A view from a neighbor to the north:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...your-blessings

Originally Posted by Terry Glavin

But pause to calm down just a bit and it’s hard not to notice that Canadians politics just now, no matter what the shouters have to say for themselves, is not taking its trajectory in a very American way, or in any British fashion. For this, we should count ourselves very lucky. First, a synopsis of the American scene reveals a contest for the Republican Party’s presidential-ticket nomination dominated by a cast of gargoyles so hideous and reactionary you’d think the entire money-poisoned spectacle was a lavish reality-television satire produced and directed by a consortium of Hollywood moguls intent on securing Hillary Clinton’s victory in 2016.

Clinton remains out in front of the race for the Democratic Party ticket owing to her successful strategy of trying to go unnoticed. Her closest challenger is apparently the fire-in-the-belly socialist Bernie Sanders, a scrupulously honest and reasonable senator from Vermont who would probably feel at home in Canada among either the Liberal party or the New Democratic Party.

Leading the Republican pack is the famously loutish casino and beauty pageant tycoon Donald Trump, about whose vulgarity little needs to be said because dummkopf coarseness is the very thing for which he is best known — that and of course his cartoonish hairdo. But what is worth noting about Trump’s boorishness is that it is proving to be such a favourability-rating virtue that all the hillbillies among his opponents are finding it necessary to emulate and mimic him, just to draw attention to themselves and give the impression that they’re “serious” contenders.

If this keeps up, any advantage sought by Trump’s challengers will inevitably go to the candidate to whom the utterance of ill-tutored bellicosities and loudmouthed indecencies comes most naturally. This is a state of affairs that presents as grim a terrain for such level-headed candidates as, say, Jeb Bush, Trump’s closest competitor, as it does for such distant runners as Carly Fiorina, the former chief executive officer of Hewlett Packard.

The otherwise presentable credentials that should be useful to Jeb Bush are offset of course by the taint of his family name, his brother being former president George W. Bush (now as much a figure of contempt on the Republican right as among most Democrats) but his most crippling handicap is that he isn’t downright loopy. In Farina’s case, she appears doomed, not in spite of her potential to broadly mobilize both sensible Republicans and reasonable Democratic Party voters, but because of it.

It’s come down to this. Trump floats the notion of a constitutional amendment to allow him to catapult Americans born of illegal immigrants back over that “wall” he keeps talking about building on the U.S.-Mexican border, or takes time to expostulate on the allegedly diminished attractiveness of celebrity supermodel Heidi Klum. This allows former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee to score upticks in the polls by proposing to mobilize the National Guard for such national-security purposes as ensuring that even a 10-year-old pregnant rape victim would be prevented from gaining access to an abortion.

Originally Posted by Earl and Mooch

A view from a neighbor to the north:

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-co...your-blessings

As sane a review of a less than sane process as I've seen.

Donald Trump just got the endorsement of the fascist pig David Duke.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewir...t-donald-trump

As questionable as Hillary Clinton may be as a candidate, Joe Biden is worse. In my opinion he doesn't have the stuff to get elected, and he's too old too. If Democrats turn to him and dump Clinton, they are ceding the election to the Republican candidate; probably Jeb Bush. Probably Biden's only chance would be if Trump or some other chump is nominated.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

As questionable as Hillary Clinton may be as a candidate, Joe Biden is worse. In my opinion he doesn't have the stuff to get elected, and he's too old too. If Democrats turn to him and dump Clinton, they are ceding the election to the Republican candidate; probably Jeb Bush. Probably Biden's only chance would be if Trump or some other chump is nominated.

I don't think Clinton or Bush would be the eventual nominees; nor will Biden be a candidate. Most likely the election would be Sanders vs Trump. That's what mainstream boomer ideologues refuse to understand: The people are tired of globalism, "human rights" and neoliberalism being shoved down their throats. People want a Strong government, they want masculine values. They are tired of effeminate ideologies being shoved down the populace and the military's throats.

There may be something to this. My wife will probably vote Republican, but won't vote for Trump. I will probably vote Democratic, but won't vote for Clinton.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/03/op...tion.html?_r=0

If nominated, Mrs. Clinton will be the weakest Democratic nominee since Michael Dukakis in 1988. But many Republicans, presented with this golden opportunity, are enamored of a man who, if he’s the nominee, will be their weakest since Barry Goldwater in 1964. The Republican Party has a much deeper and more impressive field than the Democrats do, so they still have plenty of alternatives. But as summer gives way to fall, one of those alternatives had better emerge. The Democratic nominee will be beatable, but not if Donald Trump, unreason personified, is the unappealing face of Mr. Lincoln’s party.

Is Joe Biden "hardhat" enough?

When he first announced he might be jumping in, I scoffed - both due to his age, and the track record of recent sitting/former Democratic Vice Presidents as Presidential candidates (Humphrey, Mondale and Gore all lost - and only Gore's loss was really close). But then yesterday they were reeling off his past voting record on MSNBC: He apparently voted for the Hyde Amendment, in favor of the Defense Of Marriage Act, and against partial-birth abortion. Those are pretty impeccable "hardhat" credentials.

So Biden might be viable after all.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

As questionable as Hillary Clinton may be as a candidate, Joe Biden is worse. In my opinion he doesn't have the stuff to get elected, and he's too old too. If Democrats turn to him and dump Clinton, they are ceding the election to the Republican candidate; probably Jeb Bush. Probably Biden's only chance would be if Trump or some other chump is nominated.

Biden jumps in with Elizabeth Warren on the ticket as VP, and Joe promises only one term (hint, hint), the Dems will take the WH in a landslide.

PW - although we had our disagreements a long time ago, on this one I couldn't agree with you more. I tried to caucus for Biden in Iowa in January 2008, but we couldn't form a viable group and I ended up with the Obama people. I am thankful I did (I can't abide the Clintons), but I've always had a soft spot for Joe. And Warren as President-in-waiting would be hard for me to resist. The Clintons could finally be sent out to pasture, the troglodytes might then be sent to the further most corners of their caves, and I could depart this life with quiet satisfaction.

Pax,

Dave Krein

Originally Posted by David Krein

PW - although we had our disagreements a long time ago, on this one I couldn't agree with you more. I tried to caucus for Biden in Iowa in January 2008, but we couldn't form a viable group and I ended up with the Obama people. I am thankful I did (I can't abide the Clintons), but I've always had a soft spot for Joe. And Warren as President-in-waiting would be hard for me to resist. The Clintons could finally be sent out to pasture, the troglodytes might then be sent to the further most corners of their caves, and I could depart this life with quiet satisfaction.

Pax,

Dave Krein

Please! You're raising my hopes with this shining vision on the hill! Only I fear to be dashed on the rocks.

Originally Posted by TnT

Please! You're raising my hopes with this shining vision on the hill! Only I fear to be dashed on the rocks.

Well, it would give us another chance at a blue dominant regeneracy. Maybe even a better chance than was really available in early 2009.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Well, it would give us another chance at a blue dominant regeneracy. Maybe even a better chance than was really available in early 2009.

I don't see how Biden offers a better chance for regeneracy than Hillary Clinton, or than Barack Obama did.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

Is Joe Biden "hardhat" enough?

When he first announced he might be jumping in, I scoffed - both due to his age, and the track record of recent sitting/former Democratic Vice Presidents as Presidential candidates (Humphrey, Mondale and Gore all lost - and only Gore's loss was really close). But then yesterday they were reeling off his past voting record on MSNBC: He apparently voted for the Hyde Amendment, in favor of the Defense Of Marriage Act, and against partial-birth abortion. Those are pretty impeccable "hardhat" credentials.

So Biden might be viable after all.

Those are "culture warrior" credentials. The culture war is passe. It would make him less viable.

Although I said Biden might have a chance against Trump, I am not underestimating the Donald. Although he would make a lousy president, for the most part, he makes a good candidate-- according to my cosmic score. Better than Biden's score, which is no better than Hillary's.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I don't see how Biden offers a better chance for regeneracy than Hillary Clinton, or than Barack Obama did.

Biden puts E. Warren on his ticket and promises to run for only one term (hint, hint) - Democrats, but particularly Progressives, enthusiasm explodes over the prospect of holding the WH for 12 years. Both HC and BS will have to stand aside from that juggernaut. The greatest turnout ever in the general resulting in a landslide with coattails to re-take the Senate at a filibuster-proof level and possible even putting in play the House. 4T is over with just the sweeping of the Baggers into history's dustbin left to do.

Originally Posted by David Krein

PW - although we had our disagreements a long time ago, on this one I couldn't agree with you more. I tried to caucus for Biden in Iowa in January 2008, but we couldn't form a viable group and I ended up with the Obama people. I am thankful I did (I can't abide the Clintons), but I've always had a soft spot for Joe. And Warren as President-in-waiting would be hard for me to resist. The Clintons could finally be sent out to pasture, the troglodytes might then be sent to the further most corners of their caves, and I could depart this life with quiet satisfaction.

