, who doesn't fall when they're President? DeSantis wants to kill all children before they turn gay.
The NY Times is a paragon of truth, the keeper of standards, the paper of record. And was once Josef Stalin's go-to for fun information.
I believed in the Iraq War. It wasn't really until our government, and the cabal which controls it, started declaring that anybody who opposed the neocons' new favorite political party, the Democrats, are automatically nazis, that I began to question it. This shame I will take to my grave.
Removing Saddam was the correct decision, and one that should have been done a decade prior. The failure wasn't the war, or the missteps in the occupation and reconstruction. The failure was in the inability to learn the appropriate lessons, and to disentangle ourselves from regional obligations.
He thinks childhood vaccines produce autism. He thinks Sirhan didn't murder his father. He obviously thinks the Holocaust was No Big Deal, because he said covid mandates were worse than Nazi Germany.
He's a wacko who's polling well because the current president is a demented old fool who's governing exactly as he would have even if he weren't demented.
Keep in mind that the Democrat Party took Bernie's nomination in 2016 and gave it to Hillary and then again in 2020 when they took it from Bernie and gave it Biden. I'm thinking that 2024 will be the trifecta and they take it from RFK and give it to Biden again. Three time's the charm. And of course there's always the CIA. If their lips are moving they're lying and we know how they behaved in 1963.
Bob,
Thanks for posting the RFK Jr. interview. He's a climate nut, but he's right on the money about corruption in DC. This bit about COVID is VERY interesting...
"She was also the same agent who presided over event 201, this very suspicious pandemic, coronavirus pandemic, simulation that took [00:41:00] place in October of 2019, 3 months before we were told that coronavirus pandemic was actually circulating. Her function there was to collaborate with the other co-host, George Gao, the director of the Chinese CDC. Anybody can go on YouTube and watch this. They conduct a discussion on the last seminar of the day, that's seminar number four, about how to censor information and particularly if people start [00:41:30] talking about a lab leak, how to shut down those people and censor them. Avril Haynes says, "Not only do we have to censor them on social media, but we have to," quote, "flood the zone with authoritative voices." In other words, propaganda. She's talking there about propagandizing the American people and shutting down the set, and it's exactly what they did three months later when coronavirus actually came to public attention. [00:42:00] These very, very strange things that she's involved in. And then she ends up managing the coronavirus response in the White House and we can't keep elevating the people who are the most corrupt people in our government."
I agree with RJK jr. As the Biden administration lies to us about things like this...
https://jonathanturley.org/2023/06/08/wars-first-casualty-ukraine-reportedly-sabotaged-nord-stream-and-then-lied-about-it/#comments
Cappy said...
"Great idea. Let 60s antiwar radicals take over, make the military a source of hippie fantasy propagation and then get belligerent. Smooth."
They have. They just learned that making war is profitable.
Like others (we're a wave!) I've changed my party affiliation to vote for Bobby in the primary. I'm riding the Meade sturgeons -- Trump or Kennedy.
And that Onion blurb is funny.
Insiders run DC and Big Media. Insiders are ruining the country. Outsiders like Trump threaten the imbalance of power and the Insiders are starting to see this member of a famous Insider family as a threat because he is talking like an outsider. They act “broken” by Trump because they are threatened by Trump. He refuses to be bought and that scares the shit out of the ruthless bloodsucking DC Insiders. That’s why Pelosi and Biden and Big Media hate Trump with a white hot passion like we’ve never seen before. They can’t even say his name out loud as if they are brave little hogwarts fighting Evil. What a charade!
What a loss for America to have no actual journalists left.
Ralph Nader, 1980? Meade might get both his sturgeons.
This is the silly season before everything is just soul-sucky malaise. Nader said he ran because Gore was too right-wing. Kennedy is saying he can tie dye his issues all over the political sphere. But please, no VP Naomi Wolf. Kennedy has hair enough for both of them, which is really saying something.
As usual, I'll wait to see what George Elmer Pataki says.
Isolationism is indeed anti-Democratic Party right now, though Kennedy avoids that goblin word.
"Democrat Wars" was an Nixon slogan against continuing the Vietnam War. I remember kids
who are currently in their mid-50's arguing in the playground about how all our wars were started by Democrats. Even as a "Republican" kid, I knew this was a bad, jingoistic talking point.
Look, if you support Russia, if you believe that that a "Greater Russia" is an important and necessary balance to Europe and the US, then stand up and make that case.
Putin is in the business of reconstituting the Russian Imperial borders, of returning the land lost to the consequences of glasnost, perestroika and the less well remembered "demokratizatsiya." He is doing this because of fears that an increasing weakness on Russia's part will embolden greater losses to the country's security and open it up to possible invasion by not just armies of jackbooted Poles, Ukrainians and Romanians, (NATO) but a more pernicious invasion by decadence, homosexuality, veganism and "wokeness." Whatever you may think of the way he casts the issues, the stakes for all of us are real.
