↓
 

The New Neo

A blog about political change, among other things

  • Home
  • Bio
  • Email
Home » Page 1089 << 1 2 … 1,087 1,088 1,089 1,090 1,091 … 1,893 1,894 >>

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

Parties committing suicide (case study: Labour?)

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2015 by neoSeptember 14, 2015

Britain’s Labour Party commits suicide by electing extremist Jeremy Corbyn to be its leader, according to Dan Hodges of The Telegraph. If what the paper says is true, Corbyn makes our own Bernie Sanders look like Hubert Humphrey.

I often think when people announce the death of a political party they are exaggerating. Political parties have a funny way of confounding that judgment. But this time it may be true, at least for a while:

Jeremy Corbyn’s opponents can’t begin to picture Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. Jeremy Corbyn’s own cheerleaders can’t begin to picture Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. Even Jeremy Corbyn can’t begin to picture Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. How in God’s name are the voters supposed to picture it?

They aren’t, of course. The voters were the last people under consideration when Labour’s new army of £3 activists pumped out their fusillade of electronic ballots.

Labour has not just relinquished any prospect of being a party of government. It has just relinquished any prospect of being a party of opposition…

Something may still emerge from the ashes. But the Labour Party as we know it ”“ and as some people once loved it ”“ died today.

I don’t pretend to know a whole lot about British politics. But I know a single party system isn’t usually a good thing. What’s more, I also know that British politics has moved to the left and that even their Conservative Party there isn’t what we’d call “conservative” in the US.

I also know that this is the sort of thing many frustrated conservatives in this country would love to happen to our own Republican Party:

Political parties die because they want to die. None of this had to happen. Labour could have elected a solid but unremarkable interim leader. Yvette Cooper’s steel. Liz Kendall’s courage. Whatever it is that’s left of Andy Burnham after three months of remorseless self-abasement. They would not have enthused or energised anyone. But at least they would have kept the flame alive.

But that’s not what Labour Party members wanted. They wanted to see their party go out in a final blaze of uncompromising glory.

Sound familiar?

[NOTE: I want to clarify something. At the end of this post, I’m not necessarily talking about Trump supporters, although it fits some of them. Other Trump supporters, however, think that Trump can win (and perhaps will win) and they think he’d make a good president. I happen to differ with them, but they are not the ones I’m talking about here. Nor is the group I’m talking about here limited to Trump supporters. The group I’m referring to is what I’ve previously called the Cloward-Pivens of the right, or the apocalypse-seekers.

What’s more, the group I’m referring to doesn’t necessarily want to nominate a candidate who, like Corbyn in Britain, represents the most extreme and uncompromising version of their views. Sometimes they want to support a candidate they hate (the liberal Democrat), either by staying home during the election or actively voting for that person. This, they believe, will hasten the disaster and the recovery from it.]

Posted in Liberals and conservatives; left and right | 46 Replies

As the billionaire Trump goes, so go…

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2015 by neoJanuary 27, 2016

…the other billionaires:

But Trump’s rise shows billionaires don’t have to constrain themselves anymore. They can cut out the middleman. It’s the art of the deal on the campaign trail.

And if you’re a billionaire with business sense, a flair for the dramatic and a reality TV background, well, you’re within reach of the nomination.

Whatever else Trump does on the campaign trail this year, his legacy just may be in nudging other billionaires off the sidelines and into politics. Just one billionaire is campaigning in 2016. How many will run in 2020?

And now, right on cue, is Mark Cuban:

In an email exchange with CNBC, Cuban revealed his thoughts on the presidency, how he’d structure his campaign and what it would mean for the nation to have, in his words, a “three-comma POTUS””as in $1,000,000,000.

Asked whether he’d ever run for president, Cuban wrote: “I get asked every day. It’s a fun idea to toss around. If I ran as a Dem, I know I could beat Hillary Clinton. And if it was me vs. Trump, I would crush him. No doubt about it.”

What could possibly go wrong? Aren’t these billionaires free of the taint of being beholden to the big money donors? Isn’t that A Good Thing?

In the abstract, yes. Of course, as I wrote in a joking sort of way here, in the future:

Only multi-billionaires will be able to run for president…?

Oh, that will work out really well.

Does anyone really think that billionaires are less corrupt because they only worry about their own fortune and what might be of benefit to it? I don’t. I agree about the donor problem in general, but I certainly don’t think billionaires are the remedy.

Cuban himself explains the advantages of being so very, very rich, as well as being a media-savvy TV reality star (in Cuban’s case, it’s “Shark Tank”):

To Mark Cuban, all this makes sense. Having a billion dollars””that famous “three-comma” net worth””gives a candidate a certain swagger. “Rich people just have a little more arrogance to think we know more than everyone else,” Cuban wrote.

And just as John F. Kennedy had an instinctive grasp of the new media””television””that was coming to dominate his political era, Cuban thinks that the social media era will play to the strengths of a different group of candidates.

“There is no question the game has changed and Donald has a much stronger command of it than the rest of the candidates,” Cuban wrote. “Most future voters will get their news from their Facebook, Snapchat, Cyber Dust, Instagram, Twitter feeds,” Cuban said (Cyber Dust is his own messaging app). “They open their apps and see what’s there. They don’t go looking for depth and explanations.”

In my original joke I said that in the future, successful candidates would be limited to multi-billionaires. So I’ll add that they will be limited to multi-billionaire reality TV stars who know how to use Twitter and other social media.

Works for me. Idiocracy, here we come!

Posted in Election 2016, Finance and economics, People of interest, Trump | 19 Replies

That NH primary poll

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2015 by neoSeptember 14, 2015

Perhaps you’ve seen it. You know, the one that shows Trump way ahead of the rest of the Republican field at 40%?

The poll is somewhat odd, however. For example, the number of Republican voters in it is 472, not a very big number. I know New Hampshire’s a small state—but still, that’s pretty tiny, as polls go. It means that Trump’s 40% is a grand total of 188 people, while Carson’s 12% is 56 and Fiorina’s 8% is 37. The announced margin of error is large, plus or minus 5.1% (the smaller the sample in a poll, the more likely that the results are inaccurate, although other factors come into play as well in determining accuracy).

Another possible problem is that, of poll respondents who say they are likely to vote in the Republican primary (question 19), only about a third describe themselves as “strong Republicans,” a third as “lean Republican,” a fifth as “not very strong Republican,” and a smattering as “not sure.” Is this actually a representative group of Republican primary voters? It doesn’t quite sound that way to me, but I don’t know. Who are these people?

Let me just add that one of the reasons I’m wondering about all of this is that I remember that in 2008 the polls were way off in predicting the New Hampshire primary results, and I’m talking about polls taken very close to the primaries themselves, not far away like the one the other day:

One of the biggest stories of the NH primary is the failure of the polls to have accurately predicted the results. It’s not that it’s so unusual for polls to be incorrect, but for so many to be incorrect in exactly the same way””predicting about an 8% Obama victory and getting a result of Clinton by 3%, off by a factor of approximately 11%””is highly unusual.

In that post of mine, by the way, I stated that, in my group of liberal female friends, Hillary was not favored over Obama, and I predicted that she’s run into trouble despite her NH win.

The reason I remember that poll/primary disconnect back in January of 2008 is because the NH polls had been so massively wrong:

On Monday and Tuesday, seven independent polls showed Obama ahead by an average of 8.3 percentage points, according to the RealClearPolitics website. When the votes were counted, Clinton won by 2.6 percent.

What happened? The pollsters have theories, but no one is sure.

“It was a total shock,” said Scott W. Rasmussen of the independent Rasmussen Reports, whose final three-day tracking poll – a total of 1,200 likely voters through primary eve – showed Obama ahead by seven points, down from 10 the day before.

“I can’t remember a time when the entire polling industry showed a similar result and it was wrong,” he said.

That’s pretty dramatic. The rest of the article tries to explain, but in my opinion it fails. But here’s a possible clue, though:

While the wayward polling this season is dramatic, it happens with regularity in New Hampshire, where voters aren’t shy about expressing their contrariness – electing dark horses or upstarts, and smacking pollsters upside the head…

“Do Granite State voters enjoy fooling pollsters that much?” Nolan [Globe columnist in 1984) asked. “Is massive mendacity part of the local color?”

Food for thought.

