Current Affairs John McCain - hero or Republican

Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn’t call you a racist or not intentionally I also don’t particularly appreciate you throwing round things like ‘playing the race card’ .

Disappointingly I must be wrong because from what you say apparently the majority agree with you , well if that’s true it must be right then if the majority think so . Democracy means that the majority get to elect or vote for who or what it wants , it doesn’t mean that it’s right or everybody has to agree with it . a majority supported the Iraq war , a majority would reintroduce capital punishment and Brexit is going well .

Also kudos for helping the Arabs , that means whatever you say definitely carries more weight .

I’m not arguing it’s not a contentious issue , my point was that because you think it’s wrong the word racism is used when somebody talks about clash of cultures or being full or whatever doesn’t mean everybody else who does is overreacting or playing the race card ,

I realise my posts are long and possibly very boring for many, but it's not a simple subject: there's a lot of psychology involved as well as all the various details.

You wrote "the comments by the individual smacked of racism", that is playing the race card. You're dismissing it without engaging the argument. It's easier for you that way as it automatically ranks that opposing opinion as below yours. Internally, you thus have a solid argument. This might make you feel righteous, but it does nothing in the wider world, being if anything counter-productive. So you might want to consider to yourself why do you debate in the first place: is it to understand things? To share your view? To feel good about yourself?

Below are the top 5 most-liked comments in that latest piece. Are they being racist? If you think so, then we must be utterly surrounded by racists as those views are mirrored in vast numbers almost anywhere you care to look, but if that were true then there'd be much more support for EDL or BNP at the polls. There'd be much more incidents of illegal racist behaviour like violent attacks & prejudice in the workplace.

But (we're talking Europe here, not US/ZA) there isn't such large numbers of racist behaviour, so maybe consider those people making those comments aren't racist, and neither are their comments. Some can word their thoughts better than others, the soundbite-technique is present as it is everywhere, but the sentiment is consistent with my own.

As this looks like being the majority opinion, as you said yourself in a democracy these people will vote accordingly, and those votes will likely be for things you & the others in this thread are against. So how do you want to fight against that? By calling them racist still? How's that working out for you? How about trying a little harder to understand their point of view, then working to meet them at a compromise somewhere between your views & theirs? That might bring in friendlier election results, like a reversal of Brexit & a Corbyn government (except of course Corbyn is himself fighting against OTT accusations of racism...see how damaging it is?).

Anyway, here's the top 5...I'm interested in all of yous feedback to them, consider they are from a liberal Left paper (Guardian...not DailyMail or somesuch):


top5.webp
 
I realise my posts are long and possibly very boring for many, but it's not a simple subject: there's a lot of psychology involved as well as all the various details.

You wrote "the comments by the individual smacked of racism", that is playing the race card. You're dismissing it without engaging the argument. It's easier for you that way as it automatically ranks that opposing opinion as below yours. Internally, you thus have a solid argument. This might make you feel righteous, but it does nothing in the wider world, being if anything counter-productive. So you might want to consider to yourself why do you debate in the first place: is it to understand things? To share your view? To feel good about yourself?

Below are the top 5 most-liked comments in that latest piece. Are they being racist? If you think so, then we must be utterly surrounded by racists as those views are mirrored in vast numbers almost anywhere you care to look, but if that were true then there'd be much more support for EDL or BNP at the polls. There'd be much more incidents of illegal racist behaviour like violent attacks & prejudice in the workplace.

But (we're talking Europe here, not US/ZA) there isn't such large numbers of racist behaviour, so maybe consider those people making those comments aren't racist, and neither are their comments. Some can word their thoughts better than others, the soundbite-technique is present as it is everywhere, but the sentiment is consistent with my own.

As this looks like being the majority opinion, as you said yourself in a democracy these people will vote accordingly, and those votes will likely be for things you & the others in this thread are against. So how do you want to fight against that? By calling them racist still? How's that working out for you? How about trying a little harder to understand their point of view, then working to meet them at a compromise somewhere between your views & theirs? That might bring in friendlier election results, like a reversal of Brexit & a Corbyn government (except of course Corbyn is himself fighting against OTT accusations of racism...see how damaging it is?).

Anyway, here's the top 5...I'm interested in all of yous feedback to them, consider they are from a liberal Left paper (Guardian...not DailyMail or somesuch):


View attachment 49617

The only person who seems to be repeatedly throwing around the word racism is you .

As regards your quiz on the comments , no I don’t consider them racist . I’m not very keen on the comment by the bloke with the union flag but generally I don’t consider them racist , is that ok ?

I don’t accuse people of being racist on a regular basis but if somebody seems to be saying racist things I feel I’m sort of entitled to say it smacks of racism . If you and your majority don’t feel that’s not ok then frankly I don’t care . Notice I didn’t call them or you a racist because I don’t know enough about them, about it or about it’s context but I’m sorry it did smack of racism. So many people seem obsessed that everyone is calling them racist , often the simplest way of doing that is stop saying things that could be considered racist . Notice I said often not always because I’m sure it’s a word incorrectly used . The reality is some people just aren’t very nice they say racist things .

