Trending Topics:

Neocon savages Christie for failing ‘months and months of careful coaching’ by foreign policy experts

on 50 Comments

This is delicious. Donald Trump’s anti-interventionist foreign policy ideas are causing panic among the neoconservatives. Clearly this branch of the Republican establishment will leave the party over Trump.

Neoconservative Washington Post writer Jennifer Rubin is outraged that Chris Christie would endorse Donald Trump despite “months and months of careful coaching” in foreign policy by “outside… experts.” That’s how the Israel lobby works, by coaching politicians. This is what the neocons have successfully done with Marco Rubio: gotten him to be a robot on the Israel issue.

Notice the Christie gaffe Rubin cites, that those experts helped him overcome:

In fact, after months and months of careful coaching by outside foreign policy experts, his initial gaffes (e.g. “occupied territories” was how he referred to the West Bank) stopped and he became proficient on national security.  One former adviser told me he “absolutely” would never have helped Christie had he known he would endorse Trump. He said of Christie’s endorsement, “It’s an absolute disgrace.” It is exactly that, because Christie knows better.

It is deeply sad he would then sweep away months of high-minded speeches to enable a man he knows to be unfit for the presidency to attain that office at a time of such urgency.

And then this. Neoconservative Robert Kagan, also in the Washington Post, is endorsing Hillary Clinton because of Trump’s xenophobia and demagoguery and racism, but also the foreign policy:

Have his foreign policies, in particular, contributed to the fraying of the liberal world order that the United States created after World War II? Yes, and for these failures he has deserved criticism and principled opposition. But Republican and conservative criticism has taken an unusually dark and paranoid form. Instead of recommending plausible alternative strategies for the crisis in the Middle East, many Republicans have fallen back on a mindless Islamophobia, with suspicious intimations about the president’s personal allegiances.

Kagan is the man who brought us the Project for New American Century letters that helped get the country into the Iraq War.

So Hillary Clinton is the shop for muscular internationalists. Bernie Sanders keeps beating up on her friendship with Henry Kissinger, and that’s a good thing. But why doesn’t he talk about her affection for Benjamin Netanyahu and Dennis Ross? Netanyahu has terrible favorability ratings, especially among black Democrats, many of whom boycotted his speech to Congress a year ago. But Hillary Clinton wants to have him into the White House in her first month in office.

Remember that some neocons also left the Reagan Bush team when Bush got tough on Israel, and crossed the aisle to Bill Clinton. The Israel lobby transcends party.

Thanks to Scott McConnell, Peter Voskamp, and Glenn Greenwald:

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .

Posted In:

50 Responses

  1. Rusty Pipes on February 27, 2016, 3:25 pm

    Rather than bashing Netanyahu, Sanders could show some respect for Jimmy Carter — a former president who has been shunned by much of the Democratic establishment and vilified by the Israel Lobby, but still loved and respected by many mainstream Christians for his charitable work (especially with Habitat for Humanity) as well as his efforts in peacemaking and diplomacy through the Carter Center and the Elders.

    • Whatt on February 27, 2016, 4:09 pm

      Very Good point Rusty.

    • Kris on February 29, 2016, 12:11 am

      Even more impressive than his work with Habitat for Humanity has been President Carter’s campaign against the Guinea worm, a horrifying parasite that tunnels its way through the body. Guinea worm disease is grotesque and extremely painful.

      Carter got involved in Guinea worm eradication after an encounter in Ghana in the early 1980s. “He told me about being in Ghana and seeing a young woman who was cradling her breast. He thought she was nursing a child and went over to the woman. He wanted to meet the child. When he went to her, he realized she was in excruciating pain. There was a worm emerging from her breast.” Eventually it turned out she had 11 worms emerging from her body. …

      The Carter Center’s efforts to eliminate Guinea worm have been impressive. When their program started in the mid-1980s, there was an estimated 3.5 million cases in over 20 countries around the world. In 2014, there were just 126 cases for the entire year affecting just four countries: Chad, Ethiopia, Mali and South Sudan.

      • MRW on February 29, 2016, 1:06 pm


      • Tchoupitoulas on February 29, 2016, 11:05 pm

        God bless him.

      • DaBakr on March 2, 2016, 10:23 am

        make sure to bds the developer of a simple ingenious < $2.00 water-purification/ drinking straw/filter that can be distributed at almost no cost to rural communities where this parasite is endemic because -you just know what country they were developed in. bds=for the good of the world.

      • Kris on March 2, 2016, 11:22 am

        Perhaps because many people in South Sudan have fought epic battles with the Guinea worm, they have fully bought in to the eradication campaign. They’ve even contributed to the technology. The original water filters featured a pour-through system, which forced villagers to use multiple vessels when they wanted a simple drink of water.

        It was a villager—not a Western doctor or engineer—who eventually realized that an ordinary straw fitted with a tiny disk of nylon would be more effective. Since that small adjustment, water filters have become part of life in communities plagued with Guinea worm.

        It’s about education and outreach.

        “Guinea worm disease can be transmitted only by drinking contaminated water, and can be completely prevented through two relatively simple measures:

        Prevent people from drinking contaminated water containing the Cyclops copepod (water flea), which can be seen in clear water as swimming white specks.

        Drink water drawn only from sources free from contamination, such as a borehole or wells.

        Filter all drinking water, using a fine-mesh cloth filter like nylon, to remove the guinea worm-containing crustaceans. Regular cotton cloth folded over a few times is an effective filter.

        Filter the water through ceramic or sand filters.

        Boil the water.

        Develop new sources of drinking water without the parasites, or repair dysfunctional water sources.

        Treat water sources with larvicides to kill the water fleas.

      • eljay on March 2, 2016, 11:40 am

        || Kris: “Perhaps because many people in South Sudan have fought epic battles with the Guinea worm, they have fully bought in to the eradication campaign. They’ve even contributed to the technology. The original water filters featured a pour-through system, which forced villagers to use multiple vessels when they wanted a simple drink of water. It was a villager—not a Western doctor or engineer—who eventually realized that an ordinary straw fitted with a tiny disk of nylon would be more effective. Since that small adjustment, water filters have become part of life in communities plagued with Guinea worm.” … ||

        Clearly this villager was:
        – Israeli;
        – influenced by Israelis; or
        – an anti-Semite who stole the idea from Israel.

      • echinococcus on March 2, 2016, 11:40 am

        De Baker,

        “The willow bark preparation purified and offered to the entire world as Aspirin, the wonder drug from the fever tree called quinine, which stops malaria, and many, many other discoveries and achievements of our Glorious Reich have earned the undying gratitude of the entire humanity. If you take a drug or use transportation, you are probably using German products or patents. Our enemies may fume and curse us, but we remain the One Indispensable Nation.”

      • oldgeezer on March 2, 2016, 1:19 pm


        Are you referring to lifestraw?

        Lifestraw states the idea came from a Danish company and the patents in the device are held by a Swiss company. Not sure what value has been added by lifestraw nor why we would be required to deal with an Israeli manufacturer. Obviously if this device is required to sustain life BDS would not boycott it unless there is evidence it is supporting or profiting from the occupation.

        Besides tippytap works better.

        “In the increasingly tech-savvy world of international development, low-maintenance and locally sourced Tippy Taps have succeeded where other apps and devices have failed. LifeStraw, for example, was touted as a magic wand to purify drinking water, but there is very little evidence the filters have stopped disease.”

        Kinda like the wayez bs where wayez is owned by a US company and the US company holds all the copyrights and patents.

  2. kalithea on February 27, 2016, 3:48 pm

    I’m not always that keen on MJones slant, but there’s this article there today that pretty much confirms Glenn Greenwald’s tweet. The article should have appended for Hillary on the end of the title because that’s pretty much the conclusion it comes to.