[ADDENDUM: By the way, for all you Trump supporters out there, I’m not questioning the fact that Trump is the frontrunner. I believe that he is. I’m questioning the accuracy and meaning of this particular poll saying he’s at 40% in New Hampshire. I’m also questioning state polls in general, particularly with rather small samples and a very large field of candidates.]

Posted in Election 2016 | 5 Replies

Scott Walker has just further endeared himself to federal public-sector unions

The New Neo Posted on September 14, 2015 by neoSeptember 14, 2015

Not.

Walker has announced a plan to abolish federal public-sector unions, among other things:

That would take an act of Congress, but Walker said he’s for it because “big-government unions should have no place in the federal workplace.”

Walker also announced his intention to do the following:

-Impose right-to-work laws, under which workers can’t be forced to pay union dues as a condition of their employment, nationwide. Twenty-five states, including Wisconsin, already have such laws. Walker’s proposal, if passed by Congress, would require states to vote to opt out of the right-to-work requirement.

-Prohibit unions from automatically deducting dues from state public employees that are used to pay for political activity. Walker said if the Supreme Court does not address the issue in a pending case, he will send a bill to Congress to change the law.

There’s more, lots more.

The Walker announcement is potentially huge, and transformative. By the way, it would bring us back to FDR’s position on the issue*, although most liberals either don’t know that or would like to keep it hush-hush.

[* The liberal “Politifact” did acknowledge two years ago, albeit reluctantly, that FDR’s position was against public-sector unions having any sort of collective bargaining rights.]

[ADDENDUM: For clarification, I’d like to add that I don’t think Walker has actually made the announcement officially yet, which is to come in a speech. He did make an announcement about his announcement, and in it he cited the FDR precedent. See this:

This idea is not new. Even President Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of America’s most revered liberals, realized just how counter-intuitive it is to allow union bosses to advocate against the best interests of the government. Union bargaining, Roosevelt said, “cannot be transplanted into the public service.”

In fact, until 1962, federal law explicitly prohibited federal workers from collectively bargaining. President Kennedy, however, shrewdly realized that by allowing public sector employees to unionize at the federal level, Democrats would stand to gain votes and hefty political contributions. He was right.

This is an issue on which Walker is well-versed, to say the least.]

Posted in Politics | 20 Replies

The real life case of Beauty and the Beast

The New Neo Posted on September 12, 2015 by neoSeptember 12, 2015

This is a case of deception, love, and sex (not an unusual trio) that has caused a lot of startled and skeptical reactions. You may have to concentrate a bit to follow it at first:

A woman accused of pretending to be a man to lure a fellow student into bed has told a jury that her alleged victim was in on the deception and was a closeted lesbian.

Gayle Newland, 25, has admitted creating a fake Facebook profile in order to meet girls, using a photo of a good-looking Asian man she called Kye Fortune. But she denies misleading a woman who claims she was sexually assaulted by Newman wearing a prosthetic penis after they had intercourse, during which the woman wore a blindfold.

Newland denies five counts of sexual assault between February and June 2013. The woman, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had earlier testified to having willingly worn the blindfold during numerous sexual encounters with someone she believed was Kye Fortune. She said Kye told her he was recovering from a brain tumour and did not want her to see his scars. Opening the case earlier this week, the prosecuting barrister, Matthew Corbett-Jones, told the jury the complainant was “by her nature a very gullible and naive person…

The court heard that the pair spent at least 100 hours together in person after striking up an intense online relationship over two years, and even became engaged. At each meeting, the complainant wore a blindfold, not just when they had sex but when they sunbathed or watched films together and even on one occasion when they went out in Kye’s car. The woman told the court she only uncovered the deception after ripping her blindfold off and seeing she had actually been having sex with Newland.”

The unnamed plaintiff was either gullible and naive, say some; or stupid or desperate, say others; or lying and in on it, say still others. I don’t profess to know the truth. But for me, the story conjured up another story, or set of stories, which are of great antiquity and power. One might call the original story and all its variations “the myth of the hidden lover.”

They are all stories in which the heroine is loved, and in some cases made love to, by a man who for some reason has to remain hidden, and asks her to trust him. Remember “Beauty and the Beast“? It’s not a traditional tale; it was written in 1756:

The Beast receives [Beauty] graciously and informs her that she is now mistress of the castle, and he is her servant. He gives her lavish clothing and food and carries on lengthy conversations with her. Every night, the Beast asks Beauty to marry him, only to be refused each time. After each refusal, Beauty dreams of a handsome prince who pleads with her to answer why she keeps refusing him, to which she replies that she cannot marry the Beast because she loves him only as a friend. Beauty does not make the connection between the handsome prince and the Beast and becomes convinced that the Beast is holding the prince captive somewhere in the castle. She searches and discovers multiple enchanted rooms, but never the prince from her dreams.

That story in turn echoes older stories from a folk and mythological tradition. The first is “East of the Sun West of the Moon” and its variants, which I delighted in as a child:

Well, after she had eaten, and it became evening, she felt sleepy from her journey, and thought she would like to go to bed, so she rang the bell. She had barely rung it before she found herself in a room, where there was a bed made as fair and white as anyone would wish to sleep in, with silken pillows and curtains, and gold fringe. All that was in the room was gold or silver. After she had gone to bed, and put out the light, a man came and laid himself alongside her. It was the white bear, who cast off his pelt at night; but she never saw him, for he always came after she had put out the light. Before the day dawned he was up and off again. Things went on happily for a while, but at last she became quiet and sad. She was alone all day long, and she became very homesick to see her father and mother and brothers and sisters. So one day, when the white bear asked what was wrong with her, she said it was so lonely there, and how she longed to go home to see her father and mother and brothers and sisters, and that was why she was so sad, because she couldn’t get to them.

“Well,” said the bear, “that can happen all right, but you must promise me, not to talk alone with your mother, but only when the others are around to hear. She will want to take you by the hand and lead you into a room to talk alone with her. But you must not do that, or else you’ll bring bad luck on both of us.”

But earlier still was one of my favorite ancient tales (from Apuleius, but I read it in a children’s book of myths), that of Cupid and Psyche:

The transported girl awakes to find herself at the edge of a cultivated grove (lucus). Exploring, she finds a marvelous house with golden columns, a carved ceiling of citrus wood and ivory, silver walls embossed with wild and domesticated animals, and jeweled mosaic floors. A disembodied voice tells her to make herself comfortable, and she is entertained at a feast that serves itself and by singing to an invisible lyre.

Although fearful and without sexual experience, she allows herself to be guided to a bedroom, where in the darkness a being she cannot see makes her his wife. She gradually learns to look forward to his visits, though he always departs before sunrise and forbids her to look upon him, and soon she becomes pregnant.

The stories have slight variants, but are remarkably similar. There is a young woman who gets lost or is taken away to a palatial place where unseen hands serve her. At night, a man (or beast?) enters her bedroom to lie with her, either chastely or sexually, and although she comes to love him, he says she cannot be allowed to look on him and she must trust him. At some point she is homesick and is allowed to visit her family, who plant seeds of doubt in her mind as to the man’s identity. Is he a man, a beast, a con artist, a monster? Finally, when she returns (the “Beauty and the Beast” story is a bit different on this point), she breaks the trust and one evening she takes a candle and tries to gaze on her lover’s sleeping face. When she does so, she is elated—he is a prince, or in the case of Psyche, he is Venus’ handsome son Cupid. But alas, she has broken the trust, and woe befalls them—at least for a while.

The plaintiff suing Newland was told that her lover felt self-conscious about looking like a beast of sorts (“was recovering from a brain tumour and did not want her to see his scars”). She was told to trust him, but ultimately she betrayed that trust, ripped off her blindfold and was confronted, not with a handsome prince or the god Cupid, but with Newland—a woman.

Life’s not a fairy tale. But the tales themselves have a power, and they often speak great truths about the human…Psyche.

cupid and psyche

eastofsun

Posted in Law, Literature and writing, Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex | 13 Replies

Self-parody, squared

The New Neo Posted on September 12, 2015 by neoSeptember 12, 2015

[Hat tip: commenter G6loq]

The interesting thing about that video is that while it’s parody, it’s very close to the actual substance of Trump’s campaign. It makes me wonder whether his entire campaign might be a form of parody.

Perhaps he could choose Jimmy Fallon as VP? But only if he keeps the makeup and wig, of course.

Posted in Election 2016 | 21 Replies

Busy day

The New Neo Posted on September 12, 2015 by neoSeptember 12, 2015

I’ve got a very busy day today.

I was just working on a long post and ran out of time. Gotta go!

So, probably this evening I’ll grind out some more. Till then, enjoy the weekend, and talk amongst yourselves.

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Replies

In the great “migrant” crisis, what are liberals thinking?

The New Neo Posted on September 12, 2015 by neoSeptember 12, 2015

The following is a quote from Evan Sayet. It was written in 2007 and is not specifically about immigration, it is simply about the worldview and motivation of liberals today. But it strikes me that it certainly applies to the current “migrant” crisis in Europe:

In order to eliminate discrimination, the Modern Liberal has opted to become utterly indiscriminate.

I would add “even to the point of committing cultural suicide or actual suicide.” To a person steeped in cultural relativism and postmodern thinking, all cultures are alike and all equally good—except that ours is worse.

The Western nations of Europe (it’s mostly those and not the Eastern ones, although Great Britain appears to be an exception) seem far more interested in thinking of themselves as good and moral people than of evaluating the nature of what might be happening in the current influx of people from the Middle East. What part of Hijira—jihad by immigration—don’t they understand? All parts, because acknowledging its existence, defending one’s own nationhood and culture, and understanding that Hijira is a very good possibility with a very significant number of these new “migrants,” would mean opening themselves up to charges of “discrimination,” and that is completely unacceptable.

The leaders of Western Europe try to offer reassurances by saying they will screen and vet the newcomers and make sure no dangerous people come in. That, unfortunately, is laughable. How do they propose to do that? There are too many arrivals, the Europeans are too understaffed, and they lack the ability and the time to look into the people’s background in Syria or the myriad other countries from whence they’ve come. What’s more, the new arrivals will be fertile ground for recruitment by the already-existing terrorists and extremists the Western countries have already welcomed, clothed, and fed.

What will the Europeans do with those arrivals they may manage to reject as unsuitable? They haven’t said. Will they put them on their vaunted watchlists, with the others who—while being oh-so-carefully “watched”—have committed terrorist attacks all over Europe?

I keep thinking of this song:

I want to make it clear that I don’t think most of the “migrants” are terrorists or jihadis. Most are probably not refugees, either, but are people looking for a better economic life and see their golden opportunity now, claiming that they fear for their lives (Jonah Goldberg explains the distinction). This is a whole other issue, one I won’t be addressing in this post, except to say that economic migrants should get in line and follow the legal immigration rules of the various countries they are trying to enter.

What I am saying here is that logic and realism dictate that a very significant number of the newcomers are jihadis, and that the nations of Europe cannot properly sort out which is which and deal with the jihadi group appropriately. This is profoundly dangerous.

Posted in Immigration, Terrorism and terrorists | 43 Replies

Rick, we hardly knew ye

The New Neo Posted on September 11, 2015 by neoSeptember 11, 2015

He’s out of the race.

I liked Rick Perry. But he never really caught on, for whatever reasons. I think there just wasn’t anything that special about him compared to the many others, plus there were some lingering memories of his rather embarrassing errors last time.

“We have a tremendous field of candidates ”” probably the greatest group of men and women,” Perry said. “I step aside knowing our party is in good hands, as long as we listen to the grassroots, listen to that cause of conservatism. If we do that, then our party will be in good hands.”…

“It’d be easy just to keep going, be easy to go do the debate next week, be easy to keep going to Iowa and South Carolina and other states and everything and taking your money and dragging it out,” said Dallas businessman and longtime Perry donor Roy Bailey.

But, Bailey said, Perry “could see it was pretty obvious to him he wasn’t going to be the next presidential nominee from the Republican Party.”

And he was smart enough to know it, and to get out.

Posted in Election 2016 | 42 Replies

Some blunt talk on “migrants” to Europe from a French ex-minister

The New Neo Posted on September 11, 2015 by neoSeptember 12, 2015

Which he then tried to walk back.

Here’s how it went:

A former French minister stirred up controversy Friday after saying Germany “took our Jews and gave us Arabs” as France began taking some of the thousands of refugees arriving in Germany.

Patrick Devedjian, a right-winger who served in the governments of presidents Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy, made the remark at a press conference, but quickly tried to backtrack on social media.

“My humorous jest was misplaced,” Devedjian wrote on his Twitter account, saying he regretted it all the more because he himself helps refugees in need.

