Posts Tagged ‘BARACK OBAMA’
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CNN'S "STARTING POINT", CROOKS AND LIARS, CZECHOSLAVAKIA, DAILY KOZ, DARRELL ISSA, DEBT CEILING, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GEORGE W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER, HUFFINGTON POST, immigration reform, INSIDER, JANET YELLEN, JIMMY CARTER, JOSEPH BIDEN, MEDIA MATTERS, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MSNBC'S "HARDBALL", NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEGOTIATING, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, PAP SMEARS, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLAND, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, R.I.CO. ACT, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE PRINCE, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TITLE X, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WARREN BUFFET, WINSTON CHURCHILL, WONKETTE, WORLD WAR 11
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 6, 2021 at 12:11 am
In September, 1938, seven months after seizing Austria, German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler gave another exhibition of his “negotiating” methods. This time, the target of his rage and aggression was Czechoslovakia.
Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”
Then he followed with the threat of war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”
For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.
He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”
The two European leaders met in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on September 15, 1938.
Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler
During their talks, Chamberlain said he had come to discuss German grievances. But, he added, it was necessary in all circumstances to exclude the use of force.
Hitler appeared to be shocked that he could be accused of such intentions: “Force? Who speaks of force?“
Then, without warning, he switched to an aggressive mode. He accused the Czechs of having mobilized their army in May. They had mobilized–in response to the mobilization of the German army.
“I shall not put up with this any longer,” shouted Hitler. “I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”
Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed—and possibly angry: “If I understood you right, you are determined to proceed against Czechoslovakia in any case. If this is so, why did you let me come to Berchtesgaden?
“In the circumstances, it is best for me to return at once. Anything else now seems pointless.”
Hitler was taken aback by the unexpected show of defiance. He realized he was about to lose his chance to bully the British into accepting his latest demands.
So he softened his tone and said they should consider the Sudetenland according to the principle of self-determination.
Chamberlain said he must immediately return to England to consult with his colleagues. Hitler appeared uneasy. But then the German translator finished the sentence: “…and then meet you again.”
Hitler realized he still had a chance to attain victory without going to war.
Chamberlain agreed to the cession of the Sudetenland. Three days later, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier did the same. No Czechoslovak representative was invited to these discussions.
Chamberlain met Hitler again in Godesberg, Germany, on September 22 to confirm the agreements. But Hitler aimed to use the crisis as a pretext for war.
He now demanded not only the annexation of the Sudetenland but the immediate military occupation of the territories. This would give the Czechoslovak army no time to adapt their defense measures to the new borders.
To achieve a solution, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich.
On September 29, Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain met and agreed to Mussolini’s proposal. They signed the Munich Agreement, which accepted the immediate occupation of the Sudetenland.
The Czechoslovak government had not been a party to the talks. Nevertheless, it promised to abide by the agreement on September 30.
It actually had no choice. It faced the threat of an immediate German invasion after being deserted by its pledged allies: Britain, France and the Soviet Union.
Chamberlain returned to England a hero. Holding aloft a copy of the worthless agreement he had signed with Hitler, he told cheering crowds in London: “I believe it is peace for our time.”
Neville Chamberlain
Winston Churchill knew better, predicting: “Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war.”
Hitler—still planning more conquests—also knew better. In March, 1939, the German army occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.
Chamberlain would soon be seen as a naive weakling—even before bombs started falling on London.
Hitler next turned his attention—and demands—to Poland.
When his generals balked, warning that an invasion would trigger a war with France and Britain, Hitler quickly brushed aside their fears: “Our enemies are little worms. I saw them at Munich.”
Adolf Hitler and his generals
Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939—unintentionally triggering World War II.
In time, historians and statesmen would regard Munich as an object lesson in the futility—and danger—in appeasing evil and aggression.
But for the postwar Republican party, Hitler’s my-way-or-else “negotiating” methods would become standard operating procedure.
During the summer of 2011, Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to massively cut social programs for the elderly, poor and disabled.
And while Republicans demanded that the disadvantaged tighten their belts, they rejected any raising of taxes on their foremost constituency—the wealthiest 1%.
To raise taxes on the wealthy, they insisted, would be a “jobs-killer.” It would “discourage” corporate CEOs from creating tens of thousands of jobs they supposedly wanted to create.
Next up: Republicans: “Everything for the rich—or we’ll destroy the country.”
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CNN'S "STARTING POINT", CROOKS AND LIARS, CZECHOSLAVAKIA, DAILY KOZ, DARRELL ISSA, DEBT CEILING, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GEORGE W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER, HUFFINGTON POST, immigration reform, INSIDER, JANET YELLEN, JIMMY CARTER, JOSEPH BIDEN, MEDIA MATTERS, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MSNBC'S "HARDBALL", NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEGOTIATING, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, PAP SMEARS, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLAND, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, R.I.CO. ACT, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE PRINCE, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TITLE X, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WARREN BUFFET, WINSTON CHURCHILL, WONKETTE, WORLD WAR 11
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 5, 2021 at 12:15 am
By studying the “negotiating” methods used by Adolf Hitler, Americans generally—and Democrats in particular—can learn much about the mindset and “negotiating” style of today’s Republican party.
A classic example of Hitler’s “bargaining style” came in 1938, when he invited Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg to his mountaintop retreat in Obersalzberg, Germany.
Hitler, an Austrian by birth, intended to annex his native land to Germany. Schuschnigg was aware of Hitler’s desire, but nevertheless felt secure in accepting the invitation. He had been assured that the question of Austrian sovereignty would not arise.
Adolf Hitler
The meeting occurred on February 12, 1938.
Shuschnigg opened the discussion with a friendly compliment. Walking over to a large window, he admired the breathtaking view of the mountains.
HITLER: We haven’t come here to talk about the lovely view or the weather!
Austria has anyway never done anything which was of help to the German Reich….I am resolutely determined to make an end to all this business. The German Reich is a great power. Nobody can and nobody will interfere if it restores order on its frontiers.
SCHUSCHNIGG: We simply have to go on living alongside one another, the little state next to the big one. We have no other choice.
And that is why I ask you to tell me what your concrete complaints are. We will do all in our power to sort things out and establish a friendly relationship, as far as it is possible to do so.
HITLER: That’s what you say, Herr Schuschnigg. And I am telling you that I intend to clear up the whole of the so-called Austrian question—one way or another. Do you think I don’t know that you are fortifying Austria’s border with the Reich?
SCHUSCHNIGG: There can be no suggestion at all of that—
HITLER: Ridiculous explosive chambers are being built under bridges and roads—
This was a lie, and Hitler knew it was a lie. But no matter. It gave him an excuse to threaten to destroy Austria—as he was to destroy so many other nations during the next seven years.
HITLER: I have only to give one command and all this comic stuff on the border will be blown to pieces overnight. You don’t seriously think you could hold me up, even for half an hour, do you?
Who knows—perhaps you will find me one morning in Vienna like a spring storm. Then you will go through something! I’d like to spare the Austrians that.
The S.A. [Hitler’s private army of Stormtroopers] and the [Condor] lLegion [which had bombed much of Spain into rubble during the three-year Spanish Civil War] would come in after the troops and nobody—not even I—could stop them from wreaking vengeance.
Schnuschigg made a cardinal mistake in dealing with Hitler: He showed fear. And this was precisely what the Nazi dictator looked for in an opponent.
Contrary to popular belief, Hitler did not constantly rage at everyone. On the contrary: he could, when he desired, be charming, especially to women. He used rage as a weapon, knowing that most people feel intimidated by it.
Republicans have profited by the same strategy.
In the case of Schuschnigg, Hitler opened with insults and threats at the outset of their discussion. Then there was a period of calm, to convince the Austrian chancellor the worst was over.
Finally, he once again attacked—this time with so much fury that Schuschnigg was terrified into submission.
With one stroke of a pen, Austria became a vassal-state to Nazi Germany.
Seven months later, in September, 1938, Hitler gave another exhibition of his “negotiating” methods. This time, the target of his rage and aggression was Czechoslovakia.
Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”
This consisted of the northern, southwest and western regions of Czechoslovakia, inhabited mostly by ethnic Germans.
Then he followed this up with the threat of war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”
For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.
The Cenotaph, in London, honoring the unknown British dead of World War 1
Something had to be done to prevent it. And he believed himself to be just the man to do it.
He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”
Once again, another head-of-state was prepared to meet Hitler on his home ground. Again, Hitler took this concession as a sign of weakness. And Chamberlain’s use of such words as “please” and “grateful” only further convinced Hitler of another impending triumph.
Chamberlain was determined to grant Hitler’s every demand–so long as this meant avoiding a second world war.
As a political party, Democrats have generally copied this same “strategy” when dealing with Republicans.
Next up: Hitler’s “negotiating” legacy lives on—among Republicans.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CNN'S "STARTING POINT", CROOKS AND LIARS, CZECHOSLAVAKIA, DAILY KOZ, DARRELL ISSA, DEBT CEILING, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GEORGE W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER, HUFFINGTON POST, immigration reform, INSIDER, JANET YELLEN, JIMMY CARTER, JOSEPH BIDEN, MEDIA MATTERS, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MSNBC'S "HARDBALL", NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEGOTIATING, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, PAP SMEARS, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLAND, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, R.I.CO. ACT, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE PRINCE, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TITLE X, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WARREN BUFFET, WINSTON CHURCHILL, WONKETTE, WORLD WAR 11
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 4, 2021 at 12:41 am
Once again, Republicans are ruthlessly playing “chicken” with the nation’s financial security.
And, once again, Democrats are responding with their trademark cowardice and ineptitude.
On August 2, 2019, President Donald Trump signed into law a two-year budget deal that raised spending by $320 billion over existing spending caps set in a 2011 law—and boosted military and domestic spending.
The bill also lifted the debt ceiling, which is the legal limit on the amount of debt the federal government can have.
The bill threatened to push the budget deficit to more than $1 trillion in 2019 for only the second time since the Great Recession of 2007-2008 and add $1.7 trillion to the federal debt over a decade.
Donald Trump
During the Presidency of Barack Obama, Republicans used the threat of the U.S. defaulting on its loans to force sharp budget cuts to nonmilitary spending.
Seven years later, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell praised the Republicans’ massive contribution to the national debt under Donald Trump.
By January, 2021, the national debt had risen by almost $7.8 trillion during Trump’s time in office. It amounted to about $23,500 in new federal debt for every person in the country.
But now, with Democrat Joseph Biden as President, Republicans have become “fiscal conservatives.”
And they’re prepared to plunge the United States into financial ruin unless Democrats meet their extortion demands.
The debt ceiling is the legal limit for how much debt the United States can take on as a country. Once that limit is hit, the U.S. Treasury can no longer issue bonds to raise funds to pay for everything that the government does.
In a September 8 letter, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen warned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) of the consequences if the ceiling wasn’t raised:
“A delay that calls into question the federal government’s ability to meet all its obligations would likely cause irreparable damage to the U.S. economy and global financial markets.
“We have learned from past debt limit impasses that waiting until the last minute to suspend or increase the debt limit can cause serious harm to business and consumer confidence, raise short-term borrowing costs for taxpayers, and negatively impact the credit rating of the United States.”
Janet Yellen
Today, Republicans are threatening the nation with defaulting on its loans as Congress prepares to pass the centerpiece of President Biden’s economic agenda.
“I can’t imagine there will be a single Republican voting to raise the debt ceiling after what we’ve been experiencing,” McConnell told Punchbowl News in July.
Republicans, in short, have repeatedly utilized the same “negotiating” strategy as Nazi Germany’s Fuhrer, Adolf Hitler.
And Democrats—out of cowardice or an ignorance of history—are once again refusing to publicly make this comparison.
And while the country hurtles toward economic catastrophe, they squabble among themselves about how many budgetary items they can cram into Biden’s proposed $3.5 trillion budget. As if that budget will mean anything if the country’s economy crashes with failure to raise the debt ceiling.
By studying Adolf Hitler’s mindset and “negotiating” methods, we can learn much about the mindset and “negotiating” style of today’s Republican party.
Robert Payne, author of the bestselling biography, The Life and Death of Adolf Hitler (1973), described Hitler’s “negotiating” style thus:
“Although Hitler prized his own talents as a negotiator, a man always capable of striking a good bargain, he was totally lacking in finesse.
“He was incapable of bargaining. He was like a man who goes up to a fruit peddler and threatens to blow his brains out if he does not sell his applies at the lowest possible price.”
A classic example of Hitler’s “bargaining style” came in 1938, when he invited Austrian Chancellor Kurt von Schuschnigg to his mountaintop retreat in Obersalzberg, Germany.
Hitler, an Austrian by birth, intended to annex his native land to Germany. Schuschnigg was aware of Hitler’s desire, but nevertheless felt secure in accepting the invitation. He had been assured that the question of Austrian sovereignty would not arise.
Kurt von Schuschnigg
The meeting occurred on February 12, 1938.
Shuschnigg opened the discussion with a friendly compliment. Walking over to a large window, he admired the breathtaking view of the mountains.
HITLER: We haven’t come here to talk about the lovely view or the weather!
Austria has anyway never done anything which was of help to the German Reich….I am resolutely determined to make an end to all this business. The German Reich is a great power. Nobody can and nobody will interfere if it restores order on its frontiers.
SCHUSCHNIGG: I am aware of your attitude toward the Austrian question and toward Austrian history….As we Austrians see it, the whole of our history is a very essential and valuable part of German history….And Austria’s contribution is a considerable one.
HITLER: It is absolutely zero—that I can assure you! Every national impulse has been trampled underfoot by Austria….
I could call myself an Austrian with just the same right—indeed with even more right—than you, Herr Schuschnigg. Why don’t you once try a plebiscite in Austria in which you and I run against each other? Then you would see!
Next up: Hitler “negotiates” Austria out of existence, then turns to Czechoslovakia.
ABC NEWS, AL QAEDA, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BASHIR AL-ASSAD, BBC, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHILE, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOUSE UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE, HUFFINGTON POST, HUMAN RIGHTS, IRAN, JOHN BOEHNER, JOHN MCCAIN, MEDIA MATTERS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NICARAGUA, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, RUSSIA, S.I. HAYAKAWA, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SYRIA, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, VLADIMIR PUTIN, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 1, 2021 at 12:10 am
On September 11, 2013, the New York Times published an Op-Ed (guest editorial) from Russian President Vladimir Putin, entitled: “A Plea for Caution from Russia: What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria.”
No one should be surprised that Putin came out strongly against an American air strike on Syria.
Its “President” (i.e., dictator) Bashir al-Assad, is, after all, a close ally of Russia. Just as his late father and dictator, Hafez al-Assad, was a close ally of the Soviet Union until its collapse in 1991.
Putin, of course, is a former member of the KGB, the infamous secret police which ruled the Soviet Union from its birth in 1917 to its collapse in 1991.
He grew up under a Communist dictatorship and clearly wishes to return to that era, saying publicly: “First and foremost it is worth acknowledging that the demise of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”
So it would have been unrealistic to expect him to view the “Syria crisis” the same way that President Barack Obama did.
(A “crisis” for politicians is any event that can be exploited to increase their own status—and thus power. Few politicians really care about the “human rights” of other nations—unless promoting this issue can empower themselves and/or their own nation.
(President Ronald Reagan, for example, often wailed about the Soviets’ oppression of the Polish union, Solidarity—while firing hundreds of unionized air traffic controllers who went on strike.)
(A “crisis” for the media is any event that can be exploited for higher ratings.)
In his September 11, 2013 guest editorial in the New York Times, Putin offered the expected Russian take on Syria:
- Poison gas was used in Syria.
- It wasn’t used by the Syrian Army.
- It was used by “opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons.”
But it was the concluding paragraph that enraged American politicians the most—especially Right-wing ones. In it, Putin took exception with American “exceptionalism.”
Vladimir Putin
This is the belief that the United States is unlike other nations in its innocence and steadfast dedication to human rights above all else.
Citizens of nations whose governments have been overthrown by the United States—such as Chile, Iran and Nicaragua—and replaced with brutal dictatorships would strongly disagree.
Referring to then-President Obama, Putin wrote:
“And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is ‘what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.’
“It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.
“There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too.
“We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.”
Putin had never publicly shown any interest in religion. But by invoking “the Lord,” he was able to turn the Christian beliefs of his Western audience into a useful weapon.
“I was insulted,” then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters when asked for his blunt reaction to the editorial.
“I have to be honest with you, I was at dinner, and I almost wanted to vomit,” said U.S. Senator Bob Menendez (D-New Jersey).
Putin had dared to question the self-righteousness of American foreign policy—and those who make it.
Making his case for war with Syria, Obama had said: “America is not the world’s policeman….
“But when, with modest effort and risk, we can stop children from being gassed to death, and thereby make our own children safer over the long run, I believe we should act.
“That’s what makes America different. That’s what makes us exceptional. With humility, but with resolve, let us never lose sight of that essential truth.”
President Barack Obama
* * * * *
In short: Because we consider ourselves “exceptional,” we have the divine right to do whatever we want.
It’s not necessary to see Putin as a champion of democracy (he isn’t) to see the truth in this part of his editorial: “It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation.”
From 1938 to 1969, the House Un-American Activities Committee sought to define what was “American” and what was “Un-American.” As if “American” stood for all things virtuous.
Whoever heard of an “Un-French Activities Committee”? Or an “Un-German” or “Un-British” one?
The late S.I. Hayakawa once made an observation that clearly applies to this situation.
Hayakawa was a professor of semantics (the study of meaning, focusing on the relation between words and what they stand for).
In his bestselling book, Language in Thought and Action, he observed that when a person hears a message, he has four ways of responding to it:
- Accept the speaker and his message.
- Accept the speaker but reject the message.
- Accept the message but reject the speaker.
- Reject the message and the speaker.
Americans might want to consider #3 in the recent case of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BAVARIA, BBC, BEER HALL PUTSCH, BENJAMIN CIVILETTI, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BOB WOODWARD, BUZZFEED, CAPITOL ATTACK, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HITLER: ASCENT: 1889 – 1933 (BOOK), HUFFINGTON POST, JOHN EASTMAN, JOSEPH BIDEN, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MEDIA MATTERS, MEIN KAMPF, MERRICK GARLAND, MIKE LEE, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUNICH, NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING, PBS NEWSHOUR, PERIL (BOOK), POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT COSTA, RUDY GIULIANI, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED STAITES SENATE, UNITED STATES CAPITOL, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, UNITED STATES SENATE, UPI, USA TODAY, VOLKER ULRICH, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on September 29, 2021 at 12:07 am
TO: Merrick Brian Garland – United States Attorney General
I hold the highest regard for your personal integrity. Yet, with due regard for your years of dedicated service to the rule of law, I am forced to say: You are now presiding over the closing days of the American Republic.
On January 6, President Donald Trump incited a treasonous attack on the United States Capitol Building. There, the United States Senate, with Vice President Mike Pence presiding, would certify states’ Electoral College results of that election.
Since former Vice President Joseph Biden had gotten 306 votes compared to 232 for Trump, the outcome was already known. And Trump, who had often “joked” about becoming “President-for-Life,” wanted that verdict overturned.
The Stormtrumpers marched to the United States Capitol—and quickly brushed aside Capitol Police, who made little effort to arrest or shoot them.
Among their outrages:
Stormtrumpers scaling Capitol Building walls
- Several rioters carried plastic handcuffs, possibly intending to take hostages.
- Others carried treasonous Confederate flags.
- Shouts of “Hang Pence!” often rang out.
- Improvised explosive devices were found in several locations in Washington, D.C.
- Many of the lawmakers’ office buildings were occupied and vandalized—including that of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a favorite Right-wing target.
More than three hours passed before police—using riot gear, shields and batons—retook control of the Capitol.
And Trump? After giving his inflammatory speech, he returned to the White House—to watch his handiwork on television. He initially rebuffed requests to mobilize the National Guard.
So what has happened during the eight months since that treasonous attack?
By September 24, 654 Stormtrumpers have been arrested and charged.
- At least 74 defendants have pleaded guilty.
- At least 22 have pleaded guilty to misdemeanors.
- Six have pleaded guilty to felonies.
- Three defendants have been sentenced: One drew a sentence of eight months for a felony. Two were sentenced for misdemeanor charges.
- Another was sentenced to three years probation and no jail time.
- Another was sentenced to six months imprisonment, but was credited for the time he had already spent in jail awaiting trial.
Yet no major Trump supporter has been arrested, let alone indicted.
- NOT Trump’s attorney, Rudy Giuliani, who cried to the demonstrators, “Let’s have trial by combat!”
- NOT Donald Trump, Jr., who, just hours before the Trump mob stormed Congress, threatened Republican lawmakers at a large rally outside the White House: “These guys better fight for Trump. Because if they’re not, guess what? I’m going to be in your backyard in a couple of months!”
- NOT Rep, Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) who incited the Trump crowd with: “Today is the day American patriots start taking down names and kicking ass!”
- And, above all, NOT Donald Trump. He not only incited his followers to attack the Capitol, he has spent the last six months spreading poisonous lies that the 2020 election was “stolen” from him through “massive” voter fraud. As a result, he continues to undermine the democratic process as he terrorizes the Republican party to stand behind him.
There is a historical precedent for this, and it does not bode well for our Republic.
On November 9, 1923, Nazi Party Fuhrer Adolf Hitler tried to overthrow the government in Munich, Bavaria.
About 2,000 Nazis marched to the center of Munich, where they confronted heavily-armed police. A shootout erupted, killing 16 Nazis and four policemen.
Hitler was injured during the clash, but managed to escape. Two days later, he was arrested and charged with treason.
Put on trial, he found himself treated as a celebrity by a judge sympathetic to Right-wing groups. He was allowed to brutally cross-examine witnesses and even make inflammatory speeches.
At the end of the trial, he was convicted of treason and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment.
Serving time in Landsberg Prison, in Bavaria. he wrote his infamous book, Mein Kampf-–“My Struggle.” Part autobiography, part political treatise, it laid out his future plans—including the extermination of the Jews and the conquest of the Soviet Union.
Adolf Hitler leaving Landsberg Prison, December, 20, 1924
Nine months later, he was released on parole—by authorities loyal to the authoritarian Right instead of the newly-created Weimar Republic.
Hitler immediately began rebuilding the shattered Nazi party—and deciding on a new strategy to gain power. Never again would he resort to armed force. He would win office by election—or intrigue.
On January 30, 1933, those intrigues made him Chancellor of Germany.
Writes historian Volker Ullrich, in his monumental 2016 biography, Hitler: Ascent 1889 – 1939: “Historians have perennially tried to answer the question of whether Hitler’s rise to power could have been halted….
“There were repeated opportunities to end Hitler’s run of triumphs. The most obvious one was after the failed Putsch of November 1923. Had the Munich rabble-rouser been forced to serve his full five-year term of imprisonment in Landsberg, it is extremely unlikely that he would have been able to restart his political career.”
Thus, it isn’t just what happens that can influence the course of history. Often, it’s what doesn’t happen that has at least as great a result.
The United States Justice Department now faces the same choice faced by the judges of the Weimar Republic: Enforce the law against a ruthless tyrant—or stand by while he mounts a comeback.
2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BAVARIA, BBC, BEER HALL PUTSCH, BENJAMIN CIVILETTI, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BOB WOODWARD, BUZZFEED, CAPITOL ATTACK, CBS NEWS, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, DONALD TRUMP JUNIOR, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HITLER: ASCENT: 1889 – 1933 (BOOK), HUFFINGTON POST, JOHN EASTMAN, JOSEPH BIDEN, LINDSEY GRAHAM, MEDIA MATTERS, MEIN KAMPF, MERRICK GARLAND, MIKE LEE, MIKE PENCE, MITCH MCCONNELL, MO BROOKS, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUNICH, NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NPR, OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING, PBS NEWSHOUR, PERIL (BOOK), POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, REUTERS, ROBERT COSTA, RUDY GIULIANI, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UNITED STAITES SENATE, UNITED STATES CAPITOL, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, UNITED STATES SENATE, UPI, USA TODAY, VOLKER ULRICH, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on September 28, 2021 at 12:10 am
TO: Merrick Brian Garland – United States Attorney General
I hold the highest regard for your personal integrity. After graduating from Harvard Law School, you served as a special assistant to Attorney General Benjamin Civviletti from 1979 to 1981.
As a federal prosecutor, you played a leading role in the investigation and prosecution of the Oklahoma City bombers.
You served as judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (1997 – 2021) and then as Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (2013 – 2020).
In 2016, President Barack Obama nominated you to serve as an associate Justice of the Supreme Court to fill the vacancy created by the death of Antonin Scalia. But Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused to hold a hearing or vote on your nomination.
Merrick Garland
Yet, with due regard for your years of dedicated service to the rule of law, I am forced to say: You are now presiding over the closing days of the American Republic.
As the bestselling book, Peril, makes clear, there was a detailed plan by Republicans to illegally retain President Donald Trump in office. The votes of 81 million Americans who had voted for former Vice President Joseph Biden would have been scrapped in what was intended to be a Right-wing coup.
According to authors Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, attorney John Eastman first proposed the plan to Vice President Mike Pence on January 4 in the Oval Office with Trump in attendance. The memo called for throwing out the election results in seven states under the false claim that those states had used alternate electors.
Eastman’s memo was sent to Senator Mile Lee (R-Utah) and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who served as one of Trump’s attorneys at the time. They tried to convince Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) that there was rampant fraud in the 2020 election.
Both Graham and Lee reportedly argued that the fraud claims had no merit.
On January 6, the United States Senate, with Vice President Mike Pence presiding, would certify states’ Electoral College results of that election.
Since Biden had gotten 306 votes compared to 232 for Trump, the outcome was already known.
On that morning, Trump tried to convince Pence to reject the electoral votes that had been cast for Biden. This would mean flipping the results of the 2020 Presidential election to give him a win.
Pence replied that he lacked the power to overturn those results.
But as Pence went off to the Capitol Building housing the Senate and House of Representatives, Trump had one last card to play.
Mike Pence
For weeks Trump had ordered his legions of Right-wing Stormtrumpers to descend on Washington, D.C. by January 6.
On December 20, he had tweeted: “Statistically impossible to have lost the 2020 Election. Big protest in DC on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!”
In tweets, he promoted the rally again on December 27 and 30, and January 1.
On January 6, Trump appeared at the Ellipse, a 52-acre park south of the White House fence and north of Constitution Avenue and the National Mall in Washington, D.C.
A stage had been set up for him to address tens of thousands of his supporters, who eagerly awaited him.
Trump ordered them to march on the Capitol building to express their anger at the voting process and to intimidate their elected officials to reject the results.
“All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by a bold and radical left Democrats which is what they are doing and stolen by the fake news media.
“Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore, and that is what this is all about. And to use a favorite term that all of you people really came up with, we will stop the steal….
“Republicans are constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back….And we’re going to have to fight much harder….
“And after this, we’re going to walk down and I’ll be there with you. We’re going to walk down to the Capitol. And we’re going to cheer on our brave Senators and Congressmen and women and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.
“Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated.”
The Stormtrumpers marched to the United States Capitol—and quickly brushed aside Capitol Police.
Stormtrumpers attacking the Capitol Building
Among their outrages:
- Members of the mob attacked police with chemical agents and lead pipes.
