Said Bobby Kennedy.
Recorded before the Harris/Walz interview with Dana Bash.
August 31, 2024
"You've had two Democratic candidates who've not been able to give unscripted interviews, which is extraordinary."
"I mean my father and uncle were so proud of... the United States — our capacity to engage in debate, to defend who we were in the world, to defend a vision of our country, to articulate it to be the rest of the world, to be the leaders of the Free World, and... have a command of the facts and of knowledge, and to be eloquent. And how can you be a leader in the world? What does the rest of the world think of us right now? I mean what could they possibly think? We have two Democratic party candidates who were not able to explain themselves in an interview.... If you want to if you want the job of handling the nuclear codes, you've got to do an interview first. And... how can you go 39 days without talking to the press, without being able to defend your record, to explain who you are to the American people? And if you talk to Democrats about this, and you can get past the anger and past the vitriol — this kind of wall of of tribal resistance to any new knowledge coming in... or any contrary fact — what they'll say is, well, we're not really voting for Kamala, we're voting for the apparatus. Then you ask the next question: Has that apparatus served you? You know, has the open border served you? Has the $35 trillion debt served you? Has all the endless war served you? Has the destruction the American middle class — highest inflation rate in a generation — has any of that — that apparatus — produced something for the United States that you're so proud of that you want to blindly vote without knowing who you're voting for?"
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
65 comments:
He's 100 % correct. Anybody who is still in the ditch for Kamala ARE blind.
The values of the apparatus have not changed.
"we're not really voting for Kamala, we're voting for the apparatus. Then you ask the next question: Has that apparatus served you?"
100%! ...and it is true for the US Senate, for the House of Representatives, and for numerous state and local positions, as well.
How large is the typical congressional staff? How complex is the typical piece of legislation? Does anyone seriously think that our "representatives" have mastered the details of proposed legislation?
In reality, we are voting for figureheads to represent pre-packaged (and not necessarily coherent) collections of policy positions.
When we vote, we are signaling our alignment with them. We are not doing anything so quaint as voting for people to represent us.
I'm really happy to see this subject being raised. Until it becomes widely understood, we have no chance of making things better, except occasionally and by accident.
It’s a clear-eyed summary of the current situation. I’ve seen Shanahan out doing interviews too. They are not only effective voices for change, they’re deftly using Kamala’s “change campaign” essence against her. It’s a wonderful bit of political jujitsu to behold.
Alignment with the apparatus provides a sense of security, until the horrific day that it doesn't.
The apparatus feeds itself. It’s not even trying to explain why what it does is beneficial to American citizens. Why immigrant invasion? Why Ukraine? Why no fossil fuel use whatsoever? It is the Borg.
Our Federal government is akin to Google. It must be broken up via antitrust litigation.
I’m glad he’s supporting Trump, because he can make a good argument and support it. His former running mate seems on top of it too. Interesting his own party wouldn’t even let him compete.
Apparatus is so much more Ivy League a word than Swamp or even Uni-Party.
has any of that — that apparatus — produced something for the United States
ask Not how your Democrat Party can serve the United States..
ask HOW your United States can serve your Democrat Party
He is not wrong.
Good observations, but Jr desperately needs to retire the "my father and my uncle" shtick. Yes it's an outage that they were assassinated, but it's been 56 and 61 years since that happened and it's long past time for Jr to be his own man .
.
"J Severs : He is not wrong."
That's very true in this case, but watch out, he's still a Kennedy.
Fine. You are voting for the apparatus. And who is currently in the apparatus and what is their platform, the normal statement of values? Is the apparatus going to hire sone economists or will it continue to rely on 5 lawyers currently on the economic policy group? Who or what is on the foreign affairs policy group? Very dangerous to follow a unnamed, unknown, apparatus.
He seems to have missed the recent "nepo baby" callout trend.
The exercise of liberal license to issue faith-based apologies in order to justify, rationalize performance of human rites etc. in a religious bid for redistributive change, social, criminal, political, and climate progress. But what if resources are not finitely available and accessible, and anthropogenic carbon clusters are first-order forcings of global warming?
The people on Epstiens client list are still in charge.
He is part correct. The real issue is TDS. The apparatus has been extremely successful in convincing about 40 percent that Trump is evil incarnate. Just the word Trump causes them to foam at the mouth and go into convulsions.
Remember when Obama was criticized for relying so heavily on the teleprompter and he promised to do more unscripted speaking, like he promised to quit smoking, but he didn't?
Dana Bash is a hack.
No follow up - just gushy mushy D-hack luv.
Hand over your journo cred for -THE PARTY.
Welcome to… The Machine.
"What does the rest of the world think of us right now?"
That our oligarchy is less competent and cares less about the country it is supposedly running.
"We have two Democratic party candidates who were not able to explain themselves in an interview"
Correct. But as Joe showed, you can run for and be prez without being able to explain anything. Most voters don't care, as long as they keep access to other people's money and abortion, abortion.
"this kind of wall of of tribal resistance to any new knowledge coming in... or any contrary fact"
But, but the party of science! of the highly educated!
"Has that apparatus served you? You know, has the open border served you?"
Well, no, but 1. more money 2. abortion, abortion.
To be fair to Bash, had she done a good job of follow up questions that torpedoed Harris, she would have had to have 24/7 security to protect her from the crazies like Rich, Gadfly, and Inga.
RFK is correct on this. Ramaswamy beat him to the punch, however - "Kamala’s interview last night was a reminder that we’re not running against a candidate. We’re running against a *system*. They require a candidate they can control, which means having original ideas is a disqualification. That’s exactly why we get Biden, then Kamala, and so on."
(and yes, I know that other commentors beat me to the punch on this in comments to earlier posts)
The problem that dems don't seem to realize is that the "more money" part does not really apply to the vast majority of dem voters - their lives and fortunes do not improve at all, no matter how many times they pull the "D" lever.
Yes, it is the Borg. and everyone in it was Bjorn to lose.
If voting on person solely (DJT, Kennedy, Kamala), I would vote Kennedy, followed by DJT, and I could never vote for Kamala. I like that Bobby mentioned the federal debt. When the balloon bursts, the billionaires will be ok. The upper middle class & middle class will have it tough. The working class and poor will be destroyed.
Reid Hoffman, who funded E. Jean Carroll's junk lawsuits against Donald Trump? He's a big Democrat donor. He wants Kamala to replace Lina Khan as FTC head. Maybe that's the reality. For all the talk about Harris's (and Walz's) radicalism, big tech pays the bills and calls the shots. The apparatus is open to radicals, but it shuffles them around to ensure that donors' interests aren't threatened.
'Twas ever thus, in the sense that no person can be an expert on everything.
But.
At least we expect that the "figurehead" for whom we vote will be a person capable of taking in the information and recommendations of his or her team of (we hope) actual experts in whatever the particulars of the situation at hand, and then make a good AND ACCOUNTABLE decision. And the team should be made up of identifiable people.
The Biden "team" is still anonymous. We have no idea who's running the country. The Harris "team" will apparently include whoever advised her to bring America's Dad to her only interview. Excellent work, everyone, as Ben Shapiro says.
Yes, it's very clear that the Borg (D) are voting for "the apparatus" and not the candidate. So why is it even necessary to "interview" Harris and find out what "her" current positions are? The positions of the apparatus are very clear and can be listed very easily without having Dana Bash help camouflage it. Here's a starter list. Feel free to add your favorites:
1) Abortion on demand, at any time for any reason, or not
2) Open borders, with financial and logistic support to all
3) Criminality privileges for apparatus-favored populations, and lawfare against unfavored populations
4) LGBTQ promotion at all levels of education, work, and government
5) Ever-increasing taxation of productive elements of society to support unproductive, apparatus-favored elements
Apparently, Rich, Mark, Gadfly, Inga, et al., think these are things worth fighting for.
It's similar with the "hard-nosed prosecutor" across the pond: Keir Starmer. Starmer must be more articulate than Harris -- he'd have to be to get through Question Time in Parliament -- but the sense is that the bureaucracy is running things, and prime ministers and cabinet ministers can only slow down or speed up the implementation of the bureaucracy's plans. Meanwhile, Starmer's deputy is on vacation and partying around the clock like Finland's Sanna Marin, or maybe like Kamala in the sorority house 40 years ago.
A WSJ contributor summed up the situation as "Powerful presidency, powerless presidents." The system functions without the man or woman at the top actually being in charge.
Thankfully, RFK Jr, the world's second weirdest candidate ever (after Trump), is no longer running for president. Yessir, the guy who claims to have 1000 square feet of road kill stored in freezers and violated the law by depositing a dead bear cub in Central Park, and illegally hauled a sawed-off whale''s head across state lines is gone - along with the dead worm in the middle of his own brain.
Anyone have the “goods” on Pelosi? I’d like to see her unceremoniously dispatched in the same way as she did to Biden. Her cold-blooded reptilian personality is screwing us over. No one should ever treat her with civility nor respect.
we're voting for the apparatus.
Apparatus is an engineering term for unrestricted abortion. That is all.
In its present format, how is the apparatus you are aligned with, held accountable for what they do. What part do you play in rewarding them, once you've voted for them. More importantly, what is your role in punishing them when they do you harm. How are you controlling what they do?
If I recall correctly, Reid Hoffman is the Linked-in billionaire who was one of the chief underwriters of the lawfare campaign that still has Trump entangled. Do you approve? Can you tell me: Who voted for him, and placed him in an authoritative position to completely f*ck up our political system? I think the point of view you have expressed is deeply disturbing - it seems to be one of ambivalent lassitude over your fate.
Yes. Obama and Harris have similarities. Obama was just a better liar.
But gadfly's worm is still alive.
The problem with being governed by the machine is that you have no way to punish the machine when it fails you. It can't be impeached; if it takes bribes, it can't be kicked out of office; if it harms you, there is no one to take to court; if it doesn't like you, it can label you a terrorist and make your life miserable without any recourse on your part. Fighting against in in the courts is a slow process that the machine can circumvent by finding friendly courts that are part of the machine.
It will make decisions at the highest level it can so you lose your local control of things that effect you. There was a good reason for the tenth amendment; it kept the possibility of a nation wide machine at bay. The Democrat machine, especially here in California, believes in a one and only one size fits all approach to governing. And their one size is usually very undemocratic.
@the gad. As I recall the story, RFK Jr did those things at a very young age. I look back at those years in my life and am not proud of my behavior. I am certain you were an angel, right gad?
No response to the substance of Kennedy's observations. Just ad hominem. Perhaps that's all you have?
"well, we're not really voting for Kamala, we're voting for the apparatus."
Otherwise known as an oligarchy.
"[RFK] can make a good argument and support it."
That's why they wouldn't let him compete. He's not one of the grifters. If he won he'd smash their rice bowl.
That was a most articulate statement of the situation, and an excellent recasting of the "Are you better off now than you were then?" question.
I don't fault him for citing JFK and RFK as examples of dems who were serious and could articulate their thoughts. If he went with practically any, more recent examples, they would likely be dems who are supporting KH.
One curiosity, however, is that it's always, "my father and my uncle," singular. Is Teddy now the forgotten Kennedy?
As far as I can tell, an Ivy League education just provides a slightly larger vocabulary so they can more eloquently spew the BS!
I doubt very much that, if RFK Jr. had endorsed KH instead, you would be posting shit about how "weird" he is.
Can you speak to the substance of the post?
I don't see how any responsible person would consider KH qualified to serve as president simply on account of her social anxiety. She's not cut out for the kinds of pressure she'd constantly be under in that role.
"Good observations, but Jr desperately needs to retire the "my father and my uncle" shtick."
It's shorthand for a different (and better) time. I don't have a problem with it.
The Democratic Party™ hierarchy now decides on the candidate for President + VP. This saves time & money by skipping over the primaries as Bidet and Harris have done. To paraphrase Klaus Schwab "You'll have nothing (ie, influence ) and you'll like it.
Abortion is one of the means to an end. It's not about reproductive choice. It's about the exercise of control, because anyone who would dare to choose to carry a child to term will be disrespected, insulted, and ostracized. The driver behind this and the rest of the modus operandi of the apparatus is the lust for power.
I think how we got to where we are is pretty obvious. The oligarchy gave us Joe Biden because he was the instrument available to block Bernie Sanders. Whether they didn't see Biden's incipient dementia (I tend to believe that they did, hence the basement campaign strategy) or thought it wouldn't advance enough over 4 years is an interesting question.
I do believe they thought they could limit Biden to one term, but Joe was stubborn and they waffled. They really should have forced a real primary, but that had its risks too; most prominently, RFK probably would have won it. Like Sanders before him, that couldn't be allowed (he's not part of the team), so they crossed their fingers and stood behind Joe. That strategy came crashing down with Joe's debate performance, when even the Richs and Ingas of the party could see they'd been lied to. At that late date, they had no real choice other than to advance Kamala. The female and black contingent of the party would have revolted if they had done otherwise. And although they are left with an incredibly weak candidate, they have two powerful aces up their sleeve; democrat tribalism and electoral fraud. Trump will not be allowed to win a close election, no matter how bad it looks. The courts and the media stand ready to assure it.
"Apparently, Rich, Mark, Gadfly, Inga, et al., think these are things worth fighting for."
They may believe those things, but they don't think. "Feel" is more like it.
before the Harris/Walz interview with Dana Bash
"Interview" No, More like scripted and edited conversation.
Those of us who are old enough remeber a better America. It wasn’t perfect but the roads were in better condition and you weren’t afraid of what the schools were teaching your kids and a 25 year old could buy a house.
Those of us who are old enough remeber a better America. It wasn’t perfect but the roads were in better condition and you weren’t afraid of what the schools were teaching your kids and a 25 year old could buy a house.
The entire podcast is worth listening to. The first part of the podcast is a conversation with Reid Hoffman who funded groups trying to take JFK Jr off the ballot and funded E. Jean Carroll’s lawsuits against Trump.
I remember that well. I feel so sorry for my kids and grandkids.
MadMan @ 1:21pm,
Let's just cut to the chase and call the CNN thing a mockumentary.
That's as good a summary of Democrat rusted-ons as you could get.
I've been looking for an explanation of how we got to where we were in 2020, and I think Original Mike has provided it. Where and how we go in 2024 is still a question, isn't it?
Yes, I grew up in a time when being young meant you had a lot of opportunities, but no guarantees. Now, in the attempt to provide guarantees, our youngsters have been denied those opportunities.
Replace all the talk of "apparatus" and "systems" and ideologies with culture and you'll start to understand what has happened. Politics is downstream from culture and the counter-culture wedded to Democrat political success is a majority in urban areas around the nation.
Michael K's response to Gadfly at 11:41 AM wins this entire set of comments hands down.
Post a Comment