Pax,

Dave Krein

Funny, I too, was an early Biden supporter in '08, but switched over to Clinton when he dropped out in early January. Went with HC at the time because she wasn't under any illusion she could work with the GOP - which, until the last year, was Obama's biggest weakness. Voted, of course, for Obama in the general and have spent considerable time ever since trying to explain to exceedingly disappointed, intellectually lazy, naive 2008 Obamatrons why he was not the Savior they were so certain that he would be - exact same thing would happen with "Bernie-trons" if we are lucky enough for him to be elected.

Biden has baggage - the plagiarism will certainly be brought up as well as the 'personal space vilations' or 'gropping' incidence(s) or whatever you want to call it. He also has spasms of inappropriate verbal gaffs that have been video taped. Of most concern is what the HC supporters would do if she goes down again in the primaries - they held their collected noses and voted the Dem ticket in '08, I'm not so sure they'll do it again - the Dems cannot win the general without them. On the other hand, Biden might be "nice enough" (so far) that he might be able to smooth this over. There's also the Bernie-trons' disappointment - Biden, both organically and tactically, will run to the right to Clinton - that could drive the Bernie-trons crazy and eventually frustrated. Dems don't win without turnout. Biden would really need to thread the needle, and both the Clintons and Sanders will have to come out hard in support for Biden if he proves to be the nominee.

It will not be a cakewalk for Biden. However, ALL those difficulties go instantly away big time if Warren goes on the ticket and Biden makes clear his one-term approach. As I said, it would be a landslide in the general. The GOP field is highly flawed; their only hope is Clinton as opponent - although they would be happy with "Socialist Sanders' as the DEM nominee... at least until election day.

I think Biden will bide his time and see what continues to happen in Iowa and New Hampshire - does HC continue downward, and does BS hit a ceiling with a lot of soft anybody-but-HC support. And it's not just how Clinton/Sanders do, it will be what polling support comes out for him. Interesting times.

-----------------------------

I wrote this before the forum shutdown and before the Biden interview with Colbert. In some ways, Biden indicated he was leaning away from running. On the other hand, the level of sincerity exhibited is another indication that he would sweep the field. Can you imagine anyone in the military, other than complete neoCons, voting for anyone but Biden?

Originally Posted by playwrite

Biden puts E. Warren on his ticket and promises to run for only one term (hint, hint) - Democrats, but particularly Progressives, enthusiasm explodes over the prospect of holding the WH for 12 years. Both HC and BS will have to stand aside from that juggernaut. The greatest turnout ever in the general resulting in a landslide with coattails to re-take the Senate at a filibuster-proof level and possible even putting in play the House. 4T is over with just the sweeping of the Baggers into history's dustbin left to do.

Warren may become president someday. Or Cory Booker. But I don't think a vice-presidential pick means too much, since the people know that a veep does very little. The people vote for president, not the veep--- or anything else apparently. There is no prospect of the 4T ending until 2028 at the very earliest. With failure to repeal gerrymandering, the House and maybe the Senate stay Republican the next 4 years. Even if the Democrats keep the WH, which I expect is likely whoever runs, though by a narrow margin, the frustration will continue for at least this next 4 years. The 4T is the division and frustration, and sweeping the baggers into the dustbin is job one of this 4T.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Warren may become president someday. Or Cory Booker. But I don't think a vice-presidential pick means too much, since the people know that a veep does very little. The people vote for president, not the veep--- or anything else apparently. There is no prospect of the 4T ending until 2028 at the very earliest. With failure to repeal gerrymandering, the House and maybe the Senate stay Republican the next 4 years. Even if the Democrats keep the WH, which I expect is likely whoever runs, though by a narrow margin, the frustration will continue for at least this next 4 years. The 4T is the division and frustration, and sweeping the baggers into the dustbin is job one of this 4T.

Biden being elected over HC and BS (as well as whatever comes out of the clown car) sets up the gestalt of the VP slot being very important.

That is confirmed and enhanced by EW in the VP slot and Biden's promise to run for only one term.

EW 2020 becomes more inevitable than HC could have ever hoped to have been.

Yes, I think Biden will bide his time for a month or two and see what happens with BS and HC. I have just never been much impressed with Biden, his speaking style, his personality, or his ability to attract voters in the past. And his liberal policies have always had some hesitation and border-state moderation attached to them. On the plus side, perhaps, he's more dove-ish than Hillary.

I know that Hillary has her problems. Is she kind-of an insincere, self-justifying, perhaps somewhat-dictatorial bitch who can't be entirely trusted, and too close to corporate culture-- bound by her own greed and by her trigger-happy approach to diplomacy? Or does she have a reservoir of real charisma, wisdom and determination that gets going once the going gets tough, and an inner core of real concern for the common people, and liberal/feminist values? It will kind of depend on which HC gets cemented into the Democratic primary-voting public mind over the next few months.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Yes, I think Biden will bide his time for a month or two and see what happens with BS and HC. I have just never been much impressed with Biden, his speaking style, his personality, or his ability to attract voters in the past. And his liberal policies have always had some hesitation and border-state moderation attached to them. On the plus side, perhaps, he's more dove-ish than Hillary.

I know that Hillary has her problems. Is she kind-of an insincere, self-justifying, perhaps somewhat-dictatorial bitch who can't be entirely trusted, and too close to corporate culture-- bound by her own greed and by her trigger-happy approach to diplomacy? Or does she have a reservoir of real charisma, wisdom and determination that gets going once the going gets tough, and an inner core of real concern for the common people, and liberal/feminist values? It will kind of depend on which HC gets cemented into the Democratic primary-voting public mind over the next few months.

In general agreement on all aspects. We'll just have to wait and see, but it certainly seems to still be in play this morning -

Vice President Biden, who is mulling a White House bid, met privately with a top bundler for Barack Obama's two presidential campaigns during his swing through New York last week, Bloomberg reports.

Biden reportedly took a meeting at his hotel in Midtown Manhattan with Robert Wolf, the former chairman and CEO of UBS Americas, that lasted more than 90 minutes.

With Stephen Colbert's help, Biden knocked it out of the park. He came across as the world's most wonderful and sensitive human being. I'm skeptical about how much that will really help him, given the country's romance with bullshit artists. And it could be that Biden is the ultimate bullshit artist, if he was being disingenous on Colbert's show.

One thing I remember back before Cheney's invasion of Iraq, is that Biden, among very few others, reminded us all of the fundamental divided nature of Iraq - Sunni-stan, Shia-stan and Kurdi-stan, and how culturally it might be a bit of a challenge to expect a national Iraqi government to come about looking like a mature European-style democracy, overnight.

Originally Posted by TnT

One thing I remember back before Cheney's invasion of Iraq, is that Biden, among very few others, reminded us all of the fundamental divided nature of Iraq - Sunni-stan, Shia-stan and Kurdi-stan, and how culturally it might be a bit of a challenge to expect a national Iraqi government to come about looking like a mature European-style democracy, overnight.

Hey, even the Nordic countries insist on remaining separate rather than becoming one giant country presumably called Scandinavia. In 1905 Sweden almost invaded Norway seeking to prevent them from becoming independent. And all of the Nords have more in common with each other than the ''three Iraqs'' do.

Originally Posted by TnT

With Stephen Colbert's help, Biden knocked it out of the park. He came across as the world's most wonderful and sensitive human being. I'm skeptical about how much that will really help him, given the country's romance with bullshit artists. And it could be that Biden is the ultimate bullshit artist, if he was being disingenous on Colbert's show.

After he lost his first wife, Biden quietly, and without fanfare, commuted to work from Delaware every day. HE took the role of Dad seriously, and still seems to be family-oriented. I don't think it's an act.

Originally Posted by TnT ...

One thing I remember back before Cheney's invasion of Iraq, is that Biden, among very few others, reminded us all of the fundamental divided nature of Iraq - Sunni-stan, Shia-stan and Kurdi-stan, and how culturally it might be a bit of a challenge to expect a national Iraqi government to come about looking like a mature European-style democracy, overnight.

Back when he was SecDef, Robert Gates made fun of Biden's recommendation that Iraq be split into three self-governing regions, because that's not how democracies work. Maybe, but it seems to be how traditional societies work, and Iraq more than qualifies on that that criterion. I doubt it qualifies as a democracy on any level.

In rolling out his tax proposal, which he unveiled earlier this month, Bush has occasionally adopted a populist tone, telling supporters at a North Carolina factory that “my plan will help those who live on their paychecks, who haven’t seen a raise in a while.”

He touted the plan as a way to lower taxes, simplify the tax code, eliminate loopholes and make the American economy more competitive, describing his planned tax cut for the highest bracket as a return to Reaganism.

"At 28%, the highest tax bracket would return to where it was when President Ronald Reagan signed into law his monumental and successful 1986 tax reform," he wrote in an op-ed announcing the proposal.

As The Huffington Post's Zach Carter and Ben Walsh previously reported, that's an even steeper tax cut for the wealthy than the 33 percent rate George W. Bush supported in 2000. Jeb Bush's plan also calls for cutting corporate taxes and the capital gains tax rate.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0b48f6700fbbd

The top 1% of American income-earners would get 53% of the tax break. But with the same advisers that his brother had, what can you expect?

I enjoyed this article. If not for the fact that "amygdala" and "magic ponies" were not mentioned even once, I would have thought Playwrite could have written it.

President Obama Drops The "U" Word On The Republican Party
byDartagnanFollow
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/0...?detail=email#

If there's one thing that is sure to send Republicans into an apoplectic, screaming rage, it's the prospect of the most successful President in modern memory deliberately tweaking them where it hurts the most--namely, in their phony pretensions of patriotism:

“This whole anti-immigrant sentiment that’s out there in our politics right now is contrary to who we are. Because unless you are a Native American, your family came from someplace else,” Mr. Obama said. “Don’t pretend that somehow 100 years ago the immigration process was all smooth and strict. That’s not how it worked.” The grandparents and great-grandparents of politicians taking a hard line on immigration, he said, were also “somehow considered unworthy or uneducated or unwashed.”

“When I hear folks talking as if somehow these kids are different from my kids or less worthy in the eyes of God, that somehow they are less worthy of our respect and consideration and care, I think that’s un-American,” Mr. Obama said.

In one sentence the President managed to tie immigration, patriotism and religious faith together and frame it as an indictment of the Republican platform. With one carefully timed, barbed phrase he baited the entire Republican field, including the blowhard idiot with the orange hair, into responding, while turning the Republican meme of his "otherness" on its head and serving it up to them on a cold dish. If you don't think the right is already churning up its outrage meter, Google "Un-American" on your news feed of choice and take a look at who is reporting on this.

America will now have the pleasure of watching the Republican candidates weigh in on the President's characterization of their entire hateful, anti-Latino and Hispanic crusade. It should be the first question asked in the debates. Go ahead, Mr. Trump. Explain to your sycophants why implementing a cruel, massive deportation scheme impacting 11 million people can be reconciled with American "values," as you understand them. Tell them why we need to build a "wall." Tell them what kind of twisted notion of "God" or even basic human decency would support this kind of scheme. Your audience will eat it up. The rest of the country--maybe not so much.

With the corporate media reduced to a useless, drooling circle-jerkfest over everything that comes out of Trump's mouth, the President is busy moving into Iowa to weigh in on the "debate:"

White House press secretary Josh Earnest made no secret that Mr. Obama flew to Iowa to try to influence the 2016 discussions.
Rather than "dropping in" for a ceremonial visit, the President held a Town Hall meeting, fielding questions about education, economic policy, and most of all, immigration, where he continued to torment the Republican candidates into defending the consequences of their policies:

"Mr. Obama got animated when asked about the children of illegal immigrants having education benefits, and he immediately tied it to the debate on the 2016 campaign trail.

He said it makes “absolutely no sense” for politicians to block young people who “are American kids by every other criteria except for a piece of paper” from being “full-fledged parts of this community and this country.” "

It has to be terribly galling for a party that spent the last two decades demonizing Democrats with accusations that they are somehow less patriotic, somehow less devoted to their country and its citizens than the chest-beating Republicans, to have the "UnAmerican" label pinned onto them. It has to be doubly galling after they failed so spectacularly in trying to block the Iran accord, aligning themselves with the desires of Israeli hard-liners rather than the interests of the U.S. It has to be triply galling after it was recently revealed that they've conspired to sabotage international efforts supported by the U.S. to combat the effects of climate change.

Sometimes the truth just hurts. But don't worry, Republicans. You'll get your chance to explain yourselves tonight.

President Obama is bringing the popcorn.

Bigotry, cruelty, vindictiveness, and recklessness need to be defined out of the American way of politics if America is to do well in this Crisis Era.

People who have sought the failure of President Obama no matter what are greatly different from this liberal's position on George W. Bush: basically, that I wanted him to get away with what he proposed. I had low expectations -- but Dubya failed even those.