- A Capitol Hill police officer was knocked off his feet, dragged into the mob surging toward the building, and beaten with the pole of an American flag.
- One attacker was shot as protesters forced their way toward the House Chamber where members of Congress were sheltering in place.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ADULTERY, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ATHEISTS, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BIBLE, BILL MAHER, BIRTH CONTROL, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CATHOLICS, CBS NEWS, CIVIL LIBERTIES, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, ELEANOR ROOSEVELT, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FRANKLIN GRAHAM, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOMOSEXUALITY, HOMOSEXUALS, HUFFINGTON POST, ISLAM, JERRY FALWELL JR., JESUS CHRIST, JEWS, LESBIANS, LIBERALS, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE PENCE, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NON-CHRISTIANS, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, RELIGION, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD FEYNMAN, RICK SANTORUM, SALON, SAUDI ARABIA, SCIENCE, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SLAVERY, SPANISH INQUISITION, STORMY DANIELS, SUPREME COURT, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THEOLOGY, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TOMAS DE TORQUEMADA, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WAR, WOMEN, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, RELIGION, Social commentary on September 9, 2021 at 12:06 am
Bernardo Gui was the chief inquisitor of the Dominican Order during the Medieval Inquisition (1184 – 1230s).
Gui closely studied the best methods for interrogating “heretics.” He set forth his findings in his most important and famous work, Practica Inquisitionis Heretice Pravitatis. or “Conduct of the Inquisition into Heretical Wickedness.”
Here’s how such an interrogation might go:
When a heretic is first brought up for examination, he assumes a confident air, as though secure in his innocence. I ask him why he has been brought before me. He replies, smiling and courteous, “Sir, I would be glad to learn the cause from you.”
Interrogator: You are accused as a heretic, and that you believe and teach otherwise than Holy Church believes.
Accused Heretic: (Raising his eyes to heaven, with an air of the greatest faith) Lord, thou knowest that I am innocent of this, and that I never held any faith other than that of true Christianity.
Interrogator: You call your faith Christian, for you consider ours as false and heretical. But I ask whether you have ever believed as true another faith than that which the Roman Church holds to be true?
Accused Heretic: I believe the true faith which the Roman Church believes, and which you openly preach to us.
Interrogator: Perhaps you have some of your sect at Rome whom you call the Roman Church. I, when I preach, say many things, some of which are common to us both, as that God liveth, and you believe some of what I preach. Nevertheless you may be a heretic in not believing other matters which are to be believed.
Accused Heretic: I believe all things that a Christian should believe.
Interrogator: I know your tricks….But we waste time in this fencing. Say simply, Do you believe in one God the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost?
Accused Heretic: I believe.
Interrogator: Do you believe in Christ born of the Virgin, suffered, risen, and ascended to heaven?
Accused Heretic: (Briskly) I believe.
Interrogator: Do you believe the bread and wine in the mass performed by the priests to be changed into the body and blood of Christ by divine virtue?
Accused Heretic: Ought I not to believe this?
Interrogator: I don’t ask if you ought to believe, but if you do believe.
Accused Heretic: I believe whatever you and other good doctors order me to believe.
Inquisitor: Those good doctors are the masters of your sect; if I accord with them you believe with me; if not, not.
Accused Heretic: I willingly believe with you if you teach what is good to me.
Inquisitor: You consider it good to you if I teach what your other masters teach. Say, then, do you believe the body of our Lord, Jesus Christ to be in the altar?
Accused Heretic: (Promptly) I believe that a body is there, and that all bodies are of our Lord.
Interrogator: I ask whether the body there is of the Lord who was born of the Virgin, hung on the cross, arose from the dead, ascended, etc.
Accused Heretic: And you, sir, do you not believe it?
Interrogator: I believe it wholly.
Accused Heretic: I believe likewise.
Men like Bernard Gui—and Franklin Graham—do not seek a golden future. They crave to return to a “golden” past—which includes the power Christians once held to forcibly impose their religious beliefs on others.
Among those slated for forced conversions by the Religious Right:
- Atheists
- Jews
- Women
- Homosexuals
- Lesbians
- Non-Christians
- Liberals
To gain absolute secular power over the lives of their fellow Americans, the Religious Right will support any candidate, no matter how morally despicable.
During the 2016 Presidential race, evangelicals—and their leaders such as Franklin Graham and Jerry Falwell, Jr.—fervently supported Donald Trump, despite:
- His being twice divorced;
- His multiple affairs (including one with porn star Stormy Daniels);
- His documented ties to Russian oligarchs and Mafia chieftains;
- His viciousness, greed, lying and egomania.
Donald Trump and Jerry Falwell, Jr., at Liberty University
And they continue to fervently support him.
They expect Trump to sponsor legislation that will—-by force of law—make their brand of Christianity supreme above all other religions.
Legislation such as The Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
This was signed into law on March 26, 2015, by Mike Pence, then Governor of Indiana.
This allows any individual or corporation to cite its religious beliefs as a defense when sued by a private party.
Officially, its intent is to prevent the government from forcing business owners to violate their religious beliefs.
Unofficially, its intent is to appease the hatred of gays and lesbians by the religious Right, a key constituency of the Republican party.
Thus, a bakery that doesn’t want to make a cake for a gay wedding or a restaurant that doesn’t want to serve lesbian patrons now has the legal right to refuse to do so.
And a hospital can legally turn away a gay patient if it wants to.
Islamic countries are notorious for their persecution of non-Muslims. Now the Religious Right wants to impose its own version of sharia law on American citizens.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ADULTERY, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ATHEISTS, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BIBLE, BILL MAHER, BIRTH CONTROL, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CATHOLICS, CBS NEWS, CIVIL LIBERTIES, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, ELEANOR ROOSEVELT, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FRANKLIN GRAHAM, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOMOSEXUALITY, HOMOSEXUALS, HUFFINGTON POST, ISLAM, JERRY FALWELL JR., JESUS CHRIST, JEWS, LESBIANS, LIBERALS, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE PENCE, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NON-CHRISTIANS, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, RELIGION, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD FEYNMAN, RICK SANTORUM, SALON, SAUDI ARABIA, SCIENCE, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SLAVERY, SPANISH INQUISITION, STORMY DANIELS, SUPREME COURT, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THEOLOGY, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TOMAS DE TORQUEMADA, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WAR, WOMEN, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, RELIGION, Social commentary on September 8, 2021 at 12:06 am
American Right-wing elements relentlessly claimed that President Barack Obama was waging “a war on religion.”
GOP candidates like Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney intended to make this a major theme of their respective campaigns for President.
Obama supported a woman’s right
- to obtain abortion—including in cases of rape and incest;
- to obtain birth control; and
- to obtain amniocentesis (pre-natal testing).
By promoting women’s rights, Obama was “waging a war against religion”—according to American fascists.”
Since access to such medical procedures as birth control and pre-natal testing has long been entirely legal, what’s all the fuss about?
It’s simple: The Right is not waging a “war for religious liberty.”
It’s waging a bitter struggle to establish a government that uses force or the threat of it to impose reactionary religious beliefs on religionists who do not share such religious beliefs.
And on atheists or agnostics, who share none at all.
These Rightists and their theocratic allies have less in common with Jesus Christ than with Tomas de Torquemada (1420 – 1498), the infamous Grand Inquisitor of the Spanish Inquisition.
Christ never ordered the torture or death of anyone. Torquemada—claiming to act in “defense” of the Roman Catholic Church—presided over the deaths of at least 2,000 “heretics.”
Tomas de Torquemada
Nor did these unfortunate victims of religious fanaticism meet their death quickly or painlessly. They died by perhaps the cruelest means possible—by being burned alive at the stake.
Torquemada didn’t hesitate to pronounce someone a heretic. He “knew” who such people were. They were Jews, Muslims, atheists. They were “lapsed Catholics” who, in his view, failed to show fervent devotion to the religious authorities—like himself—who tyrannically ruled their lives.
For such people, Torquemada believed, the only road to salvation lay in being “cleansed” of their sins. And nothing burns away impurities like fire.
But before the fire-stakes came the fire-mindset: The arrogance of “knowing” who qualified as “saved” and who would be forever “damned.”
Unless, of course, his or her soul had been “purified” by fire.
“Heretic” burned at the stake
Fundamentalist Christians can no longer sentence “heretics” to the stake.
But the mindset that ruled the Spanish Inquisition has not disappeared. It has been vividly displayed by no less a religious authority than Franklin Graham, son of America’s most famous preacher, Billy Graham.
Franklin Graham
Appearing on the MSNBC program, “Morning Joe,” on February 21, 2012, Graham was asked if he thought that Barack Obama, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney qualified as Christians.
On Obama: “Islam sees him as a son of Islam… I can’t say categorically that [Obama is not Muslim] because Islam has gotten a free pass under Obama.”
On Santorum: “I think so. His values are so clear on moral issues. No question about it… I think he’s a man of faith.”
On Gingrich: “I think Newt Gingrich is a Christian, at least he told me he is.”
On Romney: “Most Christians would not recognize Mormons as part of the Christian faith. They believe in Jesus Christ. They have a lot of other things they believe in too, that we don’t accept, theologically.”
Thus, Graham pronounced as “saved” a notorious multiple-adulterer like Gingrich. He also gave a pass to Santorum, who married a woman who had lived “in sin” with an abortionist for six years.
But he unhesitatingly damned a longtime churchgoer like Obama or a devout Mormon like Romney (whose faith, most evangelicals like Graham believe, is actually a non-Christian cult).
Six years later, in 2018, Graham defended President Donald Trump, a notorious womanizer and multiple-adulterer, against charges that, in 2006, he had slept with porn star Stormy Daniels.
“I believe at 70 years of age the president is a much different person today than he was four years ago, five years ago, 10 years ago. He is not President Perfect.”
This differs greatly from his position on President Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky: “If he will lie to or mislead his wife and daughter, those with whom he is most intimate, what will prevent him from doing the same to the American public?”
It’s easy to imagine Graham transported to the French city of Toulouse in the 14th century. And to imagine him wearing the robes of Bernardo Gui, the chief inquisitor of the Dominican Order during the Medieval Inquisition (1184 – 1230s).
Gui closely studied the best methods for interrogating “heretics.” He set forth his findings in his most important and famous work, Practica Inquisitionis Heretice Pravitatis. or “Conduct of the Inquisition into Heretical Wickedness.”
In this, he offered a vivid example of how such an interrogation might go. The following is taken from that manual:
When a heretic is first brought up for examination, he assumes a confident air, as though secure in his innocence. I ask him why he has been brought before me. He replies, smiling and courteous, “Sir, I would be glad to learn the cause from you.”
This is not a dialogue between equals. The Inquisitor literally holds the power of life or agonizing death over the man or woman he is interrogating.
2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, 2016 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ADULTERY, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, ATHEISTS, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BIBLE, BILL MAHER, BIRTH CONTROL, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CATHOLICS, CBS NEWS, CIVIL LIBERTIES, CNN, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DONALD TRUMP, ELEANOR ROOSEVELT, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FRANKLIN GRAHAM, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOMOSEXUALITY, HOMOSEXUALS, HUFFINGTON POST, ISLAM, JERRY FALWELL JR., JESUS CHRIST, JEWS, LESBIANS, LIBERALS, MEDIA MATTERS, MIKE PENCE, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MUSLIMS, NBC NEWS, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NON-CHRISTIANS, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, RAW STORY, RELIGION, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REUTERS, RICHARD FEYNMAN, RICK SANTORUM, SALON, SAUDI ARABIA, SCIENCE, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SLAVERY, SPANISH INQUISITION, STORMY DANIELS, SUPREME COURT, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TEA PARTY, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, THE WASHINGTON POST, THEOLOGY, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TOMAS DE TORQUEMADA, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WAR, WOMEN, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, RELIGION, Social commentary on September 7, 2021 at 5:07 pm
Hamza Kashgari, a 23-year-old columnist in Saudi Arabia, decided to celebrate the birthday of the Islamic prophet Muhammed in a truly unique way.
Hamza Kashgar
In early February, 2012, he posted on Twitter a series of mock conversations between himself and Muhammad:
“On your birthday, I will say that I have loved the rebel in you, that you’ve always been a source of inspiration to me, and that I do not like the halos of divinity around you. I shall not pray for you.”
“On your birthday, I find you wherever I turn. I will say that I have loved aspects of you, hated others, and could not understand many more.”
“On your birthday, I shall not bow to you. I shall not kiss your hand. Rather, I shall shake it as equals do, and smile at you as you smile at me. I shall speak to you as a friend, no more.”
“No Saudi women will go to hell, because it’s impossible to go there twice.”
The tweets sparked some 30,000 infuriated responses. Many Islamic clerics demanded that he face execution for blasphemy.
Kashgari posted an apology tweet: “I deleted my previous tweets because…I realized that they may have been offensive to the Prophet and I don’t want anyone to misunderstand.”
Soon afterward, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, then King of Saudi Arabia, ordered his arrest.
Saudi King King Abdullah
Kashgari fled to Malaysia, another majority-Muslim country. He was quickly arrested by police as he passed through Kuala Lumpur international airport. Three days later, he was deported to Saudi Arabia.
Human rights groups feared that he would be executed for blasphemy, a capitol offense in Saudi Arabia.
After nearly two years in prison, Kashgari was freed on October 29, 2013. Kashgari used Twitter to inform his supporters of his release.
Outrageous? By Western standards, absolutely.
Clearly there is no tolerence in Saudi Arabia for the freedoms of thought and expression that Americans take for granted.
Meanwhile, Right-wing American ayatollahs are working overtime to create just that sort of society—where theocratic despotism rules the most intimate aspects of our lives.
