Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

An old male being stunningly dishonest to a young African-American woman? Surely the outrage media is at full throttle? Oh, wait...she's not a Democrat. Gotta put those uppity Toms in their place. Time for a good ol' fashioned smear.

That was a total pile of shit move by Lieu. Strangelove approves.

I'll concede that Lieu's recording was a cheap shot but it was a joke that she was there to begin with. What is she an expert on? Are you aware of her field of 'expertise' other than 'provocateur'? The hearing was about hate crimes & white nationalism and she was invited by one of the loonier Republicans (Gohmert maybe?) to poo-poo the idea that white nationalism is a threat. I know Gohmert interrupted the proceedings at one point to scream "White nationalism is a hoax". Were Diamond & Silk unavailable?

She also managed to deny that the GOP's "Southern strategy" ever existed, even though the man who crafted said strategy (Kevin Phillips) has talked about it at length and the Chairman of the GOP formally apologized for it in 2005 (

She's in Dinesh D'souza territory. The Dems are the party of the KKK and haven't changed their views on blacks since 1923. Oh and not a single one of the racist Dems switched parties in the 60's/80's, that's a total myth. There are hard-working conservatives all across America who'll fork over stone cold cash to hear that shit. She knows a good grift when she sees it.

************************

In 2005 the chairman of the Republican National Committee Ken Mehlman went before the NAACP and apologized for the so-called Southern Strategy

https://nypost.com/2019/04/09/candace-owens-defends-stance-on-white-nationalism-after-contentious-hearing/

[Dr. Strangelove]

Trump shared some dumbass fan-made video touting himself in 2020 that used music from one of the Dark Knight films. Now all you get when you look at his tweet is this:

[Dr. Strangelove]

Another Republican Senator taking shots at Stephen Miller: the sharp-tongued and often-witty Joe Kennedy. Blasts White House staff (though he probably has one in particular in mind) for making it difficult to even get good people willing to go to DHS.

To that point here's a running tracker of Senate-confirmable positions that currently have no one filling them (or are 'acting' directors only). 27 months on the job and Trump has yet to formally nominate anyone for 150 out of 717 positions. The current Secretary of Defense is the longest "Acting" Secretary of Def in US history and Trump's shown no signs that he has someone permanent for that post.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-administration-appointee-tracker/database/?utm_term=.15df1a997237

[iam416]

to poo-poo the idea that white nationalism is a threat.

Good. The idea of white nationalism as a threat is quite the boogey man. Sounds like her invitation was appropriate for a cheap-ass carnival hearing.

But, the point remains -- she's an uppity Tom.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Heh, well, it won't surprise you that I certainly regard white nationalism and neo-nazism as a bigger threat than you do.

[Dr. Strangelove]

BTW, unrelated note, I got down to Danny's again for lunch yesterday. Had the Classic Couple. Rare instance where I liked the pastrami even more than the corned beef. Oh my

[AlabamAlum]

She made Nadler and Lieu look foolish.

And, DSL, you say 'white nationalism' - do you draw a distinction between 'white nationalism' and 'nationalism'?

[iam416]

Heh, well, it won't surprise you that I certainly regard white nationalism and neo-nazism as a bigger threat than you do.

No, it doesn't. But that's hardly the issue. The issue is whether you consider "white nationalism and neo-nazism" a threat sufficiently large and imminent for Congressional hearings. I can't imagine you do. Of course, if you're only meeting the political grandstanding threshold, then sure. Which, of course, makes Owens appearance appropriate.

BTW, unrelated note, I got down to Danny's again for lunch yesterday. Had the Classic Couple. Rare instance where I liked the pastrami even more than the corned beef. Oh my

Classic couple with corned beef and pastrami is my go to. With some stadium mustard -- delightful! We need to grab lunch there so that I can finally properly cuff you with my dueling glove in person. May your only drinking water be that of giant sewer that is Cayuga!

[Dr. Strangelove]

She made Nadler and Lieu look foolish.

And, DSL, you say 'white nationalism' - do you draw a distinction between 'white nationalism' and 'nationalism'?

Yes. I'd call someone a white nationalist if they believe the survival of America depends on white people maintaining a permanent majority in society and that steps need to be taken, particularly on immigration, towards making sure the demographics of America don't change. There's at least one poster here who believes that. A nationalist would argue that so long as someone shares "common values" they would be welcome in America; the white nationalist would say non-whites lack the capability to share those values, never will adopt them, and should therefore be either kept out of America entirely or kept to low enough numbers that they can't interfere with the majority.

My interpretation I guess is that the nationalists see a unifying cause around a set of ideals while the white nationalists believe what's really binding society together is homogeneity of race.

We've posted other articles in the recent past that make the case for Patriotism vs. Nationalism. It's hard to reconcile belief in the power of the Individual and small government with Nationalism.

