Writes Olivia Nuzzi, in "The Mind-Bending Politics of RFK Jr.’s Spoiler Campaign/He’s a conservative. He’s a liberal. And he could turn the presidential race upside down" (NY Magazine).
२२ नोव्हेंबर, २०२३
"After the Hamas attack, Kennedy... praised efforts to penalize anti-Israel demonstrators on college campuses. He argued that Israel was within its rights..."
"... to defend itself by whatever means it saw fit. In sharp contrast to his views on American involvement in almost all other foreign conflicts, including the war in Ukraine, he said the U.S. should help: 'We must provide Israel with whatever it needs to defend itself — now.' 'Listen, nobody likes children dying,' he said recently. 'When we went into Germany after the war, and then into Japan, a lot of civilians died because we had to get Hitler.'..."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४१ टिप्पण्या:
Per NY Mag:
Person who pushes old lady out of the path of an oncoming bus is the same as person who pushes old lady into the path of an oncoming bus.
Kennedy will get less than 1% of the vote. He isn't even the Ross Perot of this election. He isn't the Ralph Nader of this election. He isn't a Pat Paulsen, either. He's more of a media creation for grins and giggles of distraction during the campaigns waged in absentia by Dementia Joe and Defendant Trump.
"In sharp contrast to his views on American involvement in almost all other foreign conflicts..."
Well, there's also that whole Sirhan Sirhan thing.
I’m old enough to remember when nuance was synonymous with gravitas, the adults in the room.
How’s a nascent AI supposed to keep up with a roving narrative of the day?
Wasn't his Dad murdered by a Palestinian because of his support for Israel?
I'll need to see Nazis goose-stepping in homemade flip-flops, before I'll buy the Hamas-Hitler comparison. Not to mention the Nazis stopped fighting once Berlin was reduced to rubble.
Seriously: trying to portray a nuclear power as the victim, to mostly kids throwing rocks, is demented.
Compare and contrast:
"praised efforts to penalize anti-Israel demonstrators on college campuses." vs. "He argued that Israel was within its rights to defend itself by whatever means it saw fit."
This is the problem with American dialectic in a nutshell, as philosopher Ravi Zacharias once called "The American crisis between either/or vs both/and".
It doesn't have to be either/or. You can believe that both anti-Israel demonstrators have a right to demonstrate and have anti-Israeli views AND believe "Israel was within its rights to defend itself by whatever means". They are not mutually exclusive. Thinking they are mutually exclusive is un-American. Kennedy thinking they are mutually exclusive is poor critical thinking on his part, and also un-American.
Stop letting a semitic blood-feud half a world away pollute your continental and egalitarian sensibilities. Stop being forced to pick a side that's everyone else's side but America's side, like Kennedy just did.
This is the quote you pulled from that article? I'm moderately surprised you chose the thing most likely to provoke the least variation in comments.
I found the dog van to be the most interesting part.
RFK Jr. is the last gasp of mid-20th-century white liberalism. USA whites have voted ~60% Republican for many elections. The remaining urban whites (e.g., Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, Newsom, etc.) sold their ideals and souls in pandering to black voters. So now, most elected white Democrats are merely mouthpieces and figureheads.
RFK Jr. is either tough enough or out of touch enough to stick with the old 20th century model. He's eclectic only because he's homeless. He's joining Jerry Seinfeld, Bill Maher, and others who cling to a world that no longer exists.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/what-about-white-voters/
"I found the dog van to be the most interesting part."
Well, they put it first. Dogs are interesting to people. I already knew about his dog van, etc. etc. and it has nothing to do with anything that matters in the election... though I considered saying if you want to judge candidates by their dogs, Trump should win.
When youre in the same room as david duke, not a good look crack
He’s a conservative. He’s a liberal
Depends on what year it is…
'Listen, nobody likes children dying,' (RFK Regarding Gaza and Israel)
I just want people to stop dying - Donald Trump on making a deal and ending the war in Ukraine.
Two statements, completely opposite of what Democrats and Neocons want. They don't care who dies as long as the money keeps rolling in. And everyone with a Ukraine flag in their profile supports this knowingly or ignorantly...pretending to protect "democracy"
Fucked up thing about the dingbat college campus left is...they hate Israel, the ONLY functioning democracy in the Middle East. But they are also willing to let as many Ukrainians die as possible to "protect democracy", because they have been brainwashed to believe the Russia boogeyman bullshit.
College Campuses are the dumbest places in America. It ain't just the young students. It starts with the leadership. All those highly credentialed PHDs...
Yes...I purposefully use the term "dingbat" college campus left because it is now completely dominated by birthing people with vaginas and their beta male counterparts.
"though I considered saying if you want to judge candidates by their dogs, Trump should win."
Thanks. I LOL'd at this.
Kennedy will not draw one of Trump's base to him. Trump pretty much has 40% of the Republican vote locked up. I think the never Trumpers are trying to scare Trump's base so they will try to get Kennedy to back out which would only help Biden not Trump.
It's really tragic to see a man with his resources and background succumb to nonsense conspiracy theories. He appears to be a true believer, which is even sadder. Even if he's not manipulating his audience, it appears his backers are manipulating him.
I'll take the original RFK seven days a week and twice on Sundays, but Junior should stick to estuaries, wetlands, marshes and the non-pharmaceutical world.
I don’t care about either Israel or Hamas. What I do care about is censorship. So-called anti-Israel groups should not be punished unless they resort to violence. Same is true for anti-Hamas groups. The answer to bad speech, as someone once said, is more speech. And I’ll add “without violence.”
narciso said...
"When youre in the same room as david duke, not a good look crack"
Did Zionists steal his land?
Crack: "Seriously: trying to portray a nuclear power as the victim, to mostly kids throwing rocks, is demented."
It was not "kids" who fired thousands of rockets into Israel, sneak attacked unarmed citizens and raped, then slaughtered women and girls. I doubt is was "kids" who tortured innocent babies to death by roasting them in ovens or cut the unborn out of their mother's wombs. Or cut the Achilles tendons of the women and girls so they could not escape. Or paraded their naked bodies through the streets of Gaza for the entertainment of and further abuse by the Gazan citizenry.
Nor did the Germans did "stop fighting when Berlin was reduced to rubble", they unconditionally surrendered and were disarmed, tried for war crimes, appropriately punished by the victors, then had their system of government reformed to prevent a recurrence of their crimes. That's what has to happen to Hamas if Gaza is to be a member of the civilized world after it has been reduced to rubble, after the rubble has bounced a few times, and after Hamas has been utterly destroyed ala the Nazi armies.
Crack, your historical ignorance and propagandistic ramblings are truly despicable.
Wasn't his Dad murdered by a Palestinian because of his support for Israel?
Why, yes he was. And there are Democrats trying to get Sirhan Sirhan paroled. I wonder why?
@Howard, please stop making sense. I preferred it when you were a total fool.
Pope says the conflict 'has gone beyond war - this is terrorism'
narciso said...
"When youre in the same room as david duke, not a good look Pope"
Now he was working for a mobster doumarreas on his farm
We are a nuclear power and al queda attacked us
Is Febreze is a suspected carcinogen or something?
jaydub said...
It was not "kids" who fired thousands of rockets into Israel - but you will ignore the kids, who are half of Gaza, because that's convenient for you.
"sneak attacked unarmed citizens and raped, then slaughtered women and girls." - I saw the sneak attack but not the rapes. Show me rapes or admit, like 40 decapitated babies, you spread propaganda without checking for accuracy.
"I doubt is was "kids" who tortured innocent babies to death by roasting them in ovens or cut the unborn out of their mother's wombs." - which you will prove in your reply, right?
"Or paraded their naked bodies through the streets of Gaza for the entertainment of and further abuse by the Gazan citizenry." - because we expect people held in a concentration camp for the last decade and a half to be cool customers, right? They're not allowed celebrations when they hit the enemy.
"The Germans,...unconditionally surrendered" - and then SS officers were brought over here, to live in luxury as they boosted NASA, at the same time we made arrangements to ship our Jews to Palestine. And, of course, most Nazis faced NO PUNISHMENT what so ever because no one else could run Germany after 12 years of Nazis doing it. I lived in Alsace, where Nazis still go on the weekends to hang out, so,...enjoy your life of propaganda.
"Crack, your historical ignorance and propagandistic ramblings are truly despicable."
Even when I back them up with links to evidence that proves Israelis are the original terrorists and you do not? That's amazing.
Israel deniers/haters look right past the Hamas slaughter.
in the mean time...
Somebody is Feeding Hamas Crystal Meth to Fuel Terror Attacks
"Illicit narcotics reportedly fueled Hamas terrorists as they slaughtered Israeli civilians on Oct. 7. Israeli forces apparently found captagon pills stuffed inside the pockets of deceased terrorists, who used the amphetamine-like drug to remain calm and alert during their bloody assault. This discovery is the latest sign that the regime of Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad has yet to close up shop on its narco-trafficking operations.."
'Seriously: trying to portray a nuclear power as the victim, to mostly kids throwing rocks, is demented.'
It's not like they can just nuke Gaza.
The Palestinians will never be nuclear power because their average IQ is 85.
Big Mike said...@Howard, please stop making sense. I preferred it when you were a total fool.
There are two Howards. The simplest way to tell which one you're dealing with is one of the is a dedicated partisan and the other is generally sensible.
He's still a communist with occasional correct thoughts.
I see jaydub hasn't come through, with ANY evidence he's got, to prove me wrong - nor have the rest of you.
You're just a vast collection of open mouths, saying nothing.
Joe Smith said...
"The Palestinians will never be nuclear power because their average IQ is 85."
That's probably hilarious amongst guys who wear camo as a fashion.
I have begun to think about free speech like I now think about free trade: good in theory, but unworkable in practice. Economic theory says that free trade benefits everybody. In reality, by doing things like manipulating exchange rates and employing slave labor, China has weaponized free trade to benefit itself. In the case of free speech, a marketplace of ideas presupposes that the audience is made up of mostly of people who have the capacity to assess the merit of these ideas for themselves. In reality, due to such things as schools no longer teaching history very well and young people relying on social media for news, a very large percentage of Americans can no longer do this.
thats spelled enablers of hamas, like unwra that push the propaganda,
There's only one Howard, tim.
'That's probably hilarious amongst guys who wear camo as a fashion.'
Don't own any camo...don't hunt.
Not sure why you're uncomfortable with facts.
Try again.
RFK is too ignorant to understand that we didn't have to kill a lot of German kids to "Get Hitler". Leaving aside that we could have negotiated a peace with the German Resistance (if we had encouraged them), bombing German cities and killing German Civilians did almost nothing to win the war.
And Firebombing Dresden was a war crime, since the war was already won in Feb 1945. The Red Army was on the Oder River - 90 miles from Berln. And the US/UK armies were in the process of destroying he German Army west of the Rhine. The Germans were out of Gasoline and Oil and we had pulvarized their Synthetic oil plants.
As for killing japanese kids, you can argue the firebombing and Nukes were unneccessary and the Imperial Japanese Government would've surrended in Aug 45 no matter what.
In any case, using war crimes in 1945 to justify war crimes in 2023 fails the logic test. But wasn't RFK Jnr. a drug addict of some sort? He doesn't strike me as a genius, to use understatement.
China has weaponized free trade to benefit itself
Labor arbitrage (e.g. slavery) has sustained liberal fiscal policies (e.g. Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacares) and environmental arbitrage sustained the laundered Green blight.
@tim maguire, thanks for the explanation.
Joe Smith said...
'That's probably hilarious amongst guys who wear camo as a fashion.'
Don't own any camo...don't hunt.
Well, you should try it, because they'll find you hilarious.
15 000 Rabbis got together to discuss the Incompatibility of Judaism & Zionism AND what they're gonna do when President RFK decides to punish them for it.
I second Hubert's comment.
Adam Smith was positioning free trade against the mercantilist trade blocs that dominated in his day. The US enforced and enabled a free trade regime during the Cold War as the price a country paid to join the US alliance (see any of Peter Zeihan's works for an explanation of why and how this proves out), and pretty much proved the principle. The issue, as with free speech, is that neither principle is an end unto itself but is a means of achieving other good ends. As such both need commitment to enforcing the principles from either an outside authority or the populace.
"Economic theory says that free trade benefits everybody. In reality, by doing things like manipulating exchange rates and employing slave labor, China has weaponized free trade to benefit itself."
Oh, shit! Manipulating the rules of the game to maximize their profits has been the stock in trade of American corporations and employers for decades. We may not--yet--have overt "slave labor," but the woefully low wages paid to a tremendous number of Americans make them into "wage slaves" who are barely making it. As for the American-based industries that outsource their manufacturing to China, (and those who employ US prison workers for miserable pay) they are, in fact, profiting from slave labor.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा