The dog that didn’t bark

My election commentary in Inside Story is about

The dog that didn’t bark … the (assumed) majority of “decent Republicans” to whom Clinton sought to appeal. Although most observers (including me) assumed that many of them would turn against Trump, hardly any did so

91 thoughts on “The dog that didn’t bark

  1. @James

    So, when they raised their warning level did you build a fallout shelter and begin stockpiling fuel, food, medicines and weapons per their instructions?

    Unless you did, it’s hard to take your claim that you care about what they say very seriously.

  2. @James

    Yeah, of course Hillary is a war monger. That other bloke, the one stirring jingoistic nationalist sentiments, the one threatening a trade war with China, the one who is going to forcibly deport 3 million Mexicans, the one who accuses China of creating global warming, the one who will let global warming run rampant – well there is no threat with him. Its just rhetoric, he doesn’t mean any of it. It’ll be fine.

  3. @Luke Elford wrote:

    Unless you [built a fallout shelter and began stockpiling fuel, food, medicines and weapons per their instructions], it’s hard to take your claim that you care about what they say very seriously.

    How I choose to deal with the threat of thermonuclear war, that we have all lived with since the 1950s, is my concern.

    You have failed to show, that, given Barack Obama’s record of starting and continuing wars against the people of the Middle East, that it was not unreasonable for the people, who publish defconwarningsystem _dot_ com, in the middle of this year to fear thermonuclear war and make preparations for the breakdown in society that would inevitably follow.

    Ddefconwarningsystem _dot_ com‘s views of the threat that the election of Hillary Clinton would have posed to humanity are consistent with the evidence, so they were right to welcome Donald Trump’s victory on 8 November.

    John Brookes wrote on November 19th, 2016 at 23:39 | #75:

    [Donald Trump], the one stirring jingoistic nationalist sentiments, the one threatening a trade war with China, the one who is going to forcibly deport 3 million Mexicans, the one who accuses China of creating global warming, the one who will let global warming run rampant – well there is no threat with him.

    I will deal with the above some other time, but even if we were to accept the worst accusations against Donald Trump, how is that worse than what we already know about Hillary Clinton?

    zoot wrote on November 20th, 2016 at 01:51 | #77 :

    James, surely Trump’s statements that more countries should be armed nuclear weapons will lift the warning level again.

    Can you show me where Donald Trump has called for more countries to be armed with nuclear weapons? He has denied ever having said this. What he did say was that these countries should pay more of the costs of defending themselves.

  4. @GrueBleen

    I don’t read your mind just your words but the point is that the capitalist ideology does provide people with an argument that absolves them from admitting to themselves – that is it allows them to hide the fact – that it is not meretricious to profit personally from other people’s work.

  5. @Julie Thomas
    Your #79

    Ok, since I always wear my tinfoil hat you probably can’t read my mind. 🙂 At least that’s what the marketing pitch says.

    But I don’t think you do any better job of reading my words than maybe I do of reading yours. Or that either of us do reading Ikono’s words – and vice versa, but of course. Still, that’s the glory of human incommunication, no ?

    As to “capitalist ideology”, well yes there are people who hide behind their publicly expressed beliefs. However, I have no objection in principle to personally profiting from the work of others: I’d truly hate to think that I was the only person who ever ‘profited’ in any way from what I have done. How about you ?

    So maybe we can agree that the key concept is “exploitation” and then spend the rest of our lives trying to define what it is exactly that that word means.

  6. @James

    But in an April interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News, Trump said, “It’s not like, gee whiz, nobody has them. So, North Korea has nukes. Japan has a problem with that. I mean, they have a big problem with that. Maybe they would in fact be better off if they defend themselves from North Korea.”
    Wallace asked, “With nukes?”
    “Including with nukes, yes, including with nukes,” Trump responded.
    At a town hall with CNN’s Anderson Cooper in March, Trump suggested that it was time to reconsider the United States’ decades-old policy of not allowing Japan to arm itself with nuclear weapons.

    That’s from CNN, easily found with Google.
    Then there’s this from CBS.
    Unfortunately too many links puts a comment into moderation, but if you exercise your Google-fu you’ll find stacks more (if you really want to find them). Those two took me about 10 seconds to discover

  7. @GrueBleen

    I have no objection in principle to personally profiting from the work of others:

    This directly contradicts the principles of democracy and the so-called “Golden Rule”.

    It divides society and leads to worsening ugly outcomes.

    It is anathema.

  8. zoot on November 20th, 2016 at 13:40 | #83, wrote:

    Having searched the Internet, I can now see that Donald Trump has, on several occasions, suggested that it was time reconsider the United States’ decades-old policy of not allowing Japan to arm itself with nuclear weapons and he has also said that South Korea should be armed with nuclear weapons because North Korea is armed with nuclear weapons.

    As Warren Fisk wrote, Mark Warner exaggerates in saying Donald Trump is ‘OK’ with nuclear proliferation (11/10/2016), which is considerably more balanced than the rest of the mainstream media:

    So Trump certainly has said he’s open to proliferation by certain allies but isn’t sold on it. We rate [U.S. Senator Mark] Warner’s claim Half True.

    Of course, this is still a serious concern (and not my only concern about Donald Trump), but given that Donald Trump, like most people, do not understand the conflict on the Korean peninsula, and given the context of ferocious hostility from nearly all the mainstream newsmedia to Donald Trump during the election campaign, I think this error of judgment is understandable.

    On the political and historical context of the Korean Peninsula: The government of South Korea was formed in 1945 by the United States with Koreans who had collaborated with the Japanese occupiers. The government of North Korea was composed, with the help the Soviet Union, of those who had led the fight against the Japanese occupiers.

    After 1945, Koreans in the South fiercely resisted the regime imposed upon them by the United States and were savagely repressed. The supposed ‘invasion’ of the South in 1950 was just a continuation of that civil war.

    Nevertheless, the choice between Donald Trump, even given such flaws on the one hand, and the financially corrupt Clinton family, that helped start wars that have killed hundreds of thousands and which promises more of the same, on the other, should have been open and shut.

  9. @James
    James it is common courtesy to use the blockquote tab to quote someone.
    Using it to delimit your interpretation of what someone wrote is dishonest.

  10. @zoot on November 21st, 2016 at 17:56,

    Thank you for having read my post of November 21st, 2016 at 12:29 | #88.

    What appeared to be my quoting of you, was, in fact, my intended response to what you had posted earlier. My quote of your earlier post was omitted in error.

    My apologies. What I meant to post was:

    zoot wrote:

    But in an April interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News, Trump said, “It’s not like, gee whiz, nobody has them. So, North Korea has nukes. Japan has a problem with that. I mean, they have a big problem with that. Maybe they would in fact be better off if they defend themselves from North Korea.”

    Wallace asked, “With nukes?”

    “Including with nukes, yes, including with nukes,” Trump responded.
    At a town hall with CNN’s Anderson Cooper in March, Trump suggested that it was time to reconsider the United States’ decades-old policy of not allowing Japan to arm itself with nuclear weapons

    That’s from CNN, easily found with Google.
    Then there’s this (link) from CBS.

    My response was intended to be:

    Having searched the Internet, I can now see that Donald Trump has, on several occasions, suggested that it was time reconsider the United States’ decades-old policy of not allowing Japan to arm itself with nuclear weapons and he has also said that South Korea should be armed with nuclear weapons because North Korea is armed with nuclear weapons.

    As Warren Fisk wrote in Mark Warner exaggerates in saying Donald Trump is ‘OK’ with nuclear proliferation (11/10/2016), which is considerably more balanced than the rest of the mainstream media:

    So Trump certainly has said he’s open to proliferation by certain allies but isn’t sold on it. We rate [U.S. Senator Mark] Warner’s claim Half True.

    Of course, this is still a serious concern (and not my only concern about Donald Trump), but given that Donald Trump, like most people, do not understand the conflict on the Korean peninsula, and given the context of ferocious hostility from nearly all the mainstream newsmedia to Donald Trump during the election campaign, I think this error of judgment is understandable.

    On the political and historical context of the Korean Peninsula conflict: … (for more, see my earlier post of November 21st, 2016 at 12:29.)

  11. Congresswoman Gabbard statement on meeting with President-Elect Trump

    “President-elect Trump and I had a frank and positive conversation in which we discussed a variety of foreign policy issues in depth. I shared with him my grave concerns that escalating the war in Syria by implementing a so-called no fly/safe zone would be disastrous for the Syrian people, our country, and the world. It would lead to more death and suffering, exacerbate the refugee crisis, strengthen ISIS and al-Qaeda, and bring us into a direct conflict with Russia which could result in a nuclear war. We discussed my bill to end our country’s illegal war to overthrow the Syrian government, and the need to focus our precious resources on rebuilding our own country, and on defeating al-Qaeda, ISIS, and other terrorist groups who pose a threat to the American people. For years, the issue of ending interventionist, regime change warfare has been one of my top priorities. This was the major reason I ran for Congress—I saw firsthand the cost of war, and the lives lost due to the interventionist warmongering policies our country has pursued for far too long.”

    Tulsi Gabbard is an American politician and member of the Democratic Party who has been the United States Representative for Hawaii’s 2nd congressional district since 2013.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s