When is something that looks like "reflexive partisanship" actually a reflection of the viewer? Ah, well. Here is James Hohmann of the WaPo, April 11:
The Daily 202: Reflexive partisanship drives polling lurch on Syria strikes
THE BIG IDEA: More Americans than ever view the news through red-colored glasses.
In 2013, when Barack Obama was president, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that only 22 percent of Republicans supported the U.S. launching missile strikes against Syria in response to Bashar al-Assad using chemical weapons against civilians.
A new Post-ABC poll finds that 86 percent of Republicans support Donald Trump’s decision to launch strikes on Syria for the same reason. Only 11 percent are opposed.
-- Overall, a bare 51 percent majority of U.S. adults support the president’s action in our new poll. In 2013, just 30 percent supported strikes. That swing is driven primarily by GOP partisans. For context, 37 percent of Democrats back Trump’s missile strikes. In 2013, 38 percent of Democrats supported Obama’s plan. That is well within the margin of error.
Independents are split evenly, with 46 percent backing Trump’s decision and 45 percent opposing it.
Har de har, those partisan rubes on the Republican side! Joining in the merriment and self-congratulatory backslapping were Kevin Drum and Steve Benen at MSNBC. Benen:
On Syria, ‘reflexive partisanship’ doesn’t apply to both parties
And Drum:
Republicans Love Bombing, But Only When a Republican Does It
Each delivers a deep data dive by, hmm, recycling the same info presented in the WaPo. Here is Benen's thoughtful analysis of the Republican swing from 22% supporting strikes to 86%:
That’s an astounding shift in attitudes, and partisan instincts almost certainly explain the rapid change. Republican voters opposed Obama, so they had no use for his plan to attack the Assad regime, and Republican voters generally back Trump, so they support last week’s strikes.
But look a little closer at the details, and the asymmetry between the parties becomes more obvious: four years ago, 38% of Democratic voters backed Obama’s proposed strikes in Syria, and now, 37% of Democratic voters support Trump doing the same thing. In other words, there’s been effectively no change.
No change in their views even though we have a new President Democrats have vowed to resist and the Obama deal with Putin on Syria has collapsed? That's not counterintuitive and worthy of explanation?
Well, there's no attempted explanation from Benen. Meanwhile, Drum was just enjoying a Friday morning imagining the Democrats as the party of sweet reason unruffled by partisan passion so he provides nothing more.
However! I have been enjoying a Saturday morning. But before I vex anyone with tedious facts or cursory research, could I just note an obvious alternative explanation that acknowledges partisan behavior on both sides?
Brace yourself! In 2013 and today, Dems are the antiwar party. Their raw, baseline support for military action against Syria under an unspecified leader might have been, say, 25% in 2013. Add in the fact that they trust their guy Obama and the poll number gets a 12% boost to 37%.
Republicans have more of a history of favoring military action, so let's say that in 2013 their baseline support for striking Syria might have been 40%. But they don't trust Obama to see anything through to a conclusion so they apply a 20% discount, bringing Republican support down to 20%.
Flash forward three and a half years. Assad has obviously cheated on his chemical deal, Syrian refugees are straining the EU, Russia is newly assertive and empowered in the Middle East - even Democrats will admit that maybe Obama's red-line waffling in 2013 was less than a triumph. A NY Times snippet from April 9 2017:
Even before last week’s chemical attack, many veterans of Mr. Obama’s team considered his handling of Syria his biggest failing and expressed regret that their administration did not stop a war that has left more than 400,000 dead and millions displaced.
Many of them even praised President Trump for taking the very action that Mr. Obama refused to take four years ago, by ordering a cruise missile strike against Syria. “Donald Trump has done the right thing on Syria,” Anne-Marie Slaughter, the director of policy planning in Mr. Obama’s State Department, wrote on Twitter. “Finally!! After years of useless handwringing in the face of hideous atrocities.”
Well, then. Hypothetically, maybe the now-chastened Democrats have a newfound (or newly re-discovered) respect for quick cruise missile strikes. Under an unspecified leader, maybe their support for strikes against Syria would be 50%. Put Hillary in charge and that number could rise to 60%! But she's not in charge - Trump is, so a 12% "Resist" discount brings Dem support down to 38%, as published.
Of course, I am only guessing at what support might look like if Hillary were in charge. But are Benen and Drum really arguing that nothing of consequence has changed in Syria and that, although Democrats have vowed to "Resist" Trump on everything else, on matters of war and peace they are focused calmly on the facts and remain indifferent to whether our leadership is provided by Obama, Clinton or Trump? C'mon - who else believes that?
OK, I don't. Obviously, the anti-war movement shifted quite a bit after Jan 20, 2009.
But pressing on: for the Republican side, if baseline Dems today are at 50% support for a strike on Syria then baseline Republicans ought to be higher, so let's say around 70%. But now, instead of subtracting an Obama discount of 20% we add a Trump Bump of 16%. Et voila, after adjusting for the partisan shading on each side, we get the published result of 86% Republican support. The Republican surge in support combines a shift in circumstances in Syria plus a big boost from dropping the Obama discount and adding the Trump Bump; the Dems coincidentally march in place by offsetting a grim sense of reality in Syria with a grim sense of reality in the White House. Mistaking that offsetting coincidence for non-partisan wisdom is, well, not wise. Hence the chat with fish about whether they are aware of water and know how it feels.
But hey, I am just making up numbers and I promised some cursory research. So here we go! Spoiler alert - this gets ugly. Lots of 'oopsies'.
Back in 2013 the Syrian chemical attacks took place on Aug 21. Early reports came out a few days later and there was a week of handwringing in Washington and global capitals. The British Parliament balked, the Russians stalled UN action, and on Aug 30 Obama delivered a speech calling for military action if backed by a Congressional vote.
Believe it or not - the WaPo's James Hohmann missed this, as did his echo chamber - the WaPo polled promptly. Their results, published Sept 3, do not show "reflexive partisanship" at all. Ooops.
Q: The United States says it has determined that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons in the civil war there. Given this, do you support or oppose the United States launching missile strikes against the Syrian government?
Dems were 42/54 on the Support/Oppose line;
Reps were 43/55;
Indys were 30/66.
A week passed. Intermediate polling published Sept 9 is accompanied by this headline:
Opposition to Syria airstrikes rises as Republicans shift sharply against action
That is a precursor to the poll that actually caught James Hohmann's canny eye, which was published Sept 17 with this headline:
Poll: Americans strongly back diplomatic solution on Syria but give Obama low marks
Oh, well then - after Kerry's "unbelievably small" sales job for a military strike got booed off, Obama and Kerry worked the chemical weapons deal with Putin, the wreckage of which we see today. Here was the party breakdown several weeks in:
Dems: 38/50 Support/Oppose a military strike
Reps: 22/67
Indys: 30/64. (My goodness, do these independents read and react to the news at all?)
In any case, the "reflexive partisanship" in 2013 followed two weeks of failed salesmanship by Obama and Kerry. The anti-war President of the anti-war party could not deliver a Democratic majority so Republicans ran for cover. No kidding. Does this result really surprise Drum, Benen, Hohmann or anyone else?
Let's close with one more "Oops" moment and note that the 2017 version of the question names the President (possibly prompting partisan puffery) and surely prompts a bit more outrage and martial ardor by citing civilian targets:
Q: Do you support or oppose President Trump’s decision to launch a missile strike on a Syrian air base in retaliation for the Syrian government using chemical weapons against civilians?
Dems: 37/59 Support/Oppose
Reps: 86/11
Mods: 46/45
Contrast that with the 2013 question, where the victims are unspecified and Obama is not mentioned:
Q: The United States says it has determined that the Syrian government has used chemical weapons in the civil war there. Given this, do you support or oppose the United States launching missile strikes against the Syrian government?
To belabor the obvious - the 2017 poll did not occur after three weeks of discussion and public handwringing.
So - comparing a quick reaction 2017 poll phrased differently from a 2013 poll that followed three weeks of debate and denunciation may not be sound social science. The increase of support by independents from 30% to 46% from 2013 to 2017 might have served as a bit of a tip that something other than partisan posturing was in play, if Mr. Hohmann had remembered to publish the 2013 data point. Ooops again.
Or, Democrats Rule, Republicans Drool! People who talk about confirmation bias are just selling something, amirite?
DO enjoy the weekend. Please.
Oneth!
Posted by: sbw | April 15, 2017 at 09:36 AM
side column ads are one for (ugh) Colbert's show and the other two are for HR Block.
Good luck Jack.
Posted by: peter | April 15, 2017 at 09:42 AM
Polls are garbage science minced through garbage questions interpreted after the fact as entertainment.
The only people who pay attention to them are pundits.
Why don’t they poll what people think about particular polls. A calculus of second derivatives!
Posted by: sbw | April 15, 2017 at 09:44 AM
There's a luxury clothing store called Gorsuch, and recently I was seeing ads for that in the columns.
Posted by: peter | April 15, 2017 at 09:48 AM
Well done fisking, Tom Maguire!
Posted by: Clarice Feldman | April 15, 2017 at 09:49 AM
Thanks, Peter and all for the good wishes.
On my laptop and I have AdBlock. No side ads at all. But certain websites that people link require me to pause it. No big deal.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | April 15, 2017 at 09:49 AM
Even before last week’s chemical attack, many veterans of Mr. Obama’s team considered his handling of Syria his biggest failing and expressed regret that their administration did not stop a war that has left more than 400,000 dead and millions displaced.
Maybe he'll stay in Tahiti forever.
Best wishes, JiB.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 15, 2017 at 09:53 AM
Best wishes jib.
So of course the fact they weren't going to do anything because of the Rhodes road show.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 09:57 AM
"Well done fisking, Tom Maguire!"
Yes!
Posted by: JimNorCal | April 15, 2017 at 09:59 AM
So eichenwals seems to doing some serious downsizing.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 10:01 AM
So the stark raving melenchon/macron/ham on seems to ahead of the sensible fillon Lepen coalition.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 10:05 AM
Perhaps the low approval for Bomber Barry reflects a personal rather than partisan divide.
I don't recall any great partisan divide re Clinton in the Balkans but he was widely viewed as corrupt but competent.
Barry was widely viewed as a feckless fool, fit only for secretive drone strikes and shamelessly taking credit for the work done by others in killing the by then irrelevant OBL.
He was especially viewed that way regarding Syria and IS.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | April 15, 2017 at 10:05 AM
narc,
C'est la voie qu'ils roulent.
In Re: Melenchon. French always vote on "pain et beurre" issues. He represents keeping the baker and dairy operative and damn security or safety.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | April 15, 2017 at 10:13 AM
This is as much crimethink as they will allow at al ghuardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died#img-1
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 10:22 AM
Prayers for good results for you, Jack.
Posted by: Pagar, a bacon, ham and pork chop supporter | April 15, 2017 at 10:23 AM
Last page
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2017/04/chatting-with-fish-about-water/comments/page/99/#comments
Posted by: asw | April 15, 2017 at 10:28 AM
Good luck jib.
All three panels are about "Flip the 6th" and "Stand up to trump. vote ossoff". That's a first. It has been difficult to even answer the phone the last several weeks so my guess is the sample is very much skewed to ossoff. As it shows 45% and thus a runoff, my guess is he is more like 40% tops.
Posted by: rse | April 15, 2017 at 10:29 AM
Clarice linked this on the last thread. It is a good overview with many good links - https://amgreatness.com/2017/04/15/obamas-chaos-strategy-case-irs-ied/
This link in the article is good...a reminder of the info the IRS was collecting - Weirdest IRS Questions for the Tea Party: Views, Donors, and Etymology
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/weirdest-irs-questions-for-the-tea-party-views-donors-and-etymology/
Posted by: Janet 🚬 | April 15, 2017 at 10:34 AM
"the prosecutor said. “It’s totally horrifying and we’re all terrified about it, and we don’t know what to do"
A one word answer: RESIGN!
Let someone who will do the job they were hired for.
http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2017/04/15/jeff-sessionss-new-immigration-order-creates-panic-among-complacent-doj-attorneys/
Posted by: Pagar, a bacon, ham and pork chop supporter | April 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM
Allow me to join the chorus -- damn good post, Tom Maguire!
Posted by: RattlerGator | April 15, 2017 at 10:37 AM
I don't recall any great partisan divide re Clinton in the Balkans
The MFM was jerking it like an even crazier de Sade in support of attacking the Serbs. Every so called "atrocity" was grossly overstated if not entirely fabricated. I've never seen anything like it before or after. Those [Redacted for One More Day of Lent After Which I'm Unchained] deserve to all be strung up for the destruction brought on the Orthodox Christians in that area, not to mention blowing up the Chinese embassy in Belgrade thanks to one of Double Naught Slick's smart missiles.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 15, 2017 at 10:38 AM
I use Adblock, but let JOM ads through.
sound social science
That is almost as funny as TM spending a Sunday morning (this morning?) on the risking.
Posted by: henry | April 15, 2017 at 10:40 AM
*fisking. Maybe autospell got TM as well. :/
Posted by: henry | April 15, 2017 at 10:41 AM
https://apnews.com/76979da0678c4299b3569b53a80e4b4b/Turkey-probes-senator,-ex-CIA-director-over-links-to-cleric?utm_campaign=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP
ISTANBUL (AP) — Turkey's state-run news agency says the Istanbul chief prosecutor's office has launched an investigation into 17 U.S.-based individuals, including Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara and ex-CIA director John Brennan, for their alleged links to cleric Fethullah Gulen.
---------------------------------------
Posted by: Miss Marple the Deplorable | April 15, 2017 at 10:45 AM
May have been a grunted monaco fan after all:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39603467
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 10:49 AM
Do read this. It explains what has been happening and why I repeatedly am amazed that people didn't read his books.
Also, daddy, your early alert on Arabella singing in Mandarin was spot on, and is highlighted here.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/04/15/president-trump-realigning-geo-political-alliances-and-few-paying-attention/#more-131360
Posted by: Miss Marple the Deplorable | April 15, 2017 at 11:05 AM
Gulen is like Trotsky after he and Stalin purged the white rissians.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 11:05 AM
Where is boulanger when you need him:
http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2017/04/14/01016-20170414ARTFIG00254-melenchon-et-le-spectre-de-la-guerre-scolaire.php
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 11:09 AM
She was called a traitor because she was a traitor, IMO, and she has never changed. Neither has John KERRY, IMO.
http://freebeacon.com/politics/jane-fonda-jon-ossoff-celebrity-donors/
"She was called a traitor by Vietnam veterans who labeled her "Hanoi Jane" after she traveled to the North Vietnam city and was photographed sitting with enemy troops on one of their anti-aircraft batteries with a helmet and a gun.
Posted by: Pagar, a bacon, ham and pork chop supporter | April 15, 2017 at 11:29 AM
My ads are all for Orvis dog beds, as I've been shopping for one. The foster hound has taken over my Emma's favorite Orvis bed (that shows how sweet she is) so she has moved over to the cheap bed but :::sighs::: every time she lies down.
When I bought the Orvis bed (2 years ago) it was on sale and is now $$$ so I'm counting my pennies and looking for change in the couch cushions. Foster will be here awhile - she is perfect on the outside but damaged on the inside :(
Posted by: Momto2 | April 15, 2017 at 11:30 AM
How is this for an Easter weekend headline?
Second leg of missing Northern California woman found in lake the day after husband found dead in jail cell (L.A. Times)
Posted by: Momto2 | April 15, 2017 at 11:32 AM
I guess I wAs surprised a university that was originally chartered for sectarian purposes, still has some one of staff that acknowledges belief in Jesus, eve though he puts a load of caveats.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 11:42 AM
Gawd..Coronation envy? Penis-envy is quite enough, Bonaparte.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trump-demands-gold-plated-welcome-xjnffdq32
Posted by: Lumpy Gravy | April 15, 2017 at 11:46 AM
'..shamelessly taking credit for the work of others..'
Lol..break that looking glass Ignatz.
If it seems like it costs a million to kill one jihadist, raise the headcount..it's just a bookkeeping procedure. And don't forget the women and children bonus.
Posted by: Lumpy Gravy | April 15, 2017 at 11:51 AM
You certainly can't accept the veracity of any poll when they all have him suckling hind teat.
Posted by: Chicken George. | April 15, 2017 at 11:56 AM
Republicans Love Bombing, But Only When a Republican Does It
We actually like it when it is effective.
Posted by: Buckeye | April 15, 2017 at 12:07 PM
For Democrats, history usually starts "this morning."
Posted by: elHombre | April 15, 2017 at 12:09 PM
By the way, the MOAB cost $170,000
http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/14/heres-how-much-mother-of-all-bombs-actually-cost-according-to-the-air-force/
I just brought in a new writer at PJ: Peter DaDalt, an economist. I'm kinda flogging his piece:
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/04/14/this-one-easy-trick-could-have-saved-united-airlines-lots-of-money/
Posted by: Charles Martin | April 15, 2017 at 12:13 PM
Democrats love drone killing, but only when a democrat does it.
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 12:14 PM
Why triple headcount? Did they decide to count the infants?
A cruise missile costs more because of guidance system?
Heh.
Posted by: Chicken George. | April 15, 2017 at 12:17 PM
As you can see, melwnchon is much like mayor bane.
Notably there were no strikes in North Africa or the Levant before 2014.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 12:18 PM
Imagine the chutzpah.
Posted by: Afghani Beautiful babies | April 15, 2017 at 12:19 PM
Thanks Chaco, I will check out Mr DeDalt's work. :)
Posted by: henry | April 15, 2017 at 12:20 PM
Mils don't bother with cost.
When MILSPEC crescent wrenches go for $500..without a flinch.
Posted by: Afghani Beautiful babies | April 15, 2017 at 12:24 PM
THANKS, CHACO.
Posted by: Clarice Feldman | April 15, 2017 at 12:30 PM
Pagar @ 10.37. So true.
Posted by: exdemocrat | April 15, 2017 at 12:47 PM
Mr. DeWalt offers an elegant free market system for overbooking. It's actually how this should be solved for all airlines going forward, avoiding the last-minute scramble to get people to give up their seats and would leave everyone happy.
Posted by: Miss Marple the Deplorable | April 15, 2017 at 12:52 PM
Mr. McGuire: I for one deeply appreciate the detail of your post.
Polls are polls are polls are polls. That's for sure.
And some make the mistake of falling for them hook line and sinker like the shadow watcher's in Plato's cave.
The service you provide with a post on partisanship frames the broad trend. And broad trends present the broad strokes against which I, as an constitutionally conservative independent, can situate my own perspectives.
Context is king, queen, jack, and robber baron. When I see poll stats that show, for example, a 20% support rate among EmoCrats for a Trump *