Before the war Ukraine was not a perfect society or hardly a perfect democracy. It was a society that constantly wavered between incompetency and kleptocracy. It also had a government that was tilting significantly away from the warm embrace of Mother Russia and more toward the West, albeit in a suitably haphazard and self-interested manner. Does that justify the invasion by Russia? Maybe in the minds of Russians, it does. Should we, as Americans, and more broadly NATO, also see the invasion as justified? Should we sanction it?
Certain MAGA supporters, and those who stand with Greater Russia against the rising tide of Morlocks, say yes. They take Putin's shibboleths about decadence, homosexuality, veganism and "wokeness" at face value and, because they also despise these things, make common cause with Russia. That, in my opinion, is foolish. First, if you take Putin at his word, that he cares about Christianity, orthodoxy, purity or tradition, well, I have a bridge with great views of Manhattan I'd love to sell you. Second, check out how Russia is conducting the war. How does that square with the ideals of orthodoxy, moral purity and tradition? All Putin cares about is strength, Russian security, and about his historic destiny as the personification of new kind of Tsar. If that genuinely appeals to you, and it appeals, I think, to more people than I care to credit, then make the case plainly.
I don't want a world where a country can just invade a neighboring country and take their stuff. I believed this in 2014, too. Heck, I also believed it about Georgia in 2007. Whatever else you may want to put on top of this conflict, the simple truth remains. Russia is the aggressor here. Russia is the one who has been destroying Ukraine and attempting to subsume it into itself, just as it did Crimea in 2014. Only things have gone seriously sideways for the Russians. The Ukrainians, it turns out, will not comply. They will not go quietly. Good for them. We should help them as much as we can.
Amusing to see the left (also known as the NY Times)attacking some one who does not want war as "right wing." Wilson and Roosevelt promised they would "keep us out of war." Lyndon Johnson the same, just before he sent 500,000 draftees to Vietnam.
To robother:
RFK Jr. is 67 now and would be 69 before taking office. I heard him speak at Hillsdale and he has spasmodic dystonia which causes his voice to quaver and to be a not altogether pleasant experience listening to him.
So he's closer to Biden and Trump in age than to DeSantis.
Biden is too old. But so are the challengers--Williamson, Kennedy, now Manchin, perhaps.
He's a Kennedy.
To spell it out for you libs, he has Kennedy sized baggage to go along with the charm, glibness and nostalgia. Not much else. If his name was Smith he'd be doing divorces in Poughkeepsie.
Russia never invaded anyone until Obama and Biden were at the helm.
Afghanistan? I guess, technically, it was the Soviet Union. Carter sent them a strongly worded letter regarding it.
"What’s wrong with closing the Mexican border?"
If we close the border the issue goes away and we can't have that. Look, we already lost the tremendous leverage gay marriage gave us by foolishly making it the law of the land. Today, no one gives a fuck about gay marriage anymore. Nobody. And what did that give us? Nothing. And if that didn't teach you that divisive issues should never be solved, than you're just not thinking.
- Teams Red & Blue
Blogger Tom T. said...
the fake idea that vaccines against polio and measles
I've not followed the vaccine debate closely. I am a believer in vaccines, generally. (I don't believe that the Kung flu jabs meet the definition of vaccine)
My uninformed understanding is that it is the thimerosol/mercury preservative in the vaccines is what caused the autism and this is what the anti-vaxxers are protesting. My uninformed opinion is that thimerosol is not a problem. Not sure about mercury.
If so, isn't saying that he is anti-vax disinformation?
John LGBTQ Henry
Blogger Tom T. said...
the fake idea that vaccines against polio and measles
I've not followed the vaccine debate closely. I am a believer in vaccines, generally. (I don't believe that the Kung flu jabs meet the definition of vaccine)
My uninformed understanding is that it is the thimerosol/mercury preservative in the vaccines is what caused the autism and this is what the anti-vaxxers are protesting. My uninformed opinion is that thimerosol is not a problem. Not sure about mercury.
If so, isn't saying that he is anti-vax disinformation?
John LGBTQ Henry
some guy who Seems confused, but really is just a lying piece, said...
I don't want a world where a country can just invade a neighboring country and take their stuff.
Did you believe that in 1846?
Did you believe that in 1861?
Did you believe that in 1898?
Did you believe that in 1919?
Did you believe that in 1945?
Did you believe that in 1961?
Did you believe that in 1964?
Did you believe that in 1990?
Did you believe that in 1998?
Did you believe that in 2003?
i'm thinking that you're kinda subjective about this
???
The Civil War, the Mexican -American War, World War I, World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War.. all of these were started by Democratic presidents.
"Russia never invaded anyone until Obama and Biden were at the helm."
Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979, and left some years later with much the same outcome we had: failure.
Hot Damn, takes me back
Ready Kids?
"Kill Kill Kill for Peace",
and Kerry threw his medals over the fence and called 'em Baby Killers?
Good Times!
The US is the only country besides New Zealand, that permits prescription drugs to be marketed to the general public. The broadcast media particularly but other media in general, gets a huge share of their revenue from this advertising. There are two reasons for this:
1) The normal reason for advertising, to increase asles
2) Blackmail/extortion though I am not sure which way. The news media says to Pfizer et al "Advertise copiously or we will run stories about how the kung flue vaccine causes heart problems or Ozempic reduces weight by reducing muscle, rather than fat. Pay us more and we will talk about how good the product is"
Pfizer et al say in turn to the media "Don't run anything but positive stories or we will pull that sweet, sweet cash and you will go broke."
RFK has long been at war with the pharma companies about certain vaccines in particular but about pharma in general. The media has to be at war with him to protect their money flow. His politics have nothing to do with media support or lack thereof. It's all about the money.
Not looking for an argument about whether RFKs positions on pharma are right or wrong. It does not matter. The only thing that matters is the advertising money. For both sides.
John LGBTQ Henry
Let's Get Brandon To Quit
"Removing Saddam was the correct decision, and one that should have been done a decade prior. The failure wasn't the war, or the missteps in the occupation and reconstruction. The failure was in the inability to learn the appropriate lessons, and to disentangle ourselves from regional obligations."
It wasn't our place to remove Saddam, and we had no cause to. Our invasion of Iraq was a war crime. And, of course, we never learn the lessons that arise from our catastrophic decisions and actions.
Bobby went to the border last night and posted his video. That's what I want to see from a candidate, someone who goes to the issue.
Meade has jumped the sturgeon.
I don't want a world where a country can just invade a neighboring country and take their stuff. I believed this in 2014, too. Heck, I also believed it about Georgia in 2007. Whatever else you may want to put on top of this conflict, the simple truth remains. Russia is the aggressor here. Russia is the one who has been destroying Ukraine and attempting to subsume it into itself, just as it did Crimea in 2014. Only things have gone seriously sideways for the Russians. The Ukrainians, it turns out, will not comply. They will not go quietly. Good for them. We should help them as much as we can.
6/8/23, 10:59 AM
BUT, you are good with it happening to America by the Biden administration letting the invaders take over and get special privileges that they don't give to our own citizens.
JPS: "I'm already poll-fatigued from the Trump fans who insist the nomination is all over already"
I dont recall that argument being made at Althouse.
Links would be helpful.
"Right now I have one foot on the Trump bandwagon and the other on the Kennedy. No, bandwagon is the wrong metaphor. I’m surfing with one foot on the Trump sturgeon and the other on the Kennedy sturgeon. I sure hope they don’t diverge too radically—I’m getting too old to do the splits."
Be sure to wear a cup.
Like a sturgeon, spawning for the very first time?
I don't hold the Kennedy name against the guy, and the fact that he's well outside the D elites is a yuge plus. If Biden goes down (I judge it more likely than not) RFKj jumps to the top of the chart. OTOH, it's the Biden Gang that controls the levers of power now, not the Cameloteers, and certain things can be arranged.
[Blogger being bloggy]
Left Bank of the Charles said...
His “surprisingly high polling numbers” trail by[sic] Biden’s by 42.5.
That should be pretty cold comfort to the guy who supposedly won 81 million votes. There wasn't much party-primary polling in 1980, but that's roughly the lead that Jimmy Carter had over Ted Kennedy in early polls. In the end Fat Ted came within 12 points or so of beating him in the primary, and grievously wounded him in the general election against Reagan.
Look, if you support Russia
[sigh] You fucking people. There might be one guy on here that does otherwise you straw man arguing idiots can't shut up about Russia. One can both hate Putin and Zelensky at the same time. Haven't you heard? It's not a binary world. You war-loving freaks need to convince America what is happening is worth it. Scaremongering about a paper tiger Russian threat isn't enough so you resort to the old McCarthyite tactic of anyone who disagrees must be a Russia lover. Fuck you. Fuck off. Show some evidence Putin CAN take over the world.
And then take your fucking evidence to Europe and see if they will defend their land cause I'm not going to without a clear exit plan. Need an exit plan. Isn't that the rule? Y'all hated Bush for "no exit plan" in Iraq but that argument dried up like week-old bread. Yer stale. Get a new gig. Get an exit plan for Ukraine and articulate it for us.
[I hope it does publish twice. You need to hear it twice.]
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा