The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Joe Bauer]

It's a disturbing, disheartening and even sickening new reality Trump has created.

We've never seen a president do so much damage in so many ways to our society and to such exponentially unfathomable degrees. And in just 4 years!

Almost daily sowing angry hate and fear mongering divisiveness, mistrust of our most important and revered democratic institutions like Congress, the press and the voting process, flaunting and violating rules of law and respectful tradition, creating fear amongst anyone in public and even foreign service by publicly ridiculing or even firing those in this realm who dare disobey or criticize him.

The man spends far more time than any other president in his representing "all" Americans responsibilities playing golf at his own resorts, jetting around to well over 300 rallies ( an average of 1 and 1/2 per week! ) composing and posting angry, attacking and totally self-absorbed and self aggrandizing tweets thousands of times, staging pompous, self promoting/bragging PR photo ops, and constantly looking for ways to publicly insult or hurt his enemies and reward his family and loyalists.

Trump's daily cosmetic make up routine of hair cutting,styling and dye, facial skin coloring and who knows what other procedures is so obsessively and expensively out of the norm it's perversely over-the-top vain.

Never has a President inspired more insider tell-all best seller books and that have exposed more bad character traits and unethical and possible criminal charge doings than Trump.

Never has an American President been accused of more unwanted, inappropriate and even criminal sexual behavior and by more women victims than Trump.

One book alone ... "All The President's Women-Donald Trump And The Making Of A Predator" contains the Trump sexual predator experiences of more than 20 women who were willing to place their stories or even actual names into the public realm to inform the world of this man's true predator type character and behavior towards women.

One well known female journalist in New York City ( E. Jean Carroll ) has actually filed suit against Trump, accusing him of high end department store changing room rape!

Trump's most well known legacy quote may very well end up being ... I like to " Grab em by the pu$$y" !!!

Or, "Russia if you're listening ..." or regards the Proud Boys "Stand back and stand by" or "I won this election by a landslide!"

Just the fact that many in future generations will rationally and seriously ponder these disturbing Trump quotes as his most lasting and well known legacy ones is a tragic reality.

Anyone who dares to read even half of these national best seller insider tell-all books revealing the real Donald Trump will never to be able to defend him or promote him in a positive character and behavior light versus the most negative and disturbing with a straight and honest face.

Michael Cohen's Trump expose book "Disloyal - A Memoir" is the most graphic and disturbing insider expose of Trump. Every other page reveals a new Trump bad character shocker cumulatively building up to an almost monster like final assessment and depiction.

Trump's niece Mary Trump's book conveys much of the same but in a less graphic "street tough" even Mafia lingo type way as Cohen's.

I think most Americans truly wish Trump would just go away and take his constant anxiety creating, divisive conflict and confrontation loving and extreme insecurity bragging and bullying ways with him.

Edited December 13, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[Douglas Caddy]

Republicans plotting to deny Biden the presidency on the floor of the House on January 6.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/2020/12/republicans-plotting-to-deny-presidency-to-biden-on-floor-of-the-house-if-trump-gives-the-word-report/

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/12/11/hatred-liberals-is-all-thats-left-conservatism/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR0sTK82Qugyi5sBc_WaEcQQWK0MjE83l335ExpKLqiFdWGU4I-0SugCyz4

 

I am surprised it took this long for someone to say this in a major venue.  Because I think its utterly accurate.  What Trump, and McConnell, and the Federalist Society  have done to the GOP is turn its underlying motivating factor into a hatred of liberalism.  Thus the whole "libtard" motto, and "cry more libs", by Madison Cawthorn, the newly elected congressman from North Carolina.  The GOP was headed in this direction under Gingrich and DeLay, but Trump's employment of people like Bannon and Bossie in the White House--who were really political operatives--made it all accelerated and more in the open. Its really kind of amazing when you realize that in the fifties, the two leaders of the party were Taft and Eisenhower.  Whatever one thought of those two men overall, they really did stand for something.  Ike once said, words to the effect, he would not be the one to tear down the New Deal. 

But today, as demonstrated by the rallies yesterday in Washington, the GOP has become a party of destruction.

Which actually makes forums like this kind of important historically. Because when you look at the presidents since JFK, he was the last one to really have a successful liberal term. (Click here and  go to Kennedy presidency 1961. https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/jfk-at-100) 

 

Believe me, they know this, which is why they try and hijack him.

Edited December 13, 2020 by James DiEugenio

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

 What Trump, and McConnell, and the Federalist Society  have done to the GOP is turn its underlying motivating factor into a hatred of liberalism. 
...

Because when you look at the presidents since JFK, he was the last one to really have a successful liberal term.  

So DiEugenio denies the successful liberal policies of Obama’s last two years while decrying the right-wing attack on liberalism?

DiEugenio gave Trump’s fascism mostly a pass for four years while routinely attacking Obama.

Go figure.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2020 by Cliff Varnell

[Sandy Larsen]

On 12/10/2020 at 3:09 PM, Dennis Berube said:

1.) Lincoln
2.) Washington
3.) FDR
4.) Monroe
5.) Madison
6.) Jefferson
7.) JQA
8.) JFK
9.) Arthur
10.) Garfield  

 

Dennis,

Thanks for your reply.

The reason I asked for your presidential rankings is because you so quickly dismissed the list I presented (with Obama at #8) because it has Truman in the top 10. And then said the list was too generous with the rankings of T. Roosevelt, Jefferson, Eisenhower, and Reagan.

So in the list I presented, you rejected those that I've crossed out here:

1. Lincoln
2. Washington
3. F.D. Roosevelt
4. T. Roosevelt
5. Jefferson
6. Truman
7. Eisenhower
8. Obama
9. Reagan
10. L.B. Johnson

I was surprised because T. Roosevelt, Jefferson, and Truman have ranked in the top 10 of virtually every major poll taken of scholars. (Anyone interested can see a list of presidential poll results in a side-by-side comparison here.) Furthermore, Eisenhower has ranked in the top 10 in all but four polls. While results are mixed for Reagan and LBJ, they are still quite high. (Obama hasn't been in many polls due to his presidency being so recent.)

You rank Arthur and Garfield in your top 10, compared to their poor rankings in ALL the scholars' polls. I'm curious as to what they did that impresses you.

 

[James DiEugenio]

Sandy:

The problem is that, as we have found out through the work of Paul Bleau, academia is establishment oriented.  Which roughly means, to get along, you go along. Therefore, someone like Truman, who I argue in my review of The Jakarta  Method, actually altered FDR's foreign policy, has been lavishly overrated.  I mean when Condi RIce likes your presidency, something is wrong somewhere.  Rice likes Truman, as many Republicans, like George Will also, because he encouraged the Cold War.  Which is a path I do not think FDR and Hull would have gone down. I mean we know that is what Anthony Eden said in a secret interview he did with Bob Sherwood.

But to show you how the Establishment encourages this, McCullough's book, which lavishly praised Truman, and covered up his horrible decision to drop the atomic bombs, becomes a bestseller and gets a mini series. (See this for McCullough's faux pas with both Truman and Adams.  I actually think he covered up the stuff with Truman https://hnn.us/articles/157.html.) If you recall, McCullough did the speech at Dealey Plaza on the 50th, when the mayor decided to rope it off and pass names of spectators through DHS.

Same with Eisenhower.  Eisenhower deliberately avoided enforcing the Brown vs Board decision, even in the face of the insurrection that took place by Orval Faubus at Little Rock in 1957.  He let that affair go on for weeks until he finally had to send in the military to protect the students from getting attacked.  He left that whole Brown vs Board mess up to the Kennedys to deal with.

And it was Ike who got us into Vietnam. He and Foster Dulles broke the Geneva Accords, and then CREATED a new country, South Vietnam. They then installed a whole new leadership which won through rigged elections.  Lansdale would tell Diem I can get you 60%, and Diem would say, how about 90%. This gave the illusion that somehow America was fighting for democracy.  Well, yeah when you have more people voting in a district than the eligible voters who live there, it looks like democracy.  And Foster Dulles saying, well now that the French are out, we can go in without a hint of colonialism. Figure that one out.

Needless to say Ike and Allen Dulles started the art of overthrowing democratically elected governments, in Iran and in Guatemala. They also began the method of assassination of foreign leaders: the Lumumba case being a very bad example. So, today, I am not a big fan of the allegedly avuncular Eisenhower.

The whole BLM movement has made us examine this whole presidency ranking business.  Washington and Jefferson both owned hundreds of slaves. Madison and Monroe owned scores. Grant owned at least one.  IMO, if I had to rank them, I would probably still include Washington and Jefferson, but I would have to gravely qualify that ranking.

And my God LBJ? That is just nutty.  Johnson altered so many of Kennedy's foreign policy moves, and for the worse, that its really ridiculous to try and count them.  And the Establishment historians who do these rankings helped cover that up.  To use just one example: Indonesia.  What Johnson did there led to the death of over a half million people.  Try and find one cable where anyone in the WH or State Department says, "Isn't that enough killing of innocent people?"

This is why I have never bought the whole American Exceptionalism rubric. Its a mask for people who do not want to deal with these issues, and also exalt people like Truman, Ike and LBJ.

Edited December 13, 2020 by James DiEugenio

[Sandy Larsen]

 

On 12/12/2020 at 4:18 AM, Ron Ecker said:

In 1990 Willie Nelson's assets were seized by the IRS because he owed them more than $16 million due to a tax shelter that was illegal. He was eventually able to pay off the debt (negotiated down to $6 million) by the auction of his assets and his release of "The IRS Tapes: Who'll Buy My Memories?"

 

A year or two ago I heard that Willie Nelson sold his 100 acre ranch near Birdseye, Utah. We pass by it on Memorial Days to visit my parents' graves. (My mother was born in nearby Fairview, current population 1247.) I wonder if that sale was to help pay off his IRS debt. It a nice area for horse riding, if that's your thing.

 

 

[Steve Thomas]

"CCP & 1000’s of US citizens worked together to try to steal 2020 election at top of ticket & selected down ballot races. Serbia, Canada, Venezuela, Cuba, CIA, George Soros, Bill Gates, Biden, Clinton Foundation & many national state & local officials from both parties involved."

— Lin Wood (@LLinWood) December 13, 2020

I wonder if they all got together over lunch.

I say we invade Canada, but let's wait until summer when it's warmer; or maybe send the Proud Boys up there now...

Steve Thomas

[Jeff Carter]

1 hour ago, Steve Thomas said:

I say we invade Canada, but let's wait until summer when it's warmer; or maybe send the Proud Boys up there now...

Steve Thomas

Have the Proud Boys ever been in a hockey fight?

[Richard Price]

The Russians have hacked into computer systems at Commerce and Treasury according to reports by various news agencies.  They happen all the time and we do it to other countries as well.  Is this just another day in the worldwide cyber wars?  Then again, is this possibly the kompromat on Trump coming to fruition as he pushes his "loyalist" into positions in every agency.  These people may be loyalist to Trump, but they may have ties to Russians or be compromised also.  Thirty eight days to go, if we're lucky.

The national media is all reporting on the coming transfer of power, but Trump is still saying "We're going to win this".  They haven't been paying attention.  He says exactly what he means, he has from day ONE.  Everyone is getting lulled to sleep by thinking this is all going to go the way it always does.  2021 may not signal the end of the nightmare of 2020.

[Ron Bulman]

Armed protesters, on both sides, confronting each other.  Not good.  Sooner or later it may well come to more than wounded in a stabbing or shooting incident.  An outright firefight with multiple casualties?  Police subduing who, on which side? 

"very different than anything we've seen before."  "They were looking for a confrontation".

Man arrested in Olympia, Wash., after pro-Trump demonstrations turn violent (msn.com)

Edited December 14, 2020 by Ron Bulman

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Sandy:

The problem is that, as we have found out through the work of Paul Bleau, academia is establishment oriented.  Which roughly means, to get along, you go along. Therefore, someone like Truman, who I argue in my review of The Jakarta  Method, actually altered FDR's foreign policy, has been lavishly overrated.  I mean when Condi RIce likes your presidency, something is wrong somewhere.  Rice likes Truman, as many Republicans, like George Will also, because he encouraged the Cold War.  Which is a path I do not think FDR and Hull would have gone down. I mean we know that is what Anthony Eden said in a secret interview he did with Bob Sherwood.

But to show you how the Establishment encourages this, McCullough's book, which lavishly praised Truman, and covered up his horrible decision to drop the atomic bombs, becomes a bestseller and gets a mini series. (See this for McCullough's faux pas with both Truman and Adams.  I actually think he covered up the stuff with Truman https://hnn.us/articles/157.html.) If you recall, McCullough did the speech at Dealey Plaza on the 50th, when the mayor decided to rope it off and pass names of spectators through DHS.

Same with Eisenhower.  Eisenhower deliberately avoided enforcing the Brown vs Board decision, even in the face of the insurrection that took place by Orval Faubus at Little Rock in 1957.  He let that affair go on for weeks until he finally had to send in the military to protect the students from getting attacked.  He left that whole Brown vs Board mess up to the Kennedys to deal with.

And it was Ike who got us into Vietnam. He and Foster Dulles broke the Geneva Accords, and then CREATED a new country, South Vietnam. They then installed a whole new leadership which won through rigged elections.  Lansdale would tell Diem I can get you 60%, and Diem would say, how about 90%. This gave the illusion that somehow America was fighting for democracy.  Well, yeah when you have more people voting in a district than the eligible voters who live there, it looks like democracy.  And Foster Dulles saying, well now that the French are out, we can go in without a hint of colonialism. Figure that one out.

Needless to say Ike and Allen Dulles started the art of overthrowing democratically elected governments, in Iran and in Guatemala. They also began the method of assassination of foreign leaders: the Lumumba case being a very bad example. So, today, I am not a big fan of the allegedly avuncular Eisenhower.

The whole BLM movement has made us examine this whole presidency ranking business.  Washington and Jefferson both owned hundreds of slaves. Madison and Monroe owned scores. Grant owned at least one.  IMO, if I had to rank them, I would probably still include Washington and Jefferson, but I would have to gravely qualify that ranking.

And my God LBJ? That is just nutty.  Johnson altered so many of Kennedy's foreign policy moves, and for the worse, that its really ridiculous to try and count them.  And the Establishment historians who do these rankings helped cover that up.  To use just one example: Indonesia.  What Johnson did there led to the death of over a half million people.  Try and find one cable where anyone in the WH or State Department says, "Isn't that enough killing of innocent people?"

This is why I have never bought the whole American Exceptionalism rubric. Its a mask for people who do not want to deal with these issues, and also exalt people like Truman, Ike and LBJ.

 

Jim,

You make many good points. But the following is where I am coming from:

Scholarly polls -- like the presidential rankings -- are useful for people who aren't knowledgeable enough to form their own opinions on a topic, and don't have a pundit whose opinions on the topic they trust. Even if the scholars are influenced by "the establishment," their opinions will surely be more reliable than those of some opinionated stranger walking by. And so I use them at times.

If you don't mind my asking, who would you list as your top ten presidents? In deciding, please do not give qualifications, like "except that he owned slaves." Instead, rank the whole person, warts and all, in each case.

 

[Bob Ness]

9 hours ago, Richard Price said:

The Russians have hacked into computer systems at Commerce and Treasury according to reports by various news agencies.  They happen all the time and we do it to other countries as well.  Is this just another day in the worldwide cyber wars?  Then again, is this possibly the kompromat on Trump coming to fruition as he pushes his "loyalist" into positions in every agency.  These people may be loyalist to Trump, but they may have ties to Russians or be compromised also.  Thirty eight days to go, if we're lucky.

The national media is all reporting on the coming transfer of power, but Trump is still saying "We're going to win this".  They haven't been paying attention.  He says exactly what he means, he has from day ONE.  Everyone is getting lulled to sleep by thinking this is all going to go the way it always does.  2021 may not signal the end of the nightmare of 2020.

I always question these type of reports because I reckon half or more are disinfo by the spooks. It's not like they're not on the lookout for attempts of this type and if I were a CI type the first thing I'd do is make sure they showed the cards they like to play. It's a great opportunity to load your adversary up with bad information which if acted on creates problems.

They do it a lot with scientific and industrial targets I don't know why they wouldn't with financial info.

[Dennis Berube]

15 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I was surprised because T. Roosevelt, Jefferson, and Truman have ranked in the top 10 of virtually every major poll taken of scholars.

Sandy, if you re-read that list I rather hastily concocted, Jefferson was on there and LBJ was not.

Jim nicely explained why Truman shouldn't be near the top 10 and T Roosevelt is another president that garners far more favorable views by these establishment historians than deserved in my opinion. Garfield was a bit of a joke because I believe most of these best presidents lists are always tilted towards modern history, not sure why, perhaps because the 1800's are boring to most modern readers?

Although the slave ownership issue is perhaps not ideal, I do not view Washington owning slaves as a reason he shouldn't be viewed positively in historical context. I mean, if Washington isn't there, we likely do not have a country and who knows how long Britain would have kept slavery in its US colony. Using India as an example, today there are an estimated 18.3 million living in what qualifies as modern day slavery even though they made the slave trade illegal before the US I think. Additionally, some of those high ranking slave owners actively promoted slavery, some didn't. Jefferson signed that bill prohibiting importation of slaves for instance. A small step, but necessary.

Through the 2020 lens, I understand that doesn't matter, but I do not agree with analyzing historical actions through a modern viewpoint. If history somehow turns positive, imagine a year 2220 review of presidents and the simple critique that almost all post WWII presidents advocated (or at least failed to stop) constant interventions, typically based on largely false propaganda, in foreign countries that tended to result in a lighter form of modern day slavery (or worse, Indonesia,Vietnam,Chile?) for the people of those countries. I believe any analysis of the Constitutional era should find that any attempt to make slavery illegal at that time would have resulted in a disaster and would have effectively been a step backwards. Jackson's destruction of the 2nd US bank made a non-slavery based South next to impossible and led to 1861.

 

[Dennis Berube]

17 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

So DiEugenio denies the successful liberal policies of Obama’s last two years while decrying the right-wing attack on liberalism?

Thank you for the morning chuckle Cliff. Obama's "Successful liberal policies" and no, I do not need to see you re post your arguments thereof it is ok that we disagree.

 

It's easy to attack liberalism when it doesn't exist in a historically recognizable form. Today, it apparently means, corporatism with a touch of tokenism. Also, it seemingly can mean anything other than serious economic reform and regulation (and disagreement with CIA/CFR on all foreign policy matters). If your not attacking that then what are you doing for Wallace's Common man?