As for me things are working out pretty well personally. That doesn’t mean I'm not uncomfortable with the rise of the far right , with the Tommy Robinson’s of this world , with trump and Brexit but if the majority likes all that all I can do is keep paying my taxes , vote and hope we as a country regain some kind of what I’d consider sanity . You and your majority will continue doing what you want as well , it’s a Democratic society . I just hope your perception of what the majority thinks isn’t as accurate as you believe but only time will tell .

I wrote a lot more but deleted it as posting huge replies to each other seems pointless, I think we’ve established where our positions are .
 
I realise my posts are long and possibly very boring for many, but it's not a simple subject: there's a lot of psychology involved as well as all the various details.

You wrote "the comments by the individual smacked of racism", that is playing the race card. You're dismissing it without engaging the argument. It's easier for you that way as it automatically ranks that opposing opinion as below yours. Internally, you thus have a solid argument. This might make you feel righteous, but it does nothing in the wider world, being if anything counter-productive. So you might want to consider to yourself why do you debate in the first place: is it to understand things? To share your view? To feel good about yourself?

Below are the top 5 most-liked comments in that latest piece. Are they being racist? If you think so, then we must be utterly surrounded by racists as those views are mirrored in vast numbers almost anywhere you care to look, but if that were true then there'd be much more support for EDL or BNP at the polls. There'd be much more incidents of illegal racist behaviour like violent attacks & prejudice in the workplace.

But (we're talking Europe here, not US/ZA) there isn't such large numbers of racist behaviour, so maybe consider those people making those comments aren't racist, and neither are their comments. Some can word their thoughts better than others, the soundbite-technique is present as it is everywhere, but the sentiment is consistent with my own.

As this looks like being the majority opinion, as you said yourself in a democracy these people will vote accordingly, and those votes will likely be for things you & the others in this thread are against. So how do you want to fight against that? By calling them racist still? How's that working out for you? How about trying a little harder to understand their point of view, then working to meet them at a compromise somewhere between your views & theirs? That might bring in friendlier election results, like a reversal of Brexit & a Corbyn government (except of course Corbyn is himself fighting against OTT accusations of racism...see how damaging it is?).

Anyway, here's the top 5...I'm interested in all of yous feedback to them, consider they are from a liberal Left paper (Guardian...not DailyMail or somesuch):


View attachment 49617

It's only a difficult and nuanced one if you choose to make it that way.

I remember the majority being massively against the mass influx of Southeast Asians from Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and a bit later the Philippines back in the 70's and 80's. Two of my closest friends are Cambodian refugees who arrived during that time. They were just kids at the time, but they have vivid memories of the refugee camps they were in.

Their parents barely can speak English to this day, but my friends and their siblings are just as American as me. The fears struck up at the time of their mass immigration that was wildly unpopular turned out to be just typical fear of change.

The entire history of America is filled with mass immigrations from various places. Each time they were unpopular and they were treated as outsiders and greeted with bigotry/painted as demons.
 
McCain's incessant supporting of policies which kill millions of Arabs isn't a dangerous type of patriotism then?

I've wanted to ask you about this, but haven't made the time - you have said the above, or words to that effect several times. I'm not taking it literally that you think John McCain's goal was to formulate and support policies that resulted in killing Arabs by the millions. I assumed you were making a broader point about US policies (especially GOP-led) that have directly and indirectly resulted in untold Arab deaths and misery. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, so if I have misunderstood that, I sincerely apologize in advance.

Why is this your opinion?
What specific policies of McCain, or more broadly the GOP/USA? Logically I'd assume the invasion of Afghanistan post-9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Iraq/overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but I'm guessing it's more than that.

I'm not attacking your position or asking you to defend it at all, I just don't exactly understand the basis of it. Agree or not, I'm certain I'll see a different perspective - I might learn something if I am not careful ;)
 
The only person who seems to be repeatedly throwing around the word racism is you .

As regards your quiz on the comments , no I don’t consider them racist . I’m not very keen on the comment by the bloke with the union flag but generally I don’t consider them racist , is that ok ?

I don’t accuse people of being racist on a regular basis but if somebody seems to be saying racist things I feel I’m sort of entitled to say it smacks of racism . If you and your majority don’t feel that’s not ok then frankly I don’t care . Notice I didn’t call them or you a racist because I don’t know enough about them, about it or about it’s context but I’m sorry it did smack of racism. So many people seem obsessed that everyone is calling them racist , often the simplest way of doing that is stop saying things that could be considered racist . Notice I said often not always because I’m sure it’s a word incorrectly used . The reality is some people just aren’t very nice they say racist things .