[AlabamAlum]

The pics of the black hole are amazing. Not so much in beauty, but within my lifetime, a black hole was theoretical and not agreed to even exist by all astrophysicists, and some others surmised that they existed, but that we'd never have proof. Seeing one now is seeing the unseeable.

[AlabamAlum]

Yes. I'd call someone a white nationalist if they believe the survival of America depends on white people maintaining a permanent majority in society and that steps need to be taken, particularly on immigration, towards making sure the demographics of America don't change. There's at least one poster here who believes that. A nationalist would argue that so long as someone shares "common values" they would be welcome in America; the white nationalist would say non-whites lack the capability to share those values, never will adopt them, and should therefore be either kept out of America entirely or kept to low enough numbers that they can't interfere with the majority.

My interpretation I guess is that the nationalists see a unifying cause around a set of ideals while the white nationalists believe what's really binding society together is homogeneity of race.

We've posted other articles in the recent past that make the case for Patriotism vs. Nationalism. It's hard to reconcile belief in the power of the Individual and small government with Nationalism.

So, not all nationalists are white nationalists. Good enough. Thanks for the reply.

[iam416]

steps need to be taken, particularly on immigration, towards making sure the demographics of America don't change

Well, if enforcement of immigration laws and and advocating a non-open border are a "tthreat" then I guess there's a threat. I'm certainly onboard.

[Dr. Strangelove]

So, not all nationalists are white nationalists. Good enough. Thanks for the reply.

Right. At least not in America. I think it's harder to draw a distinction in a lot of European countries because so many of them in the aftermath of WWI and WWII were expressly crafted as ethno-states. "Hungary belongs to the Hungarians. The Czechs need a home state of their own". That sort of thing. In the aftermath of WWII a lot of countries expelled ethnic minority populations, especially Germans. That was because a lot of the countries in eastern Europe viewed these ethnic minorities as collaborators who had colluded with the Nazis in exchange for power. As one example, then-Czechoslovakia didn't want another future Hitler claiming that Sudetenland Germans needed protection, so they deported nearly all of them to East Germany. There were literally millions of them. Population transfers like that took place in the wake of WWII all over central and eastern Europe.

I guess my point with all that rambling is just to say while I wouldn't expressly call nationalism 'white nationalism' in Europe, but it's a fuzzier line than in the USA. Because the post-WWII nation-states were expressly designed for ethnic homogeneity.

[Dr. Strangelove]

Well, if enforcement of immigration laws and and advocating a non-open border are a "tthreat" then I guess there's a threat. I'm certainly onboard.

You're not a white nationalist because while you want immigration laws enforced or even restricted to the 'highly skilled', you aren't putting an ethnic, religious, or racial test on top of it. The white nationalists would reject that because even a highly skilled Arab surgeon or Nigerian engineer poses a threat to the nation-state because they aren't like 'us' and never will be.

Or maybe another way to put it...even if you got everything you wanted in immigration policy, there's every reason to believe that the majority of the highly skilled immigrants coming in would be from non-European countries. People from developing countries are simply a lot more apt to immigrate. A white nationalist would find that unacceptable. Europeans, or no one.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Here's a question for Kap, Crash or Hanni. The Trump administration has announced three significant foreign policy undertakings in the last week: (1) designating Iran's revolutionary guard as a terrorist organization. The step makes additional sanctions possible. What do you think is the objective of such a move? Will it achieve it? (2) new threats of EU tariffs......same questions as above. (3) the purge at DHS......same questions.

I have my own ideas. TBH, I don't think increasing pressure on the Mullahs in Iran is going to be productive if creating another "Arab Spring" among persians and creating instability is the goal. Maduro/Venezuela is a model and that's not going well. He hangs on and world oil supplies dwindle with the net effect punishing western consumers.

Shitting on the EU through trade threats isn't going to bring change to established processes. This kind of unilateral tough guy approach - the way Trump likes to negotiate in his businesses - is a dangerous undertaking unlikely to improve US trade positions with the EU. The WTO is a reasonably functional organization, IMO. Trump fosters confrontation rather than cooperation in ongoing trade disputes. I don't get this approach.

On immigration ....... the DHS purge is a bold step completely in keeping with how Trump works with subordinates. I'd agree US immigration policy is a mess mostly in favor of liberal immigration policy. I could see this as a wake up call to Congress to fix existing immigration law that IMO is generally too soft. I also think any EOs coming about on immigration as a result of installing Trump people in DHS won't survive court challenges but still.....

I see MAGA themes here consistent with Campaign promises Trump made. Definately this stuff on a superficial level appeals to his base potentially mobilizing voter support for re election. But all of this policy I mention is potentially destabilizing and not necessarily beneficial to US national security interests. Is Trump acting in only his best interests here neglecting the possibility for unintended consequences?