Program Note
[ Posted Thursday, August 6th, 2015 – 15:54 UTC ]
There will be no column today. I'm going to become just a consumer of politics today, because there's so much going on, with the two Republican debates. I thought about commenting on just the first one (the "kid's table" debate), but instead of offering up snap reactions this time I'm going to let things percolate for a day.
Feel free to use the comment thread to offer up your own thoughts on the debate-a-palooza, though. For me, the day's just too hectic to do any sober analysis. So to speak. My apologies, and I'll see you all back here tomorrow for our usual Friday Talking Points.
-- Chris Weigant
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant
Strictly Fox News live video feed so far as I can tell. Snippets of verbatim coverage from other news outlets plus, an overload of internet color, opinion and snark. Might as well be in the pre- television era if you don't have cable.
Liz,
Just FYI...
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2015/07/31/ftp355/#comment-62335
Michale
Well, now that we got thru the big GOP debate, we can wait for the Democrat Party debate..
And wait....
And wait.....
And wait........
And wait...........
Michale
Anyone wanna lay any bets as to whether Clinton will actually be a viable candidate by the time the debates come around?? :D
Michale
If only Obama would chant the Benghazi!™ incantation "Radical Islamic Terrorism", the ISIS could be defeated in three months, but it only works if the president says it.
Our Xenophobe who art in Sky-Heaven, hallowed be Thy multiple names and personalities.
Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in Arizona as it is in the West Bank.
Give us this day our deportations and forgive us our sanctuary cities and we will never forgive those who commit illegal acts of love against us.
And lead us not into reason, but deliver us from rapists.
For Thine is the self-righteousness and the hypocrisy and the cognitive dissonance forever and ever.
You Betcha.
JFC,
Once again, I am forced to ask..
Do you come with a translator???
Because no one knows what the hell you are saying....
Michale
. . . and, of my own free will, I am once again pointing out that your reading comprehension issue is not a problem on my end and you should not project it onto competent readers.
. . . and, of my own free will, I am once again pointing out that your reading comprehension issue is not a problem on my end and you should not project it onto competent readers.
If I were the only one who has mentioned your lack of comprehensible verbiage, then you would have a point.
But I am not, so you don't..
You remind me of those USENET trolls who would post the most wacky and incomprehensible spewage imaginable and then expect everyone to gush as to how "wise" and "deep" they are...
Pre-Internet, those types would sit in Greenwich Village coffee houses and rant on incomprehensibly about nothing...
Welcome to the 21st century.. It's just as incomprehensible as it was back then... :D
But keep on debating with a "chatbot"... I'll take the easy wins as well as the hard-fought ones.. :D
Michale
Found a complete video of the Cleveland Show on Youtube this early AM. Watched it.
The format of 10 candidates, 3 moderators, a live audience and slightly more than hour of air time produced nothing of substance. People are free to project anything they want onto the performances, all of which met expectations. The only genuine debate will come from the editing of impressions, quotes and clips. I'll keep my impressions brief. Meh.
Things may improve when enough hopefuls lose hope.
I grok JFC.
The only genuine debate will come from the editing of impressions, quotes and clips. I'll keep my impressions brief. Meh.
Take heart.. At least you will have the exciting and informative Demcrat Party debates....
Oh... wait.... :D
I grok JFC.
Please... Not in public. It will scare the children... :D
Michale
I grok JFC.
You mean... You understand what he is saying!??? Really!!???
By all means. Interpret...
"Je suis un espion. Interpret."
-Lord Oliver, TIMELINE
:D
Michale
Yes, Michale, I received an email alert about that last night.
Allow me to make a very sad prediction: if the JCPOA goes down in the US Congress, then the decline of America will be very dramatically hastened.
And, consequently, I will no longer be such a big fan of the promise of America because that flame will have been pretty much extinguished for me with little left to comment about.
On the bright side of things, a lot of my spare time will be freed up for new and renewed pursuits ...
<I.Allow me to make a very sad prediction: if the JCPOA goes down in the US Congress, then the decline of America will be very dramatically hastened.
Again, I don't see that..
OBAMA will have egg all over his face.. But that's what he gets for dragging this country where it doesn't want to go..
The American people are against giving Iran every benefit of every doubt..
Having their representatives kill the JCPOA will simply be the way the American people register their disgust..
Remember, a government **BY THE PEOPLE**....
The people have spoken.. The JCPOA is a bad deal...
Michale
It pains me to say this, Michale but, you and countless of your fellow citizens are in for a very rude awakening if Congress rejects the JCPOA.
Because, going forward, a weakened President Obama will be the least of America's concerns.
I don't know what the outcome will be if Congress rejects the JCPOA but, your government is most decidedly not for, by and of the people, anymore. Not when a foreign leader and a powerful lobby group in Washington control the peoples' representatives.
Because, going forward, a weakened President Obama will be the least of America's concerns.
Personally, a weakened Obama equals a stronger America..
I don't know if you noticed or not, but Obama is taking this country in a direction that the majority of Americans DON'T WANT to go..
Now, if you want to make the argument that Obama knows best and the majority of Americans are morons for not following Obama's lead, but all means. Make that argument..
But Obama has proven time and time again that his agenda is the ONLY agenda he follows. The country and it's citizens be damned..
Not when a foreign leader and a powerful lobby group in Washington control the peoples' representatives.
But that's just it. It's NOT a foreign leader and a powerful lobby group..
It's the AMERICAN people..
THEY are against the JCPOA..
And they are sick and tired of getting overridden by politicians who DON'T have the country's best interests at heart..
"A line must be drawn!! THIS FAR!!! NO FARTHER!!"
-Captain Jean Luc Picard
You have IRAN, chaos and terror on one side..
You have Israel on the other side..
Of course, the American people are going to side with Israel...
Michale
It's the AMERICAN people..
THEY are against the JCPOA...
in response to that assertion, i would ask two lines of questions (i'm on the fence myself as to whether the JCPOA is a good or bad deal, so subject to evidence to the contrary, i think i'm able to be reasonably objective):
1. What percentage of "the American people" are against the JCPOA? a plurality? a majority? a supermajority? What percentage are in favor? - Considering the levels of gerrymandering present in our country, our elected representatives could simultaneously represent their constituents faithfully and still defy the overall will of the population.
2. Is this the kind of issue where the general population's opinions are informed or intelligent enough to be valued over leaders or policy experts? The majority of the country was opposed to desegregation when it happened, and i'm certain the same is true of many other policies that were beneficial in the long run. So, while the "will of the people" is a poignant argument to make, I'm not so sure it's a good measure of the "right thing to do" (regardless of what that right thing might happen to be).
JL
1. What percentage of "the American people" are against the JCPOA?
It's running 55% against.... But the key factor is that the NO vote has been steadily rising as people find out more about it..
The "secret" deals and the fact that Iran gets to continue it's terrorism, etc etc etc...
Well, that's bad...
So, while the "will of the people" is a poignant argument to make, I'm not so sure it's a good measure of the "right thing to do" (regardless of what that right thing might happen to be).
Well, in this particular case, the "will of the people" is against a regime that is the number 1 supporter of terrorism...
Put another way... Any deal that give IRAN is for???
How good a deal can it be for the US and Israel??
I would think that Iran simply being FOR the deal is enough to make one, at the VERY least, wary...
The goal of the deal (and the sanctions for that matter) was to REMOVE Iran's nuclear infrastructure...
Not codify it and authorize it...
I mean, how much information does one need to know that, if Iran wants it, it MUST be bad....
It's like saying, "The KKK really wants Deal A... Let's analyze Deal A and see if it is good or bad..."
Put another way.. If Deal A was supported by Rush Limbaugh, Ted Cruz, Dick Cheney and John Boehner??? What would ya'alls instinctive reaction to the deal be?? :D
Sometimes, all the information needed is to see who is for and against it..
In this case, the fact that the number 1 sponsor of terrorism is for the deal??
Well, that sells me on the idea that it's a bad deal...
YMOCMV :D
Michale
Sometimes, all the information needed is to see who is for and against it..
Ad hominem arguments can be very tempting to fall into, in precisely the ways you explained. then again, didn't dick cheney lobby on behalf of marriage equality?
Ad hominem arguments can be very tempting to fall into, in precisely the ways you explained. then again, didn't dick cheney lobby on behalf of marriage equality?
Oh sure, there are exceptions..
But, by and large, they rule holds...
If someone or some group who is indisputably and undeniably BAD is saying, "Hay, this is a great agreement!!!!" I would think that, logically, that should make any sane rational person approach the agreement with a good deal... a GREAT deal of skepticism...
A good way to see if Iran is being sincere??
Scrap this deal and see how they react..... If they react badly, then that's a pretty good indication they were never going to be faithful to the original deal anyways..
Let's give Iran some rope and see what they do with it...
Will they use the rope to create a link between cultures??
Or will they hang themselves with it??
Michale
Another possibility is that Obama WANTS Congress to shoot down this deal..
That way, Obama can go back to the negotiating table and say, "Sorry.. That deal didn't fly.. You have got to do better...."
If Obama is the 10-dimensional chess player the Left THINKS he is, then this would be par for the course...
Joshua,
I'm wondering what you see as the main sticking points of the JCPOA that put you on the fence about it?
M - 13
"You understand what he is saying!??? Really!!???"
Really. He chooses his topics and words very carefully. He tends to work in little chunks, and the chunks pass my Turing Test with flying colors. I appreciate his craftsmanship.
I would not presume to translate him because that would amount to me putting words into his mouth.
Really. He chooses his topics and words very carefully. He tends to work in little chunks, and the chunks pass my Turing Test with flying colors. I appreciate his craftsmanship.
Well, we agree on one thing..
He has chunks that are flying.. :D
I would not presume to translate him because that would amount to me putting words into his mouth.
Ahhhhhh
So you DON'T know what he means...
Or, more accurately, you THINK you know what he means, but you don't want to translate to the rest of us because you might be wrong..
Hokay... That works.. :D
Michale
The problem with people that speak in riddles is they can change the meaning of what they say to fit any given situation..
It's intellectually dishonest and a low-brow, unintelligent way to communicate...
Say what you mean and mean what you say...
It's really simple....
Michale
Well, FoxNews had THE biggest night ever... :D
I am sure that makes ya'all very very happy... :D
Michale
JL & Liz,
Ya’alon: Israel ‘not responsible’ for Iran nuke scientists’ livesDefense minister hints assassinations may resume, says Israel considering air strikes against nuclear facilities
http://www.timesofisrael.com/yaalon-israel-not-responsible-for-iran-nuke-scientists-lives/
Apparently, the deal WON'T actually prevent a war but may actually facilitate one.....
Michale
Well, FoxNews had THE biggest night ever... :D
FNC had 24 million viewers on debate night...
To put it into context, Jon Stewart' farewell final show drew 3.5 million viewers.. :D
FOX NEWS DOMINATION
:D
Michale
"So you DON'T know what he means..."
It does not matter to me if you believe that.
All Turing Tests are essentially personal and ultimately subject to the possibility of failure.
JFC could be a chat bot, but I think not.
"We prefer that this be done by means of sanctions, but in the end, Israel should be able to defend itself,” the defense minister said.
Someone should really point out to the Israeli defense minister that sanctions HAVE NOT WORKED to stop Iran's nuclear program. Indeed, even under the strongest sanctions regime ever to be imposed on a country in the history of the world, Iran's nuclear program grew exponentially.
So, I guess the Israeli defense minister has only one option on his table. And, good luck with that. Do you suppose he presumes he'll have US assistance? Ha!
JFC could be a chat bot, but I think not.
:D heh
Someone should really point out to the Israeli defense minister that sanctions HAVE NOT WORKED to stop Iran's nuclear program.
Not YET....
But the evidence shows that they WERE having the desired effect.. And Obama threw it all away because he wanted a legacy...
Well, Congress will give him a legacy, to be sure...
So, I guess the Israeli defense minister has only one option on his table. And, good luck with that. Do you suppose he presumes he'll have US assistance? Ha!
Unless Democrats want to avoid all political office for the next few decades.....
Imagine the fallout for Democrats if Obama hangs Israel out to dry even more so than he already has and Democrats went along with it....
A Democrat wouldn't be able to be elected dog catcher for the next 30 years....
But the evidence shows that they WERE having the desired effect..
FALSE!
You get away with quite a lot around here, Michale, but that statement above is ridiculous and needs to be called out. You are entering very dangerous territory when you make false statements like that.
You don't get it, do you, Michale ... Israel has no one left to blame but itself for the challenges it faces on the Iran front.
As you can see, I am going to be in a very foul mood for a very long time if the JCPOA goes down in flames in the US Congress. Fair warning ...
But the evidence shows that they WERE having the desired effect..
FALSE!
The pressure on Iran's economy that drove Iran to the negotiating table PROVE that the sanctions were having the desired effect..
The problem developed because Obama gave away everything and got nothing in return...
The PROPER way to start a deal would be to say, "You will NEVER, EVER be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. NEVER!! NOT EVER!!! Now, about those sanctions"
But Obama signaled right from the start that he would be happy with just getting a slight reprieve..
And that ALL the JCPOA is... Just a slight reprieve. After which Iran can resume it's program to develop nuclear weapons with the world's blessing....
As you can see, I am going to be in a very foul mood for a very long time if the JCPOA goes down in flames in the US Congress. Fair warning ...
Fair enough.. I felt the same way after the disastrous twin rulings from the SCOTUS...
So I feel for ya.. :D
Michale
You don't get it, do you, Michale ... Israel has no one left to blame but itself for the challenges it faces on the Iran front.
I agree completely!
Israel had the NERVE..... the unmitigated gall... to put their own survival before Obama's legacy.......
SHAME ON THEM!!!!
Michale
Israel had the NERVE..... the unmitigated gall... to put their own survival before Obama's legacy.......
If only the US Congress had the same nerve and unmitigated gall to put the interests of their own nation ahead of the survival of a foreign leader and his dangerously misguided and wrong-headed thinking - on this subject and others.
Israel had the NERVE..... the unmitigated gall... to put their own survival before Obama's legacy.......
If only the US Congress had the same nerve and unmitigated gall to put the interests of their own nation ahead of the survival of a foreign leader and his dangerously misguided and wrong-headed thinking - on this subject and others.
I can't believe you, of all people, would march to the beat of a foreign leader's drum.
If only the US Congress had the same nerve and unmitigated gall to put the interests of their own nation ahead of the survival of a foreign leader and his dangerously misguided and wrong-headed thinking - on this subject and others.
In this issue, the interests of this country and Israel are identical...
IRAN must *NOT* be allowed to possess nuclear weapons...
The JCPOA *guarantees* that Iran will possess nuclear weapons...
On one side, you have Israel and Americans.. On the other side you have Obama and the Iranians...
It's really that simple..
I can't believe you, of all people, would march to the beat of a foreign leader's drum.
It's not too surprising when you consider that I (and the majority of Americans) are beating the exact same drum...
Israel is the good guy...
Iran is the bad guy...
You don't make deals with the bad guy that hurt the good guy..
It's unseemly...
Michale
You don't make deals with the bad guy that hurt the good guy..
And when all the political rhetoric is swept away, when you get down to the brass tacks of the JCPOA, that is what it all amounts to.
Obama made a deal with an enemy at the expense of an ally...
He made Israel LESS secure and made Iran stronger...
THAT is the only context of the JCPOA that matters....
Michale
"I would not presume to translate him"
Thanks. I read your comment earlier and I was willing to bet that you wouldn't because I feel certain that you do get it.
"JFC could be a chat bot, but I think not."
I don't know Butchie instead.
I don't know Butchie instead.
Like I said in #26..... :^/
Michale
M - "The problem with people that speak in riddles is they can change the meaning of what they say to fit any given situation.."
I don't see any riddles, but I do see dialectics. JFC trades largely in dialectics. He sets up contrasts in order to expose flaws in logic or just plain ol' hypocrisy. Like Socrates, Plato, or Hegel did, or like any bearded philosopher with a degree from Hunter College might still do in a Greenwich Village coffee house.
The fact that you don't get the technique is not entirely JFC's fault.
LizM and Michale -
Allow me to point something out. Obama smartly got a deal from Congress months back. In this deal, Congress gets to have a vote disapproving of the Iran deal (note: not approving it). This is expected to pass, giving Republicans an opportunity to vote against Obama.
However, what happens next is key. Because of the deal Congress agreed to, Obama then vetoes the disapproval bill. It goes back to Congress, and if 1/3 of either house votes with Obama, then the Iran deal goes through.
Got that? A lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing. Instead of Obama having to get majority support, all he needs is 1/3 of either house.
Because Congress already agreed to do it this way.
So keep this in mind while discussing the chances of the deal becoming reality... and when discussing Obama's relative dealmaking skills. He already got a pretty good deal... from Congress.
-CW
Like Socrates, Plato, or Hegel did, or like any bearded philosopher with a degree from Hunter College might still do in a Greenwich Village coffee house.
Which is exactly what I said above..
You say Poe-TAY-toe, I say Toe-MAY-toe, but it all amounts to the same thing.
Intentional obfuscation..
Not plain speak...
I know it's JFC's style, but it does leave himself open to just the sort of issues I point out..
CW,
However, what happens next is key. Because of the deal Congress agreed to, Obama then vetoes the disapproval bill. It goes back to Congress, and if 1/3 of either house votes with Obama, then the Iran deal goes through.
But the point is, Congress is well on it's way to a VETO-PROOF majority on this issue...
As Schumer goes, so goes Congress...
And also keep in mind that TIME is not on Obama's side... It's all but guaranteed that Iran will do something stoopid in the coming weeks.
A brazen terrorist attack.
Blatant cheating
It's highly unlikely that Iran would do ANYTHING to enhance the chances of the JCPOA...
It's more likely that Iran will do something that will turn Congress and the American people even MORE so against the JCPOA...
As I said above, it all amounts to one thing.
Israel is the good guy...
Iran is the bad guy...
You don't make a deal with the bad guy that screws over the good guy...
Michale
Another point to make is that not only will Schumer vote against the agreement the first vote, he will also vote to override Obama's veto...
That's a very dangerous distinction for Obama...
Michale
Chris[46]
I think we both get that. You must really think that Michale and I are a couple of idiots!
Of course, we know how this Iran vote was set up. We're just looking at it from the other side of the coin with myself, admittedly, looking at it from afar and mostly through headlines and expert uneasiness about the whole thing.
In other words, I'm more concerned about the two-thirds of either house that is required to defeat the JCPOA. Now, I understand all about the firewall in the House but, I remain concerned. Not just about the worst case scenario but in the case that the US Congress - Republican and Democrat, House and Senate - will only just narrowly fail to override a presidential veto as this will also do damage to the ability of any US president to conduct a credible foreign policy, going forward.
I do appreciate the fact, however, that you believe President Obama was smart in having the vote set up this way. Ahem.
And, you don't have to tell me about Obama's deal-making ability. Consider how the snap back sanctions vote in the UN was set up ... of course, there were a few other important people involved in that, too.
In this issue, the interests of this country and Israel are identical...
The Prime Minister of Israel, apparently, doesn't see it that way.
Addendum to my comment Re. Chris [46]
I said,
"In other words, I'm more concerned about the two-thirds of either house that is required to defeat the JCPOA."
Just to be clear on the record about how this congressional vote was set up, I should have said that I'm more concerned about the two-thirds of both houses that is required to defeat the JCPOA.