    Will Conservatives Abandon Donald Trump in the General Election?

    Because of Trump’s almost inevitable win on the Republican side; Neocon Republicans and Sheldon Adelson are starting to look to Hillary as their standard-bearer! There are more and more signs of this. Can you believe that Hillary’s foreign policy is so attractive to Republicans that they would forego their own candidate???

    Why is Bernie’s Team not investigating this trending development and not firing on all cylinders to expose her as the candidate of the right; the candidate of Neocons and billionaires???

    Why isn’t he exposing how the right is on the verge of giving her a cake walk to the White House???

    Bernie Sanders has so much fodder to use against her! Instead he’s sounding like a broken record.

    Why isn’t he shaming her for pandering to Netanyahu, an extremist, rabid Zionist, who undermined a Democratic Presidency?

    Why isn’t he attacking her on Libya and Syria?

    If he doesn’t do something drastic; he’s going to tank on Super Tuesday!

    Where’s the pressure on the Goldman Sachs transcripts? Where are the attacks on her unrepentant lack of transparency?

    Where is the poster size chart that exposes her billionaire and millionaire funders and her Ziocon friends?

    Where’s his criticism of Bill and Hillary’s entitled elitism?

    Where’s the attack on Bill’s welfare reform act?

    All those years as an independent on the sidelines and now he has the only opportunity he’ll ever get in a lifetime to hand the Democratic establishment and the Clinton Machine their asses and what the efff is he doing to take full advantage of it?

    Why isn’t he running away with this contest when Hillary has so much baggage to haul? He should be leaving her in the duuuust with all the baggage she’s hauling!×401/local/-/media/Indianapolis/2015/03/05/B9316488024Z.1_20150305115212_000_G8UA4QPH5.1-0.jpg

    • echinococcus on February 28, 2016, 9:27 am


      Sad as it is to have to say it, for anyone with imperialism as a priority who decides that a vote for a “lesser evil” is justified, that vote is not Sanders or Clinton, but Trump.

    • Tchoupitoulas on February 29, 2016, 11:15 pm

      I hate to say it, and I have given to Sanders’ campaign more than a few times, but I think he’s someone who never expected to get as far as he did. I wouldn’t go so far as to say his campaign was something he thought of as a lark, but I don’t think he ever expected he would get this far. And now that he has, he isn’t mentally prepared for the next step, which is scraping and smearing HRC all over the pavement. It would be easily done, but he doesn’t seem disposed to do it. I kind of think he’s afraid of her. She’s Bill’s wife, they wield enormous power in the senate, and having spent a lot of time working in government, he’s intimidated by that.

      So, enter Trump.

  3. kalithea on February 27, 2016, 8:57 pm

    So Hillary just gave Sanders a beating in S.C. and instead of handing her her ass, Bernie’s giving her an effortless nomination. Easiest prediction ever: Sanders is toast after New Hampshire.

    I don’t want to say who’s gonna win the general; but if we rely on Astrologists; and I find them unreliable — Hillary’s gonna beat Trump.

    Here’s the thing though: Bush ended up being the most hated President going out; and if Hillary wins, banish the thought, she’ll be the most resented President going in. So it’s going to be a battle royale for the Presidency and a razor thin margin.

    You can’t go back and recapture Bill’s magic with — Hillary!

    So she’s got a new line now: she’s going to make the country whole again– what tripe! She’s the most polarizing figure in politics, perhaps ever, and even on the left! And I suppose she’s going to reverse gravity too! How can people be so absolutely, dense?

  4. Kathleen on February 27, 2016, 10:11 pm

    Neocon war hawks like Kagan supporting a neocon war hawk …Hillary Clinton. Why oh why did Bernie steer clear of her war record in Libya, Syria.

    • echinococcus on February 28, 2016, 9:23 am

      Because Sanders is a full accomplice of all US crimes against humanity, including the rape of Libya and Syria. Again.

    • jimby on February 28, 2016, 8:41 pm

      It should not be a surprise that Kagan would align with Clinton. He is married to Victoria Nuland. She was in the Bush State Dept and stayed with Clinton. She nearly single handedly instigated the horror show in the Ukraine. She still works there for Kerry. Kagan and Clinton should be a good fit.. puke

      • Kathleen on March 8, 2016, 12:08 pm

        I’m not surprised at all. She is a neocon war hawk. No surprise at all

    • Atlantaiconoclast on March 1, 2016, 1:17 am

      The “progressives” I know care little about Libya and Syria, and think I make too much about Israel/Palestine. In fact, they supported an anti regime intervention in both Libya and Syria. Humanitarian interventionist leanings manipulated by neocon liars.

      • echinococcus on March 2, 2016, 12:45 pm

        It’s about time to completely forget all those fancy characterizations people use for themselves and consider strictly their stand on the issues. We can tell where to shove that progress if the “Progressives” are warmongers. Similarly, I’ll love Buchanan and Paul as long as they remind us of international law.

        Anyway, on this site things are exceedingly simple. We can always evaluate them with regard to a minimum consensus for the destruction of Zionism / severe restriction of Zionism, or not. In fact, it’s a simple yes-or-no situation with a single maybe in-between. So perhaps it is a good to develop a list of a few telltale criteria to dissociate the non-Zionist Zionists from the anti-Zionists.

        Problem is, none of the bastards are willing to give up that “Progressive” label.

  5. Bandolero on February 27, 2016, 10:29 pm

    Philip Weiss

    I don’t think the neocons are panicked about Trump’s “anti-interventionist foreign policy ideas.”

    I think the neocons are panicked that Trump may intervene against Israel’s best friends – the Saudis & their Al Qaeda proxies, thereby seriously weakening Israel.

    Have a look at this:

    Trump: “Secret Papers” May Link 9/11 to Saudi Arabia

    … Donald Trump this week indirectly referred to 28 classified pages said to link the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the 9/11 attacks. … Trump’s implied promise to declassify 28 pages from a 2002 joint congressional intelligence inquiry into 9/11 sets him apart from the remaining Republican and Democratic presidential aspirants, filling a gap created when Rand Paul suspended his campaign. … When asked about the 28 pages last summer, Jeb Bush said he’d never heard of them. This month, asked if he would like to see the 28 pages his brother classified, Bush sarcastically replied, “Yeah, I’d like to see ’em. You got ’em?” Among the many who would like to “see ’em”: 9/11 family members and survivors whose lawsuit against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been imperiled by what former Senator Bob Graham calls a “pervasive pattern of covering up the role of Saudi Arabia in 9/11, by all of the agencies of the federal government, which have access to information that might illuminate Saudi Arabia’s role in 9/11.” …

    I think things like these may explain a great deal of why neocons are panicking over Trump, and I have some imagination why that may be so.

    • Atlantaiconoclast on March 1, 2016, 1:19 am

      Good point, though I suspect Israel might be mentioned in those 28 pages too, as SA is already mentioned in the non redacted portion of the full Congressional inquiry document.

  6. kalithea on February 28, 2016, 12:38 pm

    The only good thing that comes with the trouncing of Bernie by Hillary is that Bloomberg won’t get into the election campaign later, because Zionism must always be part of the political equation and especially part of the result.

    If only Trump hadn’t vowed to move the American Embassy to Jerusalem and brought in Sarah Palin who’s not only a uber Zionist but batshit krazeee extreme…crap!

    No good options.

    • Emory Riddle on February 29, 2016, 12:15 pm

      The idea that Bloomberg could get enuff votes to impact the election is delusional. I believe his own team conducted a preliminary look into this and reached the same conclusion.

      I personally would like to see him run and someone have the common sense to ask him how he grew his personal fortune from less than $2 billion when he became mayor to over $30 billion when he left the office 12 years later.

  7. Boomer on February 28, 2016, 1:30 pm

    This article explains a cryptic reference to “important conservative intellectuals” that I heard on NBC this morning. “Intellectual” sounds so much better than “Israel-firster.”

    • Krauss on February 28, 2016, 6:32 pm


    • MRW on February 29, 2016, 1:28 pm

      My, my, my. The Goyim are revolting and saying they’re mad as hell and not going to take it anymore, and the hyperbolic hall-monitors are reporting them to the Principal with any accusation they hope will stick.

      I hope Trump wins. I hope he rips the face off this group of hooligans that have brought nothing but penury and grief to the majority of Americans who lost their jobs, their homes, their retirements, and now earn under $50Gs a year, or are working two jobs to survive and feed their kids. A completely forgotten majority segment of society while they debate foreign policy?

      CNN host Jake Tapper asked the DNC chair, “What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it’s all rigged?”

      “Unpledged [‘super’] delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” Wasserman Schultz explained.

    • Atlantaiconoclast on March 1, 2016, 1:19 am

      neocons are not conservative at all

      I hate what they have done to that word!

  8. Krauss on February 28, 2016, 6:35 pm

    This shouldn’t surprise anyone. I don’t believe Kagan’s BS for one moment. Rubio has engaged in blatant islamophobia – hasn’t stopped the neocons from endorsing. They are now fleeing the ship because they see they can’t win.

    It’s like Pat Buchanan all over again. The only reason they are attacking is because of foreign policy, because of Israel. As he explained later, they never had a problem with his social conservatism before, but all of a sudden it became an issue because of Israel.

    Clearly this branch of the Republican establishment will leave the party over Trump

    Good riddance. They never had any support within the base as far as I can tell, they were a foreign element in the elite who did a hostile take-over. Hillary will be the last democratic nominee who’ll be a tool to the neocons. Tulsi Gabbard is endorsing Bernie and she’s the future of that party.

    • tree on February 29, 2016, 1:09 am

      Hillary will be the last democratic nominee who’ll be a tool to the neocons. Tulsi Gabbard is endorsing Bernie and she’s the future of that party.

      Be careful before touting Gabbard as the future of the party. You may not like the result anymore than you’d like Clinton. She’s socially conservative and has a Muslim problem.

      In Washington, Democrats no doubt noticed how great Gabbard looks on paper and television. She was elevated quickly to top jobs like vice chair of the DNC and to important committee assignments that fit with her military experience. “I think she’s wonderful,” House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) told Vogue.

      House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told Vogue that Gabbard is “an emerging star” and invited the then-congressional candidate to speak at the 2012 Democratic National Convention. “Some fresh recruits stay and some go,” Pelosi said. “It’s hard to tell what route she’ll choose.”

      So far, Gabbard is choosing her own route, and it’s not one Democrats hoping to groom her for leadership would have her take. Especially with regard to foreign policy, Gabbard often sounds more like a hawkish Republican than a potential future Democratic leader. She has blasted President Obama for failing to talk about Islamic extremism. And she recently tweeted this criticism of the president’s perceived weakness and hypocrisy in Syria:

      “Al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11. Obama won’t bomb them in Syria. Putin did. #neverforget”

      “But enough US has not been bombing Al Qaeda/Al Nusra in Syria. But its mind boggling that we protest Russia’s bombing of these terrorists.”

      Needless to say, for Democrats it’s awkward to have one of their most visible stars and a top DNC official saying things like this. In that sense, Gabbard is really a singular figure in her party.

      hat’s more, Gabbard has been glorified in the conservative media. Her criticism of Obama’s failure to cite “Islamic extremism” earned her appearances on Fox News, and in April, the conservative National Review wrote a glowing profile about the “beautiful, tough young” Democrat “who’s challenging Obama’s foreign policy” (though the magazine’s adjective-heavy headline didn’t earn them any favors with feminists).

      This shouldn’t be a complete surprise though. Gabbard’s political background is non-traditional. Her conservative Democratic state senator father led the charge in Hawaii against same-sex marriage. Gabbard said she generally aligned with social conservatism until she deployed twice to Iraq with the Hawaii Army National Guard. In 2012, she described what Honolulu Civil Beat called her “leftward journey” to the paper:

      “Some of these experiences living and working in oppressive countries, not only witnessing firsthand but actually experiencing myself what happens when a government basically attempts to act as a moral arbiter.”

      When she says ” when a government…” here she’s not talking about the US government intervention. She’s talking about other countries’ social conservatism. She’s just as much a hawk on the Middle East as anyone else, with no qualms about bombing people in that neck of the woods.

      From the Honolulu Civil Beat:

      U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii is co-sponsor of the Zero Tolerance for Terror Act, legislation that calls for ballistic missile sanctions against Iran.

      According to her office, the action comes in response to Iran illegally firing two missiles in October and November — a violation of a United Nations resolution.

      In a press release Thursday, Gabbard noted that it had been six months since Iran and world powers including the U.S. agreed on curbing Iran’s nuclear program in exchange of an easing of financial sanctions.

      And here’s a report that includes her criticism of Obama’s foreign policy from a rightist perspective, and her strong support for Modi of India.

      And another from Alternet about her support for the BJP:

      I don’t think that this is who you want as the future of the Democratic party.

      • tree on February 29, 2016, 1:27 am

        my edits didn’t work in time.

        For clarity, the third paragraph begins the quote from the Washington Post, starting with “In Washington…”

        And here’s Gabbard’s statement after Netanyahu’s address to Congress, including the usual boilerplate, “The United States’ relationship with Israel must rise above the political fray, as America continues to stand with Israel as her strongest ally.”

        People are grasping at straws and assuming that an endorsement of Sanders implies a less hawkish foreign policy outlook. It doesn’t. Certainly not in the case of Gabbard.

      • echinococcus on March 2, 2016, 7:01 pm

        Jeezes H Christ… you write as if you wanted the “Democratic party” to survive!

      • ritzl on March 8, 2016, 3:33 pm

        Hi tree. Thanks as always for your invaluable research and insights. My unbridled enthusiasm for Gabbard is now a little more bridled.

        I don’t want to interpret what Krauss means by the “future of the Democratic Party,” so I’ll pose my own current definition:

        The end of perpetual war.

        At the risk of overstating (but not much, imo), nothing else matters. Absolutely NONE of Sanders’ domestic initiatives can ever possibly happen without stopping perpetual war. The evisceration of the middle class, the gaping and widening racial economic disparity, generational improvement (his brilliant “free college” proposal), none of it happens. The Democratic party might as well just close up shop.*

        In that context and with that goal and consequences for failure, Gabbard is explicitly doing three things that no one else is doing:

        ● Simply raising war and peace as an issue;

        ● Pointing out the resource cost of perpetual war and the effect of that drain on middle class quality of life prospects; and,

        ● Specifically highlighting Clinton’s role – by name – in fomenting perpetual war.

        What Sanders/Gabbard has/have not done (yet?) is specifically make the connection between Clinton’s total buy-in to perpetual war/war-as-first-resort and her complete disregard for the well-being of the Democratic base. Maybe more consequently, they’ll make the case that perpetual war vastly disproportionately harms disadvantaged communities by depriving them of the resources for uplift. Clinton’s official actions show that she is FOR that drain and the perpetual suppression of the very people she says she seeks to help. That’s a gaping Grand Canyon-sized hole in her professed caring. It includes the murderous rural health care debacle in the US (I.e. it’s not solely about color. Not at all. … A black Sanders canvasser brought up this point unsolicited in our Super Tuesday conversation, so the campaign is aware.).

        If Sanders is playing to win we’ll see more and more explicit attacks on Clinton either by him or Gabbard as proxy.

        Sorry for length as usual. I do understand your point on social issues and their priority. I just think things are very out of wack and in danger if getting out of control.

        I wish conversations like this could be had face to face. :)

        Cheers and thanks again.
        * It could be argued as well (and has been for years now) that if Dems don’t have the spine to fight on such binary big issues like war and, social issues are “negotiable.”

  9. Bandolero on February 29, 2016, 2:25 am

    Here is one more quote from Trump, just yesterday, when he got the endorsement from Senator Jeff Sessions:

    The events of history have aligned to give the people this fleeting chance to bust up the oligarchy – to take back control from the ‘Masters of the Universe’ return it to the good and decent and patriotic citizens of the United States.”


    Jeff Sessions had used the term ‘Masters of the Universe’ a couple of years ago singling out Mark Zuckerberg to be one of them.

    I doubt Trump’s intention “to bust up the oligarchy” and “to take back control from the ‘Masters of the Universe’” will go down well with the Israel lobby. Those guys could well think Trump uses these terms to target them.

  10. on February 29, 2016, 4:54 am

    When will Phil just come out and start endorsing Trump as his ideal President? The only guy who will be brave enough to fight the Zionists and AIPAC headon on Phil’s behalf, while empowering and mobilizing racists and white supremacist scum against POC and Muslims Americans.

    • Mooser on March 1, 2016, 11:43 am

      “When will Phil just come out and start endorsing Trump as his ideal President?”

      It would be completely inappropriate (and possibly illegal!) for Phil Weiss to endorse Trump before he has received the nomination. He would be accused of inordinate undue influence!

  11. just on February 29, 2016, 8:08 am

    “ADL to Provide Candidates With Information on Hate Groups, After Trump Pleads Ignorance”

    read more:


    Try the Southern Poverty Law Center instead…

  12. Qualtrough on February 29, 2016, 9:48 am

    Trump vs Clinton is a nightmare scenario in which the USA loses no matter which of the two candidates wins.

    • on February 29, 2016, 10:35 am

      Okay, that might be the case for the average person. However, Trump winning would not be such a bad thing for people, both liberals and conservatives, that are looking to counter the influence of AIPAC and the Israeli lobby in US politics. I mean people who resents Israel so much so that his racist, Islamaphobic and chauvinistic rhetorics are acceptable trade offs. I see many articles in MW which are subtly hoping for that scenario.

      • Mooser on February 29, 2016, 12:08 pm

        “I see many articles in MW which are subtly hoping for that scenario.”

        Yup, there’s no mistaking the “self-hatred” and “internalized antisemitism” which marks the articles at Mondo. Of course, you can’t name or link to any which meet that description.

      • on February 29, 2016, 1:16 pm

        Just wait. They (MW) are being really sneaky at this stage with their leanings, but as the season progresses it will be a bit more obvious on whos their rooting for. I personally believe Phil is a closet Trump supporter, but not a man enough to admit it, fearing for his reputation among the progressive circles most likely.

  13. Kay24 on February 29, 2016, 10:23 am

    Some comic relief. A brilliant presentation by John Oliver, on Trump the serial liar.
    He makes excellent points.

  14. James Canning on February 29, 2016, 12:51 pm

    Chris Christie should be applauded for his reference to the “occupied territories”. Jennifer Rubin is consistently wrong in her policy suggestions for the Middle East.

    • MRW on February 29, 2016, 1:39 pm

      As I noted oh the Trump thread, Christie got around that last week by saying this:

      “I heard some of Sen. Rubio’s comments this morning,” Christie said. “None of them were about the people of this country…[or] the fact that middle class folks in this country are suffering.”

  15. MRW on February 29, 2016, 1:05 pm

    Don’t miss this article:
    “How to Watch Tuesday’s Returns Like a Data Geek”

  16. ritzl on March 1, 2016, 2:04 pm

    Rubio’s campaign signs here had the tagline, “A New America Century.” I kid you not.


Leave a Reply