Devedjian, who comes from an Armenian family and now leads the Hauts-de-Seine region of wealthy suburbs west of Paris, said the joke was meant to be about Syrian and Iraqi refugees.

Actually, when I first read his remark, I didn’t perceive it as a joke. I saw it as a statement of fact. Of course, the Germans didn’t do either thing without a significant amount of French cooperation.

And the fact that Devedjian is of Armenian ethnicity is probably not irrelevant.

The “joke” that was not a joke has various interesting elements:

—the linkage of Germany’s WWII activities with its present-day guilt trip over those activities and the resultant bending-over-backward to atone
—the commonality of German dominance both in WWII and in the present, telling France what to do
—subtle acknowledgement of the fact that Arabs and Jews are ethnically linked, if not equivalent
—awareness of the fact that, despite that ethnic linkage, there are vast and troubling cultural differences that don’t shape up in favor of the superiority of the Arab ethos

In other related news: now whoever would have guessed that this was about to happen? (That’s sarcasm, by the way):

Muslim radicals in Germany are trying to recruit some of the growing numbers of asylum seekers reaching the country, according to intelligence services quoted by the German news agency DPA.

The Islamic extremists “are trying to approach the young unaccompanied refugees, who arrive in our country without their families and are particularly looking for contacts and support,” a spokesman for the intelligence service in the southern state of Bavaria told DPA.

The number of terrorists and potential terrorists in Europe have already reached such high numbers that authorities cannot possibly monitor all that are on the security radar screen. In fact, nearly all of the recent attackers were “known to authorities” as suspicious characters, and yet they slipped through and were able to attack. So what’s the remedy? Why, import a lot more people to screen and try to follow!

Then we have Peggy Noonan, who writes about the problems in Europe with her customary mix of kindness, insight, and fuzzy thinking:

What a crisis Europe is in, with waves of migrants reaching its shores as the Arab world implodes. It is the biggest migration into Europe since the end of World War II and is shaping up to be its first great and sustained challenge of the 21st century. It may in fact shape that continent’s nature and history as surely as did World War I.

What’s muddled about that? “It is the biggest migration into Europe since the end of World War II…” But the migrations and DP camps of Europe during and after WWII were not migrations INTO Europe, they were almost entirely migrations of Europeans within Europe. Some Europeans were lucky enough to be able to leave Europe and come to the United States or Australia or Canada or other calmer countries outside Europe, of course. But off the top of my head I fail to recall large groups of Japanese citizens arriving on Europe’s shores during and after WWII—or citizens of other non-European country affected by WWII. There was an influx of people from countries that had been colonies of Britain (for example, India), but they were not refugees from WWII and in any event represented carefully controlled and regulated legal immigration from a Commonwealth country.

Later in her essay, Noonan does manage to inject an interesting statistic, and although she doesn’t source it, it conforms with what I’ve read elsewhere: “Seventy-two percent[of the current refugees] are men, only 13% women and 15% children.”

Noonan later writes:

The decision-makers feel disdain for the anxieties of normal people, and ascribe them to small-minded bigotries, often religious and racial, and ignorant antagonisms. But normal people prize order because they can’t buy their way out of disorder.

People in gated communities of the mind, who glide by in Ubers, have bought their way out and are safe. Not to mention those in government-maintained mansions who glide by in SUVs followed by security details. Rulers can afford to see national-security threats as an abstraction””yes, yes, we must better integrate our new populations. But the unprotected, the vulnerable, have a right and a reason to worry.

I understand what Noonan is saying here, and I’ve said a version of it myself. But I think she’s fooling herself (and the “elites” are fooling themselves) if she thinks anyone is safe. We are all threatened by terrorism, home-grown or imported. We are all threatened by vast unassimilated groups of people from religions and cultures that are not merely different from ours but are militantly opposed to ours, cultures in which large segments of the population are devotees of a religion and politics that is dedicated to our destruction and/or subservience and/or conversion. One tool by which this might occur is through Hijira, the doctrine of jihad by immigration.

Posted in History, Immigration, Jews, Religion | 37 Replies

The House rejects the Iran deal with bipartisan support

The New Neo Posted on September 11, 2015 by neoSeptember 12, 2015

Twenty-five House Democrats joined all the House Republicans (save Massie of Kentucky, who voted “present”) in voting “no” to approval of Obama’s Iran deal.

So once again, a bill has bipartisan support—and that support goes against the president. And once again, it probably won’t matter. The only possible significance of this bill might be (a) for future reference, because it puts the deal’s supporters and opponents on the record, and (b) possible grounds for a lawsuit against Obama.

As for Massie, he has explained his vote here. Simply put, he thinks the Iran deal was a treaty, and his vote is a refusal to cooperate with not voting on it as a treaty. So his position is more hardline that those of the other Republicans, not less.

As for the Senate, McConnell went ahead yesterday with a very different move and tried to vote on a disapproval of the deal in the Senate, one that was blocked by 42 Democrats voting not to invoke cloture. One can speculate on what went on in McConnell’s mind, and one would almost have to speculate because it’s hard to find any explanation of what he did other than the “failure theater” scenario of not really wanting to win in the first place, but just trying to give the appearance of wanting to win.

I cannot stand McConnell, but I’ve not bought 100% into the “failure theater” explanation (maybe just 85%). Politico says he’s got plans:

Republicans are plotting to make Democrats pay dearly for backing an agreement the GOP argues hinges on an historic enemy of the United States playing nice. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plans to return to the floor next week to force Democrats to take more votes Republicans say they’ll regret as soon as Iran violates the terms of the deal or sponsors terrorist attacks, which critics believe is just a matter of time.

Is he planning to take up a vote of approval, like the House did? Is he planning to vote on the deal as though it were a treaty, as so many people have suggested it is? And what will he do about those 42 Democrats this time? What is to stop them from doing exactly the same thing the did yesterday and vote against cloture, thereby scuttling every single one of those proposals? What will he do about that?

Posted in Iran, Politics | 10 Replies

9/11: fourteen years

The New Neo Posted on September 11, 2015 by neoSeptember 11, 2015

On 9/11’s 10th anniversary I wrote a post that contained this observation:

For those of us who were grownups when 9/11 happened, it’s also been transmuted””not to something that was always there, but to something that’s been incorporated into our view of the world. We’ve all done that differently. But for us, the shock and surprise and horror reoccurs (to a somewhat diminished extent, of course; there’s no shock like the first shock) whenever we see the footage, or when we think””really really think, without the protective shield of familiarity””of what actually happened on that day.

I believe that, in the four years that have passed since I wrote those words, 9/11 has been transmuted into something that was always there, something that no longer surprises. And although I haven’t watched any footage today of the attack, I think there is less shock and no surprise.

The reason for that is that a great deal has happened since I wrote those words four years ago. Since then, although we had responded in Afghanistan to 9/11 and then to Saddam Hussein’s defiance of nuclear weapons inspections in Iraq, the Obama administration has purposely wiped out those gains, particularly in Iraq. When I wrote that 10-year anniversary piece in September of 2011, the US was poised on the brink of Obama’s complete withdrawal from Iraq, which he was determined to accomplish against the opinion and advice of every military adviser. In the four years since that withdrawal, ISIS has risen up in the vacuum that was left, and it has wreaked horrors on civilian populations, barbarities that are of enormous scale and magnitude even compared to 9/11 and which have reverberated around the world with images of sadistic violence. Does anyone doubt for a single moment that the killers would wreak a thousand, ten thousand, a hundred thousand 9/11s on us if they could?

And then there’s the Iran deal that looms on the horizon, debated in a Congress that seems powerless against a tyrannical president bound and determined to sell our country out to a regime that is worse than Saddam Hussein’s and more implacably our enemy and the enemy of the world.

I could not have made up such a scenario back when 9/11 happened. And yet here we are.

The anniversary of 9/11 is a very solemn day. Today, when I say that “there is less shock and no surprise,” I mean neither disrespect nor belittling of the terrible event that was 9/11. The horror is just as horrible, and perhaps even all the more horrible knowing the point we’ve reached now. The 9/11 dead are still dead, their families still bereft, the 9/11 perpetrators still vile, the 9/11 heroes still heroic. We need to remember them and to bow our heads in grief, and in prayer if we are religious people.

But what I will be hoping for is a sea-change. I don’t know when it will happen. I don’t know how it will happen. I don’t know if it will happen. But I know we need a new dedication to the spirit on which this country was founded: that of courage, liberty, dedication, and clear-sightedness.

9/11 was not like Gettysburg. It was not a battle where soldiers died; it was a sneak attack on civilians going about their daily lives, although many who died were in the line of duty as police or firefighters. On the 9/11 anniversary we honor and mourn them all, every single one. But I want to paraphrase the closing of the Gettysburg Address and add:

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us””that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain””that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom””and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

[ADDENDUM: Here is the story of my own experience on 9/11 and its immediate aftermath.]

Posted in Terrorism and terrorists, Violence | 23 Replies

Post navigation

← Previous Post
Next Post→

Your support is appreciated through a one-time or monthly Paypal donation

Please click the link recommended books and search bar for Amazon purchases through neo. I receive a commission from all such purchases.

Archives

Recent Comments

  • Keith on Open thread 6/18/2026
  • Bauxite on Trump on the Iran Deal [scroll down for important UPDATE]
  • Bauxite on Trump on the Iran Deal [scroll down for important UPDATE]
  • SENNACHERIB on In the UK, there has been widespread child sacrifice on the altar of diversity and tolerance
  • SENNACHERIB on Trump on the Iran Deal [scroll down for important UPDATE]

Recent Posts

  • Open thread 6/18/2026
  • Update on tech stuff here
  • Trump on the Iran Deal [scroll down for important UPDATE]
  • In the UK, there has been widespread child sacrifice on the altar of diversity and tolerance
  • Open thread 6/17/2026

Categories

  • A mind is a difficult thing to change: my change story (17)
  • Academia (320)
  • Afghanistan (97)
  • Amazon orders (6)
  • Arts (8)
  • Baseball and sports (162)
  • Best of neo-neocon (91)
  • Biden (536)
  • Blogging and bloggers (586)
  • Dance (288)
  • Disaster (240)
  • Education (321)
  • Election 2012 (360)
  • Election 2016 (565)
  • Election 2018 (32)
  • Election 2020 (511)
  • Election 2022 (114)
  • Election 2024 (403)
  • Election 2026 (49)
  • Election 2028 (9)
  • Evil (129)
  • Fashion and beauty (323)
  • Finance and economics (1,025)
  • Food (316)
  • Friendship (47)
  • Gardening (18)
  • General information about neo (4)
  • Getting philosophical: life, love, the universe (730)
  • Health (1,141)
  • Health care reform (545)
  • Hillary Clinton (184)
  • Historical figures (334)
  • History (707)
  • Immigration (437)
  • Iran (450)
  • Iraq (226)
  • IRS scandal (71)
  • Israel/Palestine (807)
  • Jews (429)
  • Language and grammar (361)
  • Latin America (205)
  • Law (2,937)
  • Leaving the circle: political apostasy (124)
  • Liberals and conservatives; left and right (1,288)
  • Liberty (1,106)
  • Literary leftists (14)
  • Literature and writing (390)
  • Me, myself, and I (1,480)
  • Men and women; marriage and divorce and sex (917)
  • Middle East (382)
  • Military (322)
  • Movies (348)
  • Music (528)
  • Nature (257)
  • Neocons (32)
  • New England (178)
  • Obama (1,737)
  • Pacifism (16)
  • Painting, sculpture, photography (130)
  • Palin (93)
  • Paris and France2 trial (25)
  • People of interest (1,027)
  • Poetry (256)
  • Political changers (176)
  • Politics (2,780)
  • Pop culture (395)
  • Press (1,627)
  • Race and racism (870)
  • Religion (423)
  • Romney (164)
  • Ryan (16)
  • Science (629)
  • Terrorism and terrorists (968)
  • Theater and TV (265)
  • Therapy (69)
  • Trump (1,616)
  • Uncategorized (4,453)
  • Vietnam (109)
  • Violence (1,427)
  • War and Peace (1,008)

Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
DanielInVenezuela (liberty)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (shrink archives)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor’s Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
Maggie’sFarm (togetherness)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
MichelleObama’sMirror (reflect)
NoPasaran! (bluntFrench)
NormanGeras (archives)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob)
Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (exodus)
Powerline (foursight)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RedState (conservative)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
©2026 - The New Neo - Weaver Xtreme Theme Email
Web Analytics
↑