One of these is the former GOP Presidential candidate and U.S. Senator Rick Santorum. In early January, 2012, he said that states should have the right to outlaw birth control without the interference of the Supreme Court.
Rick Santorum
In an interview with ABC News, Santorum said he opposed the Supreme Court’s ruling that made birth control legal:
“The state has a right to do that [ban contraception]. I have never questioned that the state has a right to do that. It is not a Constitutional right. The state has the right to pass whatever statutes they have.
“That’s the thing I have said about the activism of the Supreme Court—they are creating rights, and it should be left up to the people to decide.”
In the landmark 1965 decision, Griswold v. Connecticut, the Court struck down a law that made it a crime to sell contraceptives to married couples. The Constitution, ruled the Justices, protected a right to privacy.
Two years later, in Eisenstadt v. Baird, the Court extended Griswold by striking down a law banning the sale of contraceptives to unmarried couples.
Santorum has left no doubt as to where he stands on contraception. On October 19, 2011, he said:
“One of the things I will talk about that no President has talked about before is I think the dangers of contraception in this country, the whole sexual libertine idea. Many in the Christian faith have said, ‘“Well, that’s okay. Contraception’s okay.’
“It’s not okay because it’s a license to do things in the sexual realm that is counter to how things are supposed to be. They’re supposed to be within marriage, they are supposed to be for purposes that are, yes, conjugal, but also…procreative.
“That’s the perfect way that a sexual union should happen. We take any part of that out, we diminish the act….And all of a sudden, it becomes deconstructed to the point where it’s simply pleasure.”
“How things are supposed to be”—according to Right-wing fanatics like Santorum and the evangelicals who support them.
Like the Saudi religious religious zealots who demand the death of a “blasphemer,” they demand that their religious views should govern everyone. That means Jews, Catholics, Islamics, atheists and agnostics.
American Christian fundamentalists and Islamic fundamentalists fervently agree on the following:
- Women should have fewer rights than men.
- Abortion should be illegal.
- There should be no separation between church and state.
- Religion should be taught in school.
- Religious doctrine trumps science.
- Government should be based on religious doctrine.
- Homosexuality should be outlawed.
The important difference—for Americans who value their freedom—is this:
The United States has a Supreme Court that can—and does—overturn laws that threaten civil liberties. Laws that GOP Presidential candidates clearly want to revive and force on those who don’t share their peculiar religious views.
Eleanor Roosevelt once said: “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.”
The same holds true—in a democracy—for candidates who seek dictatorial power over their fellow citizens. Don’t give them your consent.
2003 IRAQ WAR, ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BLOOMBERG, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, CORONAVIRUS, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, DEMOCRATS, DONALD TRUMP, FACEBOOK, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA), FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, FOX NEWS, GEORGE W. BUSH, GRETCHEN WHITMER, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, J.P. MORGAN, JAY INSLEE, JOE BIDEN, MEDIA MATTERS, MEDICARE, MIKE PENCE, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, N95 RESPIRATORS, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NPR, PBS NEWSHOUR, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, PRISONERS-OF-WAR, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RUDY GIULIANI, SALON, SEAN HANNITY SHOW, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SOVIET UNION, SUPREME COURT, SURGICAL MASKS, TALKING POINTS MEMO, TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT OF 2017, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UKRAINE, UPI, USA TODAY, VENDORS, VENTILATORS, VOLODYMIR ZELENSKY, WASHINGTON MONTHLY, WONKETTE
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on September 1, 2021 at 8:43 pm
On June 17, CNN ran a headlined story on its website: “Here’s Why Fighting the Affordable Care Act Means So Much to Republicans.”
The story opened: “For the third time in the last nine years — and this time by a convincing 7-2 vote — the Supreme Court knocked out a Republican effort to invalidate” the Act.
The Justices said that the challengers of the law did not have legal “standing” to bring the case.
Opponents of the law were not harmed by the provisions they were challenging, the Justices ruled. The reason: Congressional Republicans had eliminated the penalty for failing to buy health insurance.
Republicans believed that eliminating the penalty would allow them to attack the entire law. They assumed that without the mandate—a pillar of the law when it was passed—the rest of the Act should fall, too.
Thus, the irony: Through their latest effort to destroy the Act by de-funding it, Republicans had unintentionally saved it before the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court
The law is now providing access to healthcare for a record 31 million Americans, who would not otherwise be able to afford coverage.
In addition, the Act continues to:
- Eliminate the “pre-existing condition” excuse insurance companies had used to deny coverage to those who most needed it;
- Provide a range of no-cost preventive services;
- Allows children to stay on their parents’ insurance up to age 26;
- Expand the Medicaid program that insures lower-income people access to health insurance markets offering subsidized plans.
“With millions of people relying on the Affordable Care Act for coverage, it remains, as ever, a BFD. And it’s here to stay,” President Joe Biden tweeted that same day.
“BFD” referred to his remark, caught on a hot mic when he told then-President Barack Obama in 2010 the law is a “a big fucking deal.”
Why have Republicans pursued its demise so relentlessly? J.P. Morgan once said: “A man generally has two reasons for doing a thing. One that sounds good, and a real one.”
The story outlines the reasons that sound good:
“For the GOP base, the ACA is about a view of the country that the government is the answer to all of our problems.
“It’s also tied into their lingering distaste for former President Barack Obama, whose name is literally melded with the law.
“And a belief that the media treated Obama’s ‘if you like your plan, you can keep your plan’ lie and the disastrous rollout (and repeated crashes) of the website allowing people to sign up for a plan with kid gloves because, well, bias.”
Let’s take a quick look at each of these points.
- Millions of Right-wingers hate the Federal Government and openly call for its overthrow. This they vividly demonstrated on January 6 when they tried to illegally retain Donald Trump as President. They hoped to prevent the selection of Joe Biden as the legitimately-elected President of the United States by storming the Capitol Building.
- Racism forms a major component of the GOP’s appeal to older, white, Right-wing voters. So having the name of the first black President unofficially stamped on the law (“Obamacare”) serves as a constant spur to their hatred.
Barack Obama
- Obama’s promise that “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan”: The promise backfired because the law stated that those who already had medical insurance could keep their plans—so long as those plans met the requirements of the new healthcare law. If their plans didn’t meet those requirements, they would have to obtain coverage that did.
- The “disastrous rollout (and repeated crashes) of the website”: That happened immediately after the law became effective on March 23, 2010. The sheer rush of uninsured people hoping to finally gain access to medical care proved too much for the website. But over time those bugs got ironed out.
Now for the real reason Republicans have furiously tried to destroy the Act—one that the writer did not mention. It is also one that no Republican dares admit.
And like so much else in the Republican agenda, it is rooted in the methods employed by the Third Reich.
On June 22, 1941, German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler sent three million soldiers smashing into the Soviet Union. During the first six months—June to December, 1941—German armies lured huge Soviet forces into gigantic “cauldron battles,” surrounding and exterminating them.
An estimated 5.7 million prisoners of war fell into German hands. The Germans found themselves surprised and overwhelmed by the sheer numbers of them. But their mandate demanded that they keep marching ever forward.