As for me things are working out pretty well personally. That doesn’t mean I'm not uncomfortable with the rise of the far right , with the Tommy Robinson’s of this world , with trump and Brexit but if the majority likes all that all I can do is keep paying my taxes , vote and hope we as a country regain some kind of what I’d consider sanity . You and your majority will continue doing what you want as well , it’s a Democratic society . I just hope your perception of what the majority thinks isn’t as accurate as you believe but only time will tell .

I wrote a lot more but deleted it as posting huge replies to each other seems pointless, I think we’ve established where our positions are .

I enjoy long posts especially if they're well-reasoned counters to what I'm saying, so go for it.

And you are well-reasoned, I was just getting riled up at the obvious insinuations from some of the last 2-3 pages that concern over mass immigration must equal racism. I assume you missed them?

It's a disgraceful dehumanising shut-down technique.

But now that we're past that I can tell you I and the afore-mentioned majority are also uncomfortable with the Far Right. As explained numerous times their prominence is largely enabled by those horrible shut-down techniques.

Think of the average apolitical floating voter: he votes CDU, SPD or FDP traditionally, but he has concerns over mass immigration. The only party willing to talk about this are Far-Right parties...what does this floating voter do?

The result is clear: AfD now sit as official opposition in parliament.

Note I use examples from Germany: UK hasn't received anywhere close to the same numbers in the same short space of time as Germany has, not even a tenth.

Maybe that's the main reason why we find ourselves disagreeing: yous are basing your arguments on the UK/US-perspective where immigration numbers are steady. I'm basing mine on Germany, Sweden and France where the topic is a much more keenly-felt one due simply to receiving far more numbers in far less a time. I'm talking specifically Autumn 2015 to present. I linked this earlier, it's the one everyone calls a "crisis" (remember it being insinuated from some of the less bright posters in this thread that calling it a "crisis" is racist?).‎

And to bring it back to McCain: it's the UK/US-axis which have largely caused these mass migrant waves.‎


I've wanted to ask you about this, but haven't made the time - you have said the above, or words to that effect several times. I'm not taking it literally that you think John McCain's goal was to formulate and support policies that resulted in killing Arabs by the millions. I assumed you were making a broader point about US policies (especially GOP-led) that have directly and indirectly resulted in untold Arab deaths and misery. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, so if I have misunderstood that, I sincerely apologize in advance.

Why is this your opinion?
What specific policies of McCain, or more broadly the GOP/USA? Logically I'd assume the invasion of Afghanistan post-9/11 and the subsequent invasion of Iraq/overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but I'm guessing it's more than that.

I'm not attacking your position or asking you to defend it at all, I just don't exactly understand the basis of it. Agree or not, I'm certain I'll see a different perspective - I might learn something if I am not careful ;)

Hi mate, I posted it earlier, see also why some blues early in the thread revealed no love for McCain.

You can find it on any site which lists foreign-policies supported by McCain: Wikipedia (bless it) also lists this. Basically Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghan etc. Policies which I'm sure we all agree have served only to destabilise those lands, which in turn encourages migrations to Europe to escape the chaos, which as I explained leaves those lands much weaker for having lost their most able-bodied and monied folk.‎

There's even a theory which goes these domino-effects are intentional (unstated) policy from the US/UK-axis: as it serves to weaken the economic hand the EU has globally. The world after all can't have too many global superpowers spoiling the broth. Brexit & painting Russia as the baddy may be tied in to this.

It's just a theory, personally I'm not convinced we human beings are that organised and far-sighted enough (also why I don't believe many of these global conspiracy theories). I believe the US/UK-axis supports such military policies as it rewards some immoral rich individuals with yet more money via myriad defence/rebuilding/arms-contracts. And to hell with the consequences.
 
Hi mate, I posted it earlier, see also why some blues early in the thread revealed no love for McCain.

You can find it on any site which lists foreign-policies supported by McCain: Wikipedia (bless it) also lists this. Basically Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghan etc. Policies which I'm sure we all agree have served only to destabilise those lands, which in turn encourages migrations to Europe to escape the chaos, which as I explained leaves those lands much weaker for having lost their most able-bodied and monied folk.
I did look back, but I must have missed or overlooked, so my apologies for what you had to repeat. The section in bold we can just agree to disagree on, which is ok - but there is no denying the end result is a mass migration/immigration.
Your point on UK/US vs Germany/France/Sweden perspective is a fair one tho. Seeing or understanding vs experiencing up close and personal is a different experience and perspective.
 
funnily enough on the back of our Pink Floyd thread in the Ale House I stumbled upon a Roger Waters interview just a few days old where he backs up many of the points I've been making here: namely that to stop the refugee crisis we need to focus on what's causing them, and that is Western (and Israeli) foreign policy. Encouraging the crisis by effectively supporting open borders while shouting down as "racist" anyone who disagrees is only tacitly supporting the warmongering policies which cause the crisis in the first place.




John McCain consistently supported these warmongering policies. Jeremy Corbyn consistently has been against them. The fawning over McCain while at the same time damning Corbyn as a racist has been excrutiatingly obvious propaganda, yet so many apparently educated folk still fall for it while believing they are morally in the right, despite the massive body count screaming the opposite!

It becomes infuriating if one thinks about it for too long. Good on Roger for not wavering.
 
Now & then the graun manage a thoughtful article, this one damns Trumpwashing: the phenomenon displayed in this very thread by many of you posting that anyone who bashes Trump is a saint and on their side, regardless of what they did or what they stand for. This includes the Bushes, McCain and the rest.

The most telling lines are:

- George W Bush - who was hated by liberals because of the Iraq war, the use of torture at CIA “black sites” which prompted calls for him to be prosecuted for war crimes, presiding over the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression and bungling the response to Hurricane Katrina, in which 1,800 people perished - is now considered a sweet, old grandpa figure who liberals coo over, especially when he is bantering with Michelle Obama.

- John Brennan, the director of the CIA under Obama – who approved 542 drone strikes that killed 3,797 people in non-battlefield areas where US forces were not directly engaged including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia – is now an unlikely hero of the #resistance.

- Nuance isn’t easy in the Twitter era


Full article below.
------------------------------------

'Trumpwashing': the danger of turning the Republican resistance into liberal heroes

As figures once reviled by the left are hailed for their opposition to Trump, critics warn against forgetting the past.

The empire strikes back. At late senator John McCain’s funeral earlier this month, the Clintons, Bushes and Obamas sat side by side in the front pew along with the former vice-presidents Dick Cheney and Al Gore and Cheney’s wife, Lynne. A clip of the former president George W Bush handing a sweet to ex-first lady Michelle Obama went viral.

Among the distinguished speakers at the Washington National Cathedral: Henry Kissinger, now a venerable 95. Among the most quoted lines: “America was always great”, from McCain’s 33-year-old daughter Meghan. It was an imperious rebuke from America’s political establishment to the absent Donald Trump. McCain, no doubt, would have been delighted – but so too were many on the liberal left.

Not so long ago, the idea of liberals hankering nostalgically for Bush, hanging on Kissinger’s words or cheering assertions of American exceptionalism would have been unthinkable. Likewise the idea of rooting for the rightwing attorney general Jeff Sessions, the former FBI director and registered Republican Robert Mueller, and other mandarins of the so-called “deep state”. Yet old certainties have been shaken, roles reversed and loyalties scrambled by Trump’s profoundly unorthodox presidency.

According to Dan Kovalik, a human rights and labour lawyer and adjunct law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, the liberal left was already in ideological confusion when Trump turbo-charged the process. “In short, liberals have decided that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’, especially when ‘my enemy’ is Donald J Trump,” he wrote via email.

“And so, bizarrely, liberals have decided that the CIA and FBI – despite their well-known history of suppressing civil liberties and civil rights in this country and abroad – are now noble institutions which should be believed and respected. This is because the CIA and FBI have largely taken an oppositional stance towards Trump.”

Kovalik, author of The Plot to Scapegoat Russia and The Plot to Attack Iran, added: “Even George W Bush, who was hated by liberals especially because of the Iraq war (which the CIA helped lie us into, by the way), is now considered a sweet, old grandpa figure who liberals coo over, especially when he is bantering with Michelle Obama.

“Part of this is that people like Bush or McCain or even [the vice-president Mike] Pence, who at least appear to be standard, reasonable politicians, seem wonderful now when compared to Mad King Trump. And because Trump talks about ‘making America great again’, liberals have decided that, somehow, even under presidents like W or many more like him, we have always been great. Of course, this is nothing but a childish contrariness totally lacking in political sophistication and historical understanding.”

Bush misled the US into Iraq in search of non-existent weapons of mass destruction with a war that cost hundreds of thousands of lives and paved the way for the Islamic State. The use of torture at CIA “black sites” prompted calls for him to be prosecuted for war crimes. Bush also presided over the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression and bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina, in which 1,800 people perished.

Around the time he left the White House in 2009, a CNN survey found that only 34% of the public had a favourable view of Bush, while 62% had an unfavourable one. Yet two polls published last October found that more Democrats now view Bush favourably than unfavourably. Obama regularly praises him. The ascent of Trump has ensured his redemption is complete.

Kissinger meanwhile, the former national security adviser and secretary of state, backed the covert bombing campaign in Laos and Cambodia in 1969-70. Hillary Clinton has lauded him, though her Democratic primary rival Bernie Sanders described him as “one of the most destructive secretaries of state in the modern history of this country”.

McCain’s funeral was widely hailed as a defiant stand for a vanished age of civility, honour and bipartisanship in American politics. A Washington Post headline declared: “McCain’s funeral was a melancholy last hurrah for what’s been lost in Trump era.” But Glenn Greenwald, a leftwing journalist, former lawyer and frequent critic of liberal politicians, tweeted to his near 1 million followers: “Only someone ensconced in the halls of DC power for decades, or drowning in jingoism, could declare that a ceremony featuring Henry Kissinger, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Joe Lieberman & various other assorted warmongers is an inspiring & uplifting tribute to decency.”

Liberals’ default scepticism about the FBI, CIA and NSA [National Security Agency] has also taken a hit. John Brennan, the director of the CIA under Obama – who approved 542 drone strikes that killed 3,797 people in non-battlefield areas where US forces were not directly engaged including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia – is now an unlikely hero of the resistance. When Brennan was recently interviewed on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, the otherwise caustic, iconoclastic comedian hailed him as “a true American patriot”, adding: “I know how hard professionals here in the intelligence community work to try keeping this country strong and safe.”

Brennan is an ardent critic of Trump, who sought revenge by revoking his security clearance. In response, Sam Husseini, a senior analyst for the Institute for Public Accuracy, wrote on the Counterpunch website: “NPR tells me this is an attempt to ‘silence a critic’. But Brennan has an op-ed in today’s New York Times and is frequently on major media. He oversaw criminal policies during the Obama administration, including drone assassinations. If anything, this has elevated Brennan’s major media status. Those who have been truly silenced in the ‘Trump era’ are those who were critical of the seemingly perpetual US government war machine since the invasion of Iraq.”

The FBI, also under constant attack from the president over the Mueller investigation, is now often portrayed as a last line of defence for the republic, with former director J Edgar Hoover’s dark excesses long forgotten. Sessions, whose nomination for attorney general was opposed by the congressman John Lewis and others as a fundamental threat to civil rights, now earns sympathy and respect for standing up to Trump. His deputy, Rod Rosenstein, also a Republican, is similarly prized as plucky underdog and bulwark against chaos.

In an email, Husseini commented: “What we have seen is a massive Trumpwashing that has effectively rebranded much of the establishment, including Bush administration officials whose opinions should be less than worthless. Trump attacks Sessions and self-described liberals defend him even as he pushes increasingly brutal immigration policies.”

The Vietnam war led millions to question presidential and governmental authority as never before. Jackson Lears was a naval officer during the war but also actively campaigned against it. “The golden age of scepticism towards the intelligence agencies began to subside by the late 70s,” he said. “You could see the Washington consensus reassembling around the idea that the need for security is more important than the people’s right to know.

“People who consider themselves liberals and progressives seem to have forgotten their scepticism towards the national security state. I’m concerned that the reformation of liberal and progressives under the banner of Mueller and the deep state is a real failure of imagination and a real failure to find an alternative.”

Lears, now a history professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey and editor of the journal Raritan Quarterly, rejects the political establishment’s attempts to put Trump in a separate category from itself. “I yield to no one in my hatred and fear of Trump, but I don’t think he’s unique. Bush and Cheney committed as many crimes and overturned as many legal precedents as Trump has done.

“The rehabilitation of Bush is wilful historical amnesia. The Bushes, Clintons and Obamas sitting together was a revealing tableau of the Washington consensus. I don’t think just getting rid of Trump is the solution.”

He added: “Many of the CIA and FBI figures who are being lauded as paragons of integrity have condoned mass surveillance and contributed to the legitimisation of torture. These directors are enmeshed in the deeds and crimes of their agencies in recent years. To turn them into monuments of truth telling is disturbing.”

But Kurt Bardella, a columnist who last year switched allegiance from the Republican to Democratic party, suggested that Brennan and his peers have a legitimate role to play in the anti-Trump resistance. He said: “We have a president who will lie to anybody and has sided with Vladimir Putin against his own intelligence community as these adversaries are running campaigns against our country. The intelligence community is the last barrier to protect us against these global threats and the person in charge disregards them. The underlying good of this country supercedes any previous political alignments.”

It is this view that unites people of many political stripes around the special counsel investigation. Jeremy Varon, a history professor at the New School in New York and leading member of Witness Against Torture, a group seeking to close the Guantanamo Bay prison, believes Mueller’s work is vital to accountability and the rule of law.
Under Trump, ‘old certainties have been shaken, roles reversed and loyalties scrambled’.
Under Trump, ‘old certainties have been shaken, roles reversed and loyalties scrambled’. Photograph: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

“Trump has created an alliance of different groups of different ideologies who have a shared interest in protecting democratic norms,” he said. “That deeply flawed institutions are here the executors of accountability does not mitigate the desirability and value of accountability itself.”

Other observers agree that to hero worship or demonise Bush and the intelligence agencies is a gross and unnecessary over-simplification. Lawrence Lessig, an author and professor at Harvard Law School who in 2015 launched an abortive campaign for president, said in an email: “Of course, the left encourages the reasonable right, to defend against the crazy right. That’s not inconsistency. That’s practical politics. I’m sure none of them would select the people they’re now praising over their equivalent on the left. But the equivalent isn’t an option, so you must work with who you have.

“No doubt, there are lines no one should cross. And no doubt, praise is always conditional. But it is a weakness of our time that we insist (completely contrary to reality) that a person is either good or bad, or to be supported or opposed. I think it is a positive thing that we complexify moral judgment.”

Neil Sroka, the communications director for Democracy for America, a progressive political action committee, also called for pragmatism. “The fact is, the overwhelming majority of the left understands we need to walk and chew gum at the same time,” he said. “We have to back up the few institutions that give us a shot at holding the Trump administration accountable for its myriad crimes under united Republican government without becoming a cheering section for every anti-progressive action the FBI, intelligence community and military have taken in US history.

“Nuance like that isn’t easy in the Twitter era – see the small but noisy group writing James Comey fan fiction and wasting money on a Michael Cohen defence fund – but it’s the line we’ve got to walk right now, even if it’s hard.”

Sroka added: “The utterances and actions of those who don’t recognise the need for new nuance aren’t going to wear well in the years ahead but, as a whole, I think the heart of the resistance – the majority of folks showing up at rallies at airports, making calls to Senate offices about Kavanaugh, or being inspired to run for office in 2018 – gets it quite well.”
 
Now & then the graun manage a thoughtful article, this one damns Trumpwashing: the phenomenon displayed in this very thread by many of you posting that anyone who bashes Trump is a saint and on their side, regardless of what they did or what they stand for. This includes the Bushes, McCain and the rest.

The most telling lines are:

- George W Bush - who was hated by liberals because of the Iraq war, the use of torture at CIA “black sites” which prompted calls for him to be prosecuted for war crimes, presiding over the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression and bungling the response to Hurricane Katrina, in which 1,800 people perished - is now considered a sweet, old grandpa figure who liberals coo over, especially when he is bantering with Michelle Obama.

- John Brennan, the director of the CIA under Obama – who approved 542 drone strikes that killed 3,797 people in non-battlefield areas where US forces were not directly engaged including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia – is now an unlikely hero of the #resistance.

- Nuance isn’t easy in the Twitter era

Full article below.
------------------------------------

'Trumpwashing': the danger of turning the Republican resistance into liberal heroes

As figures once reviled by the left are hailed for their opposition to Trump, critics warn against forgetting the past.

The empire strikes back. At late senator John McCain’s funeral earlier this month, the Clintons, Bushes and Obamas sat side by side in the front pew along with the former vice-presidents [Poor language removed] Cheney and Al Gore and Cheney’s wife, Lynne. A clip of the former president George W Bush handing a sweet to ex-first lady Michelle Obama went viral.

Among the distinguished speakers at the Washington National Cathedral: Henry Kissinger, now a venerable 95. Among the most quoted lines: “America was always great”, from McCain’s 33-year-old daughter Meghan. It was an imperious rebuke from America’s political establishment to the absent Donald Trump. McCain, no doubt, would have been delighted – but so too were many on the liberal left.

Not so long ago, the idea of liberals hankering nostalgically for Bush, hanging on Kissinger’s words or cheering assertions of American exceptionalism would have been unthinkable. Likewise the idea of rooting for the rightwing attorney general Jeff Sessions, the former FBI director and registered Republican Robert Mueller, and other mandarins of the so-called “deep state”. Yet old certainties have been shaken, roles reversed and loyalties scrambled by Trump’s profoundly unorthodox presidency.

According to Dan Kovalik, a human rights and labour lawyer and adjunct law professor at the University of Pittsburgh, the liberal left was already in ideological confusion when Trump turbo-charged the process. “In short, liberals have decided that ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’, especially when ‘my enemy’ is Donald J Trump,” he wrote via email.

“And so, bizarrely, liberals have decided that the CIA and FBI – despite their well-known history of suppressing civil liberties and civil rights in this country and abroad – are now noble institutions which should be believed and respected. This is because the CIA and FBI have largely taken an oppositional stance towards Trump.”

Kovalik, author of The Plot to Scapegoat Russia and The Plot to Attack Iran, added: “Even George W Bush, who was hated by liberals especially because of the Iraq war (which the CIA helped lie us into, by the way), is now considered a sweet, old grandpa figure who liberals coo over, especially when he is bantering with Michelle Obama.

“Part of this is that people like Bush or McCain or even [the vice-president Mike] Pence, who at least appear to be standard, reasonable politicians, seem wonderful now when compared to Mad King Trump. And because Trump talks about ‘making America great again’, liberals have decided that, somehow, even under presidents like W or many more like him, we have always been great. Of course, this is nothing but a childish contrariness totally lacking in political sophistication and historical understanding.”

Bush misled the US into Iraq in search of non-existent weapons of mass destruction with a war that cost hundreds of thousands of lives and paved the way for the Islamic State. The use of torture at CIA “black sites” prompted calls for him to be prosecuted for war crimes. Bush also presided over the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression and bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina, in which 1,800 people perished.

Around the time he left the White House in 2009, a CNN survey found that only 34% of the public had a favourable view of Bush, while 62% had an unfavourable one. Yet two polls published last October found that more Democrats now view Bush favourably than unfavourably. Obama regularly praises him. The ascent of Trump has ensured his redemption is complete.

Kissinger meanwhile, the former national security adviser and secretary of state, backed the covert bombing campaign in Laos and Cambodia in 1969-70. Hillary Clinton has lauded him, though her Democratic primary rival Bernie Sanders described him as “one of the most destructive secretaries of state in the modern history of this country”.

McCain’s funeral was widely hailed as a defiant stand for a vanished age of civility, honour and bipartisanship in American politics. A Washington Post headline declared: “McCain’s funeral was a melancholy last hurrah for what’s been lost in Trump era.” But Glenn Greenwald, a leftwing journalist, former lawyer and frequent critic of liberal politicians, tweeted to his near 1 million followers: “Only someone ensconced in the halls of DC power for decades, or drowning in jingoism, could declare that a ceremony featuring Henry Kissinger, George W Bush, [Poor language removed] Cheney, Joe Lieberman & various other assorted warmongers is an inspiring & uplifting tribute to decency.”

Liberals’ default scepticism about the FBI, CIA and NSA [National Security Agency] has also taken a hit. John Brennan, the director of the CIA under Obama – who approved 542 drone strikes that killed 3,797 people in non-battlefield areas where US forces were not directly engaged including Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia – is now an unlikely hero of the resistance. When Brennan was recently interviewed on HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher, the otherwise caustic, iconoclastic comedian hailed him as “a true American patriot”, adding: “I know how hard professionals here in the intelligence community work to try keeping this country strong and safe.”

Brennan is an ardent critic of Trump, who sought revenge by revoking his security clearance. In response, Sam Husseini, a senior analyst for the Institute for Public Accuracy, wrote on the Counterpunch website: “NPR tells me this is an attempt to ‘silence a critic’. But Brennan has an op-ed in today’s New York Times and is frequently on major media. He oversaw criminal policies during the Obama administration, including drone assassinations. If anything, this has elevated Brennan’s major media status. Those who have been truly silenced in the ‘Trump era’ are those who were critical of the seemingly perpetual US government war machine since the invasion of Iraq.”

The FBI, also under constant attack from the president over the Mueller investigation, is now often portrayed as a last line of defence for the republic, with former director J Edgar Hoover’s dark excesses long forgotten. Sessions, whose nomination for attorney general was opposed by the congressman John Lewis and others as a fundamental threat to civil rights, now earns sympathy and respect for standing up to Trump. His deputy, Rod Rosenstein, also a Republican, is similarly prized as plucky underdog and bulwark against chaos.

In an email, Husseini commented: “What we have seen is a massive Trumpwashing that has effectively rebranded much of the establishment, including Bush administration officials whose opinions should be less than worthless. Trump attacks Sessions and self-described liberals defend him even as he pushes increasingly brutal immigration policies.”

The Vietnam war led millions to question presidential and governmental authority as never before. Jackson Lears was a naval officer during the war but also actively campaigned against it. “The golden age of scepticism towards the intelligence agencies began to subside by the late 70s,” he said. “You could see the Washington consensus reassembling around the idea that the need for security is more important than the people’s right to know.

“People who consider themselves liberals and progressives seem to have forgotten their scepticism towards the national security state. I’m concerned that the reformation of liberal and progressives under the banner of Mueller and the deep state is a real failure of imagination and a real failure to find an alternative.”

Lears, now a history professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey and editor of the journal Raritan Quarterly, rejects the political establishment’s attempts to put Trump in a separate category from itself. “I yield to no one in my hatred and fear of Trump, but I don’t think he’s unique. Bush and Cheney committed as many crimes and overturned as many legal precedents as Trump has done.

“The rehabilitation of Bush is wilful historical amnesia. The Bushes, Clintons and Obamas sitting together was a revealing tableau of the Washington consensus. I don’t think just getting rid of Trump is the solution.”

He added: “Many of the CIA and FBI figures who are being lauded as paragons of integrity have condoned mass surveillance and contributed to the legitimisation of torture. These directors are enmeshed in the deeds and crimes of their agencies in recent years. To turn them into monuments of truth telling is disturbing.”

But Kurt Bardella, a columnist who last year switched allegiance from the Republican to Democratic party, suggested that Brennan and his peers have a legitimate role to play in the anti-Trump resistance. He said: “We have a president who will lie to anybody and has sided with Vladimir Putin against his own intelligence community as these adversaries are running campaigns against our country. The intelligence community is the last barrier to protect us against these global threats and the person in charge disregards them. The underlying good of this country supercedes any previous political alignments.”

It is this view that unites people of many political stripes around the special counsel investigation. Jeremy Varon, a history professor at the New School in New York and leading member of Witness Against Torture, a group seeking to close the Guantanamo Bay prison, believes Mueller’s work is vital to accountability and the rule of law.
Under Trump, ‘old certainties have been shaken, roles reversed and loyalties scrambled’.
Under Trump, ‘old certainties have been shaken, roles reversed and loyalties scrambled’. Photograph: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images

“Trump has created an alliance of different groups of different ideologies who have a shared interest in protecting democratic norms,” he said. “That deeply flawed institutions are here the executors of accountability does not mitigate the desirability and value of accountability itself.”

Other observers agree that to hero worship or demonise Bush and the intelligence agencies is a gross and unnecessary over-simplification. Lawrence Lessig, an author and professor at Harvard Law School who in 2015 launched an abortive campaign for president, said in an email: “Of course, the left encourages the reasonable right, to defend against the crazy right. That’s not inconsistency. That’s practical politics. I’m sure none of them would select the people they’re now praising over their equivalent on the left. But the equivalent isn’t an option, so you must work with who you have.

“No doubt, there are lines no one should cross. And no doubt, praise is always conditional. But it is a weakness of our time that we insist (completely contrary to reality) that a person is either good or bad, or to be supported or opposed. I think it is a positive thing that we complexify moral judgment.”

Neil Sroka, the communications director for Democracy for America, a progressive political action committee, also called for pragmatism. “The fact is, the overwhelming majority of the left understands we need to walk and chew gum at the same time,” he said. “We have to back up the few institutions that give us a shot at holding the Trump administration accountable for its myriad crimes under united Republican government without becoming a cheering section for every anti-progressive action the FBI, intelligence community and military have taken in US history.

“Nuance like that isn’t easy in the Twitter era – see the small but noisy group writing James Comey fan fiction and wasting money on a Michael Cohen defence fund – but it’s the line we’ve got to walk right now, even if it’s hard.”

Sroka added: “The utterances and actions of those who don’t recognise the need for new nuance aren’t going to wear well in the years ahead but, as a whole, I think the heart of the resistance – the majority of folks showing up at rallies at airports, making calls to Senate offices about Kavanaugh, or being inspired to run for office in 2018 – gets it quite well.”

I think that's a really strange take on the entire situation. I can only speak for myself, but guys like McCain rejecting Trump and his views/policies should be applauded by people on both sides of the aisle.

People on the far right demonize anyone who stands against Trump with McCain being a perfect example of that. I respect any politician in this day and age who stands against the rising tide of the far right. I still disagree with a lot of what McCain stood for, but at least he from time to time didn't tow the line because he stood on a few shreds of principal.
 
I think that's a really strange take on the entire situation. I can only speak for myself, but guys like McCain rejecting Trump and his views/policies should be applauded by people on both sides of the aisle.

People on the far right demonize anyone who stands against Trump with McCain being a perfect example of that. I respect any politician in this day and age who stands against the rising tide of the far right. I still disagree with a lot of what McCain stood for, but at least he from time to time didn't tow the line because he stood on a few shreds of principal.

From a British perspective, I can't imagine many on here giving someone like Tony Blair credit for his Trump-bashing. He's too damaged goods. Maybe the americans are generally more forgiving of their politicians, as when you look back on this thread it's been mainly the British posters who have rejected McCain despite his anti-Trump position and recent passing. Starting a war is a big deal, at least in this part of the world.
 
From a British perspective, I can't imagine many on here giving someone like Tony Blair credit for his Trump-bashing. He's too damaged goods. Maybe the americans are generally more forgiving of their politicians, as when you look back on this thread it's been mainly the British posters who have rejected McCain despite his anti-Trump position and recent passing. Starting a war is a big deal, at least in this part of the world.

Rejecting Trump's policies and/or rejecting the notion of MAGA is hardly Trump bashing though.

Only people on the far right would view it that way.
 
Rejecting Trump's policies and/or rejecting the notion of MAGA is hardly Trump bashing though.

Only people on the far right would view it that way.

again, there's that old problem that just won't go away...labelling people. So by your logic Sam Husseini is on the Far Right. He would raise an eyebrow or three at that labelling, for sure.
 
There is no logic in someone rejecting Trump's policies and/or rejecting the idea of MAGA and labelling it Trump bashing.

You're avoiding your own logic flaw: by your argument Sam Husseini is of the Far Right. Do you maintain this or do you accept your argument is flawed?
 
You're avoiding your own logic flaw: by your argument Sam Husseini is of the Far Right. Do you maintain this or do you accept your argument is flawed?

No it is you who is avoiding my post. It was you that used the Trump bashing phrase to label people. I took exception to that but instead of addressing that you took exception to me using a label.

I have no idea who that person is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top