Did Anyone Else Watch It?

[Paul Rigby]

 

[Michael Griffith]

I must disagree with some of RFK Jr.'s arguments about Russia's invasion. He says the U.S. and NATO are partly to blame for the invasion because we broke our promise not to expand NATO eastward. He ignores the fact that when we made that commitment, Russia was a very different country than it later became. Initially, under Yeltsin, Russia was a semi-democratic state with emerging checks and balances and with regional leaders chosen by local elections, not to mention that Russia was not threatening or attacking any of its neighbors. All of this changed when Putin began to consolidate his power in the mid-2000s and invaded Georgia in 2008.

Naturally, when Eastern European nations saw these things happening, they became concerned about their own security, and we and NATO were naturally willing to expand NATO eastward in response to the increasingly tyrannical and aggressive regime in Russia. 

Only an aggressor worries about a neighbor joining a defensive alliance.  Putin had no excuse for invading the peaceful and liberal democracy of Ukraine, in violation of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Roger Odisio]

18 hours ago, Paul Rigby said:

 

Thanks for this, Paul.  I'm familiar with Robert Barnes from his appearances on the Duran. A bright fellow with thorough knowledge of US history, difficult to pigeonhole in the increasingly defunct left-right dichotomy.  He would bring up the deep state and even the JFKA when talking of other things.

Here he concentrates on the importance of the peace speech and Junior's attempt to revive it. I was especially struck by his description of the speech as laying out the road not traveled.  The killers took the country in a different, in fact opposite, direction. I liked the description so much I'm going to steal it.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Michael Griffith  I have to disagree with you. Russia was asked to withdraw its nuclear weapons from Ukraine. In exchange for that agreement, the US gave a firm promise. it was not conditioned on who was in power or the form of Russian government.

Coupled with this promise is the fact that our russian experts in our government and those of our allies are fully cognizant of Russia's long history of paranoia about its borders. They surely knew that extending NATO eastward was provoking the bear. There could have been other ways to provide assurances to eastern european countries without triggering the Russians.  The US and its allies are not pure in this matter. 

 

 

[Greg Doudna]

Some stomach-turning headlines re RFK Jr. "Pro-RFK Jr. Super PAC has deep ties to Marjorie Taylor Green, George Santos"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pro-rfk-jr-super-pac-160948638.html

There is one way RFK Jr. could show he is for real: by ripping the bark off the MAGA Trumper right, going after them both barrels: Bannon, Trump, toxic populism/fascism, the whole lot of them ... in continuity with his uncle JFK and father, RFK, who were at odds with the rabid right of Edwin Walker and the John Birch Society in the early 1960s.

Its the same thing. The same toxic populism weaponized by demagogues strain in American history.  

If RFK Jr. does not do so, then that is a pretty good signal to me he is not for real. 

Here is a deep-pocketed pro-RFK Jr. PAC with some of the most loathsome direct origins and connections to right-wing fascist wannabes in America. 

It is like 2004 when hard-right Republican operatives openly assisted the Rev Al Sharpton campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, with both serious money and serious political campaign management skills support, all openly and with Sharpton's approval. They didn't try to control or change anything he said. Sharpton out there on the left kept on being Sharpton unfiltered without change. But it was to weaken the Democrats. 

An example of one who did repudiate that kind of toxic support: forgotten now, and I'm not a particular advocate of him, but Ross Perot. I saw him look right into a camera on a national debate stage and in response to a question say "If you've got hatred in your heart toward other races, I don't want your vote", and gave every indication of meaning it. That stood out to me as as classy as John McCain's famous answer to the lady who wanted him to say Obama was evil. 

That was honorable. I hope to God RFK Jr. will do the same with these Trump MAGA types lavishing praise on him, and like... right now.  

Going unvarnished against Trump/the MAGA-right will alienate the white nationalist and racist sectors of Trump's base but they're a lost cause for progressives and a better America anyway. But there are among Trump voters evangelicals and non-evangelicals who are not racist, who are voting economic and alienation issues, and an unvarnished attack on the fascist right by RFK Jr. would win over many of those.

[James DiEugenio]

This is such crapola.

Its not Yahoo, its Rolling Stone as the originator. As I noted in my  article on this issue, the Rolling Stone has no credibility in this arena.

There are all kinds of consultancies that work for either political party, it does not matter.  Its a business.

And so they use this to somehow equate RFK Jr. with the Far Right.  

It goes back to that BS Bannon story that CBS put out when RFK Jr. announced.  That somehow Bob was doing that it Bannon's request to weaken Biden.

That speech RFK Jr. gave on foreign policy could not have been given by an rightwing candidate or any mainstream Democratic candidate. 

The bottom line is this: the MSM does not want another Kennedy even near the White House ever again.

[Benjamin Cole]

36 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is such crapola.

Its not Yahoo, its Rolling Stone as the originator. As I noted in my  article on this issue, the Rolling Stone has no credibility in this arena.

There are all kinds of consultancies that work for either political party, it does not matter.  Its a business.

And so they use this to somehow equate RFK Jr. with the Far Right.  

It goes back to that BS Bannon story that CBS put out when RFK Jr. announced.  That somehow Bob was doing that it Bannon's request to weaken Biden.

That speech RFK Jr. gave on foreign policy could not have been given by an rightwing candidate or any mainstream Democratic candidate. 

The bottom line is this: the MSM does not want another Kennedy even near the White House ever again.

The bottom line is this: the MSM does not want another Kennedy even near the White House ever again.--JD

I would put it, "The MSM-Deep State does not want RFK Jr. even near the White House." 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

8 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Some stomach-turning headlines re RFK Jr. "Pro-RFK Jr. Super PAC has deep ties to Marjorie Taylor Green, George Santos"

https://www.yahoo.com/news/pro-rfk-jr-super-pac-160948638.html

There is one way RFK Jr. could show he is for real: by ripping the bark off the MAGA Trumper right, going after them both barrels: Bannon, Trump, toxic populism/fascism, the whole lot of them ... in continuity with his uncle JFK and father, RFK, who were at odds with the rabid right of Edwin Walker and the John Birch Society in the early 1960s.

Its the same thing. The same toxic populism weaponized by demagogues strain in American history.  

If RFK Jr. does not do so, then that is a pretty good signal to me he is not for real. 

Here is a deep-pocketed pro-RFK Jr. PAC with some of the most loathsome direct origins and connections to right-wing fascist wannabes in America. 

It is like 2004 when hard-right Republican operatives openly assisted the Rev Al Sharpton campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, with both serious money and serious political campaign management skills support, all openly and with Sharpton's approval. They didn't try to control or change anything he said. Sharpton out there on the left kept on being Sharpton unfiltered without change. But it was to weaken the Democrats. 

An example of one who did repudiate that kind of toxic support: forgotten now, and I'm not a particular advocate of him, but Ross Perot. I saw him look right into a camera on a national debate stage and in response to a question say "If you've got hatred in your heart toward other races, I don't want your vote", and gave every indication of meaning it. That stood out to me as as classy as John McCain's famous answer to the lady who wanted him to say Obama was evil. 

That was honorable. I hope to God RFK Jr. will do the same with these Trump MAGA types lavishing praise on him, and like... right now.  

Going unvarnished against Trump/the MAGA-right will alienate the white nationalist and racist sectors of Trump's base but they're a lost cause for progressives and a better America anyway. But there are among Trump voters evangelicals and non-evangelicals who are not racist, who are voting economic and alienation issues, and an unvarnished attack on the fascist right by RFK Jr. would win over many of those.

But there are among Trump voters evangelicals and non-evangelicals who are not racist, who are voting economic and alienation issues, and an unvarnished attack on the fascist right by RFK Jr. would win over many of those.--GD

This is exactly right. 

Many are appalled at globalist Washington, so obviously beholden to Big Defense, Silicon Valley, Media, Wall Street, Big Pharma and perma-war-globalism, and wanting access to cheap labor in US, and the world. 

I remember that line by Perot, and I liked him for it too. 

Rolling Stone has tried to smear RFK Jr. as a white supremacist, or far-right type. They are the spear-point of the long knives pointed at RFK Jr. 

As for fascism, keep your guard up: There are left-wing, and right-wing, fascists in America. 

Right now, it looks like the left-wing is far more interested in censorship and alliance with the security state, and corporatism, than the right wing. 

Just IMHO. 

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

This is one of the things RFK Jr is running on, censorship.

Did any MSM outlet carry his foreign policy speech?

[Benjamin Cole]

25 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is one of the things RFK Jr is running on, censorship.

Did any MSM outlet carry his foreign policy speech?

Oh, sheesh.

How about any coverage of the Biden Administration snuff job on the JFK Records Act?