So they simply imprisoned their captives behind barbed wire and wasted no food or medical care on them. Between starvation, illness and the brutal Russian cold, at least 3.5 million POWs died in custody.
Soviet POW’s
Republicans have learned a valuable lesson from this: If you simply deprive those you detest of food, clothing, shelter—and medical care—you don’t need gas chambers or firing squads. Or rigged vote-counts.
Most Americans—ignorant of history—cannot accept that their politicians can be as evil as those in other nations. For those needing access to affordable healthcare, voting Republican could turn out to be a fatal mistake.
Bureaucracybuster's Blog 
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, ALTERNET, AMERICABLOG, AP, BABY BOOMER RESISTANCE, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, BILL CLINTON, BLOOMBERG NEWS, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CHRIS MATTHEWS, CNN, CNN'S "STARTING POINT", CROOKS AND LIARS, CZECHOSLAVAKIA, DAILY KOZ, DARRELL ISSA, DEBT CEILING, EXECUTIVE ORDERS, EXTORTION, FACEBOOK, FIVETHIRTYEIGHT, GEORGE W. BUSH, HARPER’S MAGAZINE, HOUSE SPEAKER JOHN BOEHNER, HUFFINGTON POST, immigration reform, INSIDER, JANET YELLEN, JIMMY CARTER, JOSEPH BIDEN, MEDIA MATTERS, MITCH MCCONNELL, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, MSNBC, MSNBC'S "HARDBALL", NANCY PELOSI, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, NEGOTIATING, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN, NEW REPUBLIC, NEWSDAY, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NICCOLO MACHIAVELLI, NPR, PAP SMEARS, PBS NEWSHOUR, PLANNED PARENTHOOD, POLAND, POLITICO, POLITICUSUSA, R.I.CO. ACT, RAW STORY, REPUBLICAN PARTY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, Ronald Reagan, SALON, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, TALKING POINTS MEMO, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE DAILY BLOG, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW REPUBLIC, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE NEW YORKER, THE PRINCE, THE VILLAGE VOICE, THE WASHINGTON POST, THINKPROGRESS, TIME, TITLE X, TRUTHDIG, TRUTHOUT, TWITTER, TWO POLITICAL JUNKIES, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY, WARREN BUFFET, WINSTON CHURCHILL, WONKETTE, WORLD WAR 11
“NEGOTIATING” REPUBLICANAZI STYLE: PART THREE (OF SIX)
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on October 6, 2021 at 12:11 amIn September, 1938, seven months after seizing Austria, German Fuhrer Adolf Hitler gave another exhibition of his “negotiating” methods. This time, the target of his rage and aggression was Czechoslovakia.
Once again, he opened “negotiations” with a lie: The Czechoslovak government was trying to exterminate 3.5 million Germans living in the “Sudetenland.”
Then he followed with the threat of war: Germany would protect its citizens and halt such “oppression.”
For British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, the thought of another European war erupting less than 20 years after the end of World War I was simply unthinkable.
He quickly sent Hitler a telegram, offering to help resolve the crisis: “I could come to you by air and am ready to leave tomorrow. Please inform me of earliest time you can receive me, and tell me the place of the meeting. I should be grateful for a very early reply.”
The two European leaders met in Berchtesgaden, Germany, on September 15, 1938.
Neville Chamberlain and Adolf Hitler
During their talks, Chamberlain said he had come to discuss German grievances. But, he added, it was necessary in all circumstances to exclude the use of force.
Hitler appeared to be shocked that he could be accused of such intentions: “Force? Who speaks of force?“
Then, without warning, he switched to an aggressive mode. He accused the Czechs of having mobilized their army in May. They had mobilized–in response to the mobilization of the German army.
“I shall not put up with this any longer,” shouted Hitler. “I shall settle this question in one way or another. I shall take matters in my own hands!”
Suddenly, Chamberlain seemed alarmed—and possibly angry: “If I understood you right, you are determined to proceed against Czechoslovakia in any case. If this is so, why did you let me come to Berchtesgaden?
“In the circumstances, it is best for me to return at once. Anything else now seems pointless.”
Hitler was taken aback by the unexpected show of defiance. He realized he was about to lose his chance to bully the British into accepting his latest demands.
So he softened his tone and said they should consider the Sudetenland according to the principle of self-determination.
Chamberlain said he must immediately return to England to consult with his colleagues. Hitler appeared uneasy. But then the German translator finished the sentence: “…and then meet you again.”
Hitler realized he still had a chance to attain victory without going to war.
Chamberlain agreed to the cession of the Sudetenland. Three days later, French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier did the same. No Czechoslovak representative was invited to these discussions.
Chamberlain met Hitler again in Godesberg, Germany, on September 22 to confirm the agreements. But Hitler aimed to use the crisis as a pretext for war.
He now demanded not only the annexation of the Sudetenland but the immediate military occupation of the territories. This would give the Czechoslovak army no time to adapt their defense measures to the new borders.
To achieve a solution, Italian dictator Benito Mussolini suggested a conference of the major powers in Munich.
On September 29, Hitler, Daladier and Chamberlain met and agreed to Mussolini’s proposal. They signed the Munich Agreement, which accepted the immediate occupation of the Sudetenland.
The Czechoslovak government had not been a party to the talks. Nevertheless, it promised to abide by the agreement on September 30.
It actually had no choice. It faced the threat of an immediate German invasion after being deserted by its pledged allies: Britain, France and the Soviet Union.
Chamberlain returned to England a hero. Holding aloft a copy of the worthless agreement he had signed with Hitler, he told cheering crowds in London: “I believe it is peace for our time.”
Neville Chamberlain
Winston Churchill knew better, predicting: “Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war.”
Hitler—still planning more conquests—also knew better. In March, 1939, the German army occupied the rest of Czechoslovakia.
Chamberlain would soon be seen as a naive weakling—even before bombs started falling on London.
Hitler next turned his attention—and demands—to Poland.
When his generals balked, warning that an invasion would trigger a war with France and Britain, Hitler quickly brushed aside their fears: “Our enemies are little worms. I saw them at Munich.”
Adolf Hitler and his generals
Hitler ordered the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939—unintentionally triggering World War II.
In time, historians and statesmen would regard Munich as an object lesson in the futility—and danger—in appeasing evil and aggression.
But for the postwar Republican party, Hitler’s my-way-or-else “negotiating” methods would become standard operating procedure.
During the summer of 2011, Republicans refused to raise the debt ceiling unless Democrats agreed to massively cut social programs for the elderly, poor and disabled.
And while Republicans demanded that the disadvantaged tighten their belts, they rejected any raising of taxes on their foremost constituency—the wealthiest 1%.
To raise taxes on the wealthy, they insisted, would be a “jobs-killer.” It would “discourage” corporate CEOs from creating tens of thousands of jobs they supposedly wanted to create.
Next up: Republicans: “Everything for the rich—or we’ll destroy the country.”
Share this: