[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Biden to launch ICE mobile app, further disrupting Trump's mass deportation plan: Report Panic at Mar-a-Lago: How the Fake Press Pool Fueled Global Fear Until X Set the Record Straight Donald Trumps Nominee for the FCC Will Remove DEI as a Priority of the Agency Stealing JFK's Body Trump plans to revive Keystone XL pipeline to solidify U.S. energy independence ASHEVILLE UPDATE: Bodies Being Stacked in Warehouses & Children Being Taken Away American news is mostly written by Israeli lobbyists pushing Zionist agenda Biden's Missile Crisis British Operation Kiss kill Instantly Skripals Has Failed to Kill But Succeeded at Covering Up, Almost NASA chooses SpaceX and Blue Origin to deliver rover, astronaut base to the moon The Female Fantasy Exposed: Why Women Love Toxic Love Stories United States will NOT comply with the ICC arrest warrant for Prime Minister Netanyahu: Mississippi’s GDP Beats France: A Shocking Look at Economic Policy Failures (Per Capita) White House Refuses to Recognize US Responsibility for Escalation of Conflict in Ukraine MAKE EDUCATION GREAT AGAIN!! They will burn it with a "Peresvet" or shoot it down with a "hypersound" NY Times: Could Trumps Return Pose a Threat to Climate and Weather Data? Apples new AI-powered Siri? Pepe Escobar: The BRICS Spirit Is Alive And Well In South Africa Trump Can Stop WW III By Helping Kamala Make History About that ICBM Russia just launched on Dnipro These Are America's Safest Cities Trump's Opportunity To Reset US-Iran Relations Trump Nominates Pam Bondi For Attorney General After Gaetz Withdraws From Consideration Judea Snarls: Donald Trump seeks to divide the State of Israel and Create a Palestinian State Gaetz Withdraws From Consideration For Attorney General TROUBLE OFF AIR MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow ‘takes $5m pay cut’ CNN’s Jake Tapper STORMS OFF as JD Vance ANNIHILATES Him Over Trump’s ‘Enemy Within’ Remarks! 🚨BREAKING: Hundreds of January 6th Political Prisoners Set FREE, DC Judges PANIC! Trump Pardon Soon Tulsi Gabbard vs. Democrats and the Media!!

Editorial
See other Editorial Articles

Title: Let’s face it, US politics is just a showy soap opera laced with enough nepotism and corruption to make a banana republic blush
Source: [None]
URL Source: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/502812-us-politics-banana-republic/
Published: Oct 11, 2020
Author: Charlie Stone
Post Date: 2020-10-11 09:39:27 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 717
Comments: 6

It’s four weeks to election day. Chaos reigns in the White House. The contagious president still doesn’t wanna wear a mask. Will Donald have to be dragged out by force? Find out in the season finale of... ‘The Banana Republic.’

There was an American show that ran on pretty much every TV set in the whole wide world in the 1980s called ‘Dynasty’ – pronounced ‘die-nasty’ by Americans, who like to mangle the English language.

The main images that immediately spring to mind are all teeth and hair. Perfect teeth, perfect hair. Male or female. Oh, and the theme tune. And money.

Money, money, money. I can’t remember a single plot line though, not one.

American politics in a nutshell. Also on rt.com 'He's back': The last week has illustrated the MSM and establishment bias against Trump, but despite that he'll still win election

There was Dallas too, which was basically the same show – the very same teeth, the very same hair. And, yes, the same money, money, money. Both shows were given reboots a few years ago, but nobody seemed to notice them the second time around.

The ‘80s sugar has all been consumed, and everyone knows the fundamental flaw with sugar; eat too much and it makes you sick. The gloss has gone, the teeth are all crowns, and dental implants and all that hair... the style hasn’t changed much but it has lost its sheen and gone grey.

The world is watching America, but not for any kind of ‘leadership.’ ‘Dynasty’ has turned into ‘The Sopranos.’ Some Americans are talking of a second civil war (apparently to be fought mostly on Twitter and Facebook). Democrats and Republicans are ‘going to the mattresses.’

The rest of us are all mere spectators. We have no say whatsoever in what happens in the good old US of A. So, relax – sit back and enjoy the show.

The next four weeks is just going to be two angry old men, shouting at each other VERY LOUDLY! Yet saying nothing much of anything at all. Also on rt.com Trump has Covid-19, but who’s affected most? MSM journalists who make the story all about THEM

Polls show that 40 percent of registered voters will vote Trump, come what may. The numbers just don’t drop much below 40 for the Donald, and they haven’t for a good while. Bungling the response and then catching Covid-19 – streaking naked in the moonlight across the Rose Garden lawn, whatever – nothing can knock him under 40 for long. Nothing.

But hang on, take a deep breath, put your fingers in your ears and block out all the noise. Trump v Biden is actually basically just Coke v Pepsi (even the colors match). Same as it always is in American politics. If you check out the policies, they are not separated by vast chasms. It’s hardly Karl Marx v Adolf Hitler. It’s very little to do with policy, it’s all about personality.

Donald Trump has proven that anyone can, indeed – with the right personality – become president. If you are in possession of an almost irrational quantity of self-belief, are mildly telegenic, oh and have a few billion dollars lying around or rich benefactors willing to splurge on your campaign, then the keys to the White House could be yours.

Trump v Biden. I mean really, Uncle Sam, is this the BEST you can do?

America has almost three times as many Nobel Prize winners as any other country and almost twice as many billionaires as its nearest rival. And yet, from a population of almost 330 million, the choice for president in exactly four weeks time boils down to... two furious, inarticulate geriatrics shouting at each other across a socially distanced stage.

What’s more, the election, as Trump keeps screaming, may not even be safe.

Most of my banking is done online or via an app these days, and I’d suggest people are way more protective and paranoid of their hard-earned cash than they’ll ever be about their vote. The damn thing scans your face or does a fingerprint test only the police used to be able to do. How hard can it be to make a voting app?

But, apparently, the US voting system is so wide open to corruption that some bloke can just pop along with a mail bag and stuff a load of slips marked ‘Biden’ into a ballot box (but, presumably, none marked ‘Trump’) and swing the election. Remember ‘hanging chads,’ anyone?

And then there’s the result. Due to an absurd and antiquated system, a president can get elected even though the other guy or gal actually got more votes (as happened, of course, in Trump v Hillary Clinton and George W. Bush v Al Gore).

It’s nuts. It’s bonkers. It’s an insane soap opera.

I lived in Asia for many years and was a correspondent in Manila. The Philippines, my apologies to Filipinos, was a nut house. And the politics down there was so often just a silly, yet very dangerous, soap opera. And, funnily enough, the Philippines could once have become an American state.

Well, the US, right now, feels exactly the same and, just like any self-respecting banana republic, it is also a family affair. Also on rt.com Michelle Obama’s Orwellian damage control for BLM is a cynical attempt to gaslight the American people into voting for Biden

You disagree? President George H.W. Bush and then his son George ‘Dubya.’ President Bill Clinton’s missus almost ran all the way to the White House. Many people have been trying to push Michelle Obama to make a bid too, and maybe she will, next time. But the real race to watch in ‘The Banana Republic’ will be in three or four elections time when the youngest Trump boy, Barron, takes on the youngest Obama girl, Sasha.

Anyway, that’s for the future.

Let’s all just sit back for four weeks and watch the climax to this season of ‘The Banana Republic.’ Pop round mine for the finale if you like, what are you drinking? Coke or Pepsi?

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

#1. To: Ada (#0)

Which Zionist will you vote, fight, kill and die for?

Screen Name  posted on  2020-10-11   11:59:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Zionist

Arafat always said the main problem in Palestine/Israel was Zionists.

This has its roots in history with The Balfour Declaration (1917) which was presented to the Zionist Federation of Great Britain and Ireland.

Lord Arthur Balfour was British Foreign Secretary back then.

At that time Palestine was an Ottoman area. ;)

BTP Holdings  posted on  2020-10-11   13:21:47 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

https://www.unz.com/article/yes-we-are-headed-for-violent-civil-war/

Yes, We Are Headed for Violent Civil War

Jef Costello • October 8, 2020 • 3,000 Words

On October 1st, with little fanfare, Politico published an extraordinary opinion piece that may be the most important thing I’ve read all year. Titled “Americans Increasingly Believe Violence is Justified if the Other Side Wins,” the essay was penned by three “senior fellows” at the Hoover Institution, New America, and the Hudson Institute, as well as a professor of “political communication” at Louisiana State University and a professor of government at the University of Maryland (that’s five authors, in case you lost count).

The major takeaway is presented in the graph that appears below:

Way back in November of 2017 (my, how long ago that seems . . . ) a mere 8% of both Democrats and Republicans held that it is legitimate to use violence to advance their political goals. Actually, there’s nothing “mere” about it. It ought to surprise us that such a sizeable percentage of both parties could hold such a radical view. Also surprising is Republicans running neck and neck with Democrats. Contrary to how they are perceived by Leftists, conservatives are slow to embrace the idea of violence, or any sort of punitive measures against their opponents. Their Achilles heel, in fact, is commitment to “fair play.”

We must remember that when these numbers were compiled it had been a year since the 2016 election. A year of unhinged rhetoric by the Left, and repeated calls for Trump to be assassinated. Madonna spoke about her fantasies of blowing up the White House, and “comedian” Kathy Griffin held up an effigy of Trump’s severed head. Of course, those were the unserious, tongue-in-cheek threats. Countless other people made similar threats, quite openly, and seemed to be pretty serious about it. To my knowledge, none of them was charged with a crime.

As Trump Derangement Syndrome continued to spread, it was actually a healthy sign that more Republicans began to entertain the idea of using violence as a political tool. Leftists presented themselves as having no boundaries. There was no low to which they would not stoop, no trick too dirty. They were threatening to attack and kill not only the President, but his supporters, and, in fact, the entire white race. They made it quite clear that they could not be reasoned with. Faced with an enemy like this, violence was bound to become more attractive, or at least more justifiable, in the eyes of even the most mild-mannered Republican voter.

Almost a year later, in October 2018, the percentage of Democrats condoning violence had jumped to 13. It had become obvious to them, at this point, that the results of the 2016 election were not going to be reversed, though many still held out the hope that Robert Mueller would uncover some dirt that would prove Trump’s undoing. True to form, conservatives lagged behind (see what nice people we are?), with a mere 11% condoning violence. Still, the number had risen. At least part of this has to be attributed to the Kavanaugh hearings (of September-October), which were a wakeup call for many Republicans, including Lindsay Graham, who seems to have sort of lost his innocence as a result. The hearings proved once and for all, if any more proof had been needed, that liberals have no principles whatever, and that attempts to play fair with them will only backfire. One can’t really blame Republicans for that 11%. Please pass the ammo.

But we hadn’t seen anything yet. That was before COVID and BLM. By June of the current year, these percentages had doubled, and Dems and Republicans were now equally in favor of breaking heads: 30% of both groups now condoned violence to advance political goals. Let us pause to consider this number once more: 30%. Let us also pause to consider that this poll was conducted at the beginning of June, when the George Floyd riots had just gotten going.By December 2019, things had gotten genuinely scary. The trend had continued. And how. This was the month that the House approved articles of impeachment against Trump. Earlier in the year, in April, the Mueller report was made public, revealing that we had been subjected to two solid years of hysteria about “Russia collusion” for absolutely no reason whatever. The libs were frustrated, to put it mildly. 16% of them now condoned violence. Republicans were behind the curve again, but not by much, with 15% of them thinking the same way.

By September 1st, the percentage of liberals condoning violence had risen by just three points. Still, at 33% this constitutes one third of all Dems. The more interesting result came from the Republicans, however. The percentage in question had risen to 36%, and for the first time Republicans rated as more violence-approving than Dems. If you will read the fine print, you will find that the September poll’s margin of error is 2.0 percentage points. Thus, the three percentage points separating Republicans from Democrats are statistically significant; conservatives are now demonstrably more in favor of violence than liberals.

Has the sleeping giant awakened?

We were slow to consider violence an option. Unlike liberals, after all, we really do have principles, and we did not want to be like them. But they have pushed us to this point, and it’s difficult to see how there can be any debate about that. Months of watching our cities burn. Months of our history being torn down. Months of draconian lockdowns and arbitrary rules imposed by Democrat governors and mayors. Months of being told that we had to shelter in place, while BLM was given free rein to loot and burn. Months of being told we have no right to defend ourselves; that if you are white, you are automatically guilty. Countless lives and businesses destroyed. Given all of this, and more, it’s surprising that the number isn’t 56% — or 76% or 86%. But since many conservatives are probably afraid to say they might condone violence, I think we can round that 36% up a bit. Quite a bit.

The other day I spoke with a friend who lives in New York. He told me that he recently drove to his local rifle range, which he has visited many times in the past. He had not been there for several months, however, and when he arrived he was shocked to find a line stretching out the door (made up entirely of white people) and what wound up being a 45 minute wait. When he finally got inside, he asked the proprietor about the large turnout and was told that it had been like this every weekend since the BLM riots began, and that the numbers were increasing. I hope all those folks brought their own ammo, because my friend also told me the store was completely sold out. And this was New York, not South Carolina.

Two weeks prior to the Politico essay, The Hill published an opinion piece by a former federal prosecutor titled “Why Democrats Must Confront Extreme Left-wing Incitement to Violence.” It’s a weak and cowardly piece of writing but is nevertheless interesting on multiple levels. The author begins by asserting that Right-wing groups “by far pose the greatest threat of violence.” He bases this on a study by something called the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). This group looked at 900 cases of politically motivated plots or attacks since 1994, and concluded that Right-wing extremists had claimed the lives of 329 people, whereas “Antifa members haven’t killed any.”

This is like somebody saying, in January of 2020, “Over the last 25 years, seasonal flu has claimed the lives of 890,000 Americans,[1] but COVID-19 hasn’t killed any Americans. Therefore, the flu is the real threat.” This would have been a ridiculous position, because COVID was something new and entirely unknown. We had no way of knowing, in January, how dangerous COVID was going to be. And, since then, it has, in fact, claimed far more American lives than the flu ever takes in a given year.

Similarly, since May we have seen Left-wing violence the likes of which this country has not seen since the 1960s. And this phenomenon is fundamentally new because it has been condoned and encouraged by state and local officials, prominent Democrats in Congress, and establishment journalists and pundits. The authors of the CSIS study warn of the dangers posed by groups like the “boogaloos,” a group of “Right-wing, anti- government extremists” bent on “creating a civil war in the United States.” Oddly enough, I’d never heard of the boogaloos until reading this article, and I think I’m pretty “plugged in.”

I know nothing about this group, but I do know one thing for certain: if the boogaloos, or any other “Right-wing extremists” took to the streets and behaved as BLM and Antifa have behaved – looting, burning, assaulting, threatening, or even just blocking traffic – they would have been crushed within twenty-four hours. All the might of state and local police forces and federal law enforcement would have been unleashed against them, and the cops would not have played nice. Many “Right-wingers” would have wound up dead or injured, and the survivors would have faced extensive criminal charges.

This, gentle reader, is why “Right-wing violence” is not the greater threat. Left-wing violence is taking place with the approval and support, financial and otherwise, of the establishment. It is a threat to all ordinary Americans, especially white Americans. Right- wing violence only poses a threat (so far, a very mild one) to the establishment.

The author of The Hill piece, while claiming that Right-wingers pose the greatest threat, wishes nonetheless to warn liberals that their own people are becoming far more violent and that they need to address this problem. This is after referring to the riots we’ve seen since May as “overwhelmingly peaceful social justice protests.” But he fears Democrats aren’t listening:

Perhaps Democrats are afraid of leaving the impression of a false equivalency between extreme right- and left-wing violence. Perhaps they are fearful that acknowledging the threat posed by extreme left-wing incitement gives credibility to Trump’s false narrative that Democrat-run cities are burning because of left-wing violence (they are not burning) and his promotion of outlandish conspiracy theories, such as that people in “the dark shadows” allegedly control Joe Biden.

In other words, the author, a Leftist in deep denial about the threat posed by the Left, wonders why the Left is in such deep denial about the threat posed by itself. You can’t make this stuff up.

If Biden does win, and if the Democrats manage to gain complete control of Congress, we can look forward to an assault on the first and second amendment rights of Americans, in the form of hate speech legislation and gun control. Further, Biden and Harris have signaled that they will pack the Supreme Court – simply by repeatedly refusing to answer the question of whether they will. Democrats are also likely to grant statehood to the District of Columbia (thus increasing their numbers in Congress), amnesty millions of illegals and put them on a fast track to citizenship, and abolish the Electoral College.In August, Joe Biden asked “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is reelected?” This was widely interpreted by conservatives as a threat. The truth is that the violence will continue regardless of who wins the election. Trump’s reelection will guarantee further violence by the Left. But since Democrats have encouraged the violence and done nothing to contain it, there is every reason to believe that it will continue if Biden wins. Indeed, the “hands off” attitude the establishment has taken to Left-wing violence makes it almost inevitable that the violence will escalate, meaning that it will become more deadly. The Far Left has been emboldened.

This is, quite simply, a recipe for civil war – of some kind or other. It is certainly a recipe for the further fragmentation of the country. 62% of white men voted for Trump in 2016, and none of them wants what I have just indicated the Democrats have to offer. The elimination of the Electoral College, if it happens, could be the country’s tipping point toward dissolution. It would mean that millions of Americans in the heartland of the country (most of them white) would be politically disenfranchised. The situation in the US is already volatile; the disenfranchisement of large numbers of citizens would make it much worse. This is particularly true given that those citizens are the backbone of the country: their decency, hard work, and tax money keep it afloat. It is unlikely that those people would readily accept living at the mercy of a combination of urban elites and non-white freeloaders.

Of course, the same situation would be created if demographic projections are borne out, and whites become a minority by 2044, regardless of what happens to the Electoral College. And the re-election of the hapless Trump would not even slow this process. Given demographics, our long-term prospect is a Democratic takeover. So that even if Democrats lose in 2020 – even if they lose big – everything I projected above about what the Democrats will do when they take power is still going to happen, it just may take a little longer.

My own prediction for what will happen to the US is that it will eventually split up along racial and political lines. Already, there is hardly any “union” to assess the state of. Further, all signs now indicate that this is not going to be a peaceful process. The Left began the violence, and they have now succeeded in pushing a whopping 36% of conservatives to approve of answering violence with violence.

My readers on the Right, who are far more discerning than average folks, may be skeptical for different reasons. According to some of them, the chances of violent civil war or revolution are zero, since the establishment has far greater firepower. As I said above, if the Right took to the streets like BLM, they would be mercilessly crushed. But suppose they did it again. And again. And suppose the anger that sent them out into the streets did not diminish, but increased. It is naïve to think that determined individuals, through persistent guerilla warfare and other forms of resistance, cannot destabilize a government – especially when the government is run by decadent, out-of-touch elites who inhabit an ideological and social bubble. It has happened before, and can happen again.Some of my readers will greet these claims with skepticism. Average Americans find it impossible to imagine their country disintegrating in violent conflict. This is the result of years of propaganda about the “stability” of our Republic, the “miracle” of our peaceful transfer of power every four years, yada yada. Average Americans are bizarrely oblivious to just how violent this country really is and always has been (something that has not escaped the notice of the rest of the world): sky-high rates of murder, rape, and assault; urban riots every few years; the assassination of political figures; regular “spree killings”; and a civil war that claimed the lives of around 700 thousand people. Average folks may not want to think about it, but a second civil war is quite plausible.

Of course, the goal should not be “revolution.” There is no reason to want to “take over” the United States, because it is not desirable that the United States should continue to exist. We don’t want to live with these people anymore, even if we are the ones “in charge.” Instead, what we should aim for is independence – in other words, the partitioning of the country; carving our own country out of this country and saying goodbye to those other people. Folks, it’s either that or persuade the Europeans that we have the right of return. But that’s not going to happen.

So here are my predictions for the near future:

Left-wing violence will continue, indeed it will escalate. However, white conservatives will be increasingly willing to challenge Leftists in the streets. The Politico numbers persuasively suggest that this is likely, and we already see signs of it (notably, the Kyle Rittenhouse episode). A Trump loss will further radicalize many white conservatives. A Trump win will also radicalize white conservatives, because the response will be even more violence from Leftists. The continued anti-white rhetoric, which shows no signs of abating, will also do the work of radicalization. I predict that we will see more acts of domestic terrorism perpetrated by Right-wing groups, and that many new such groups will spring up in the next several years. These acts will be heavily condemned by all the usual suspects, but this will have little effect, since the double standard is now too obvious. Even Mom and Dad, drinking Snapple and watching Hannity, will now approve of Right-wing violence. Unlikely? Look at that chart above and think again. How likely is it that the trend has peaked at 36%?

I also predict that we will see cases of mini-secessions, in which towns, cities, and counties that are largely white and Republican will begin resisting the power of state and federal governments (e.g., not enforcing certain laws). This will make parts of the country hard to govern. These areas will become a mecca for white conservatives. They will grow in population and geographic reach, as new arrivals take residence just over county or city lines. Tired of the dirty looks they get, many non-whites and liberals will go elsewhere. In short, there will be de facto secession before secession is ever made official.

By the way, had I made prognostications about “civil war” as little as a year ago, I would have done so with the caveat “probably not in our lifetime.” Now I am definitely not so sure. It’s hard to believe, but the scenario envisioned by Chuck Palahniuk in Adjustment Day is becoming more plausible with each passing week.

Note

[1] A guestimate: each year the flu claims the lives of between 30,000-50,000 Americans.

Screen Name  posted on  2020-10-11   17:08:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

Even Mom and Dad, drinking Snapple and watching Hannity, will now approve of Right-wing violence. Unlikely? Look at that chart above and think again. How likely is it that the trend has peaked at 36%?

I listened to Limbaugh back in the 80s but never bought the Snapple ! I'm sure that many others began with Limbaugh but graduated to higher learning after seeing that he and Hannity, Prager, Medved, Beck and many others were simply right gatekeepers.

As far as the violence becoming increasingly more possible I agree it will. I think the left has already started and those being affected by it will eventually fight back. The folks that are already being attacked by the mobs have every right to return fire, I will !

noone222  posted on  2020-10-12   7:55:19 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  

        There are no replies to Comment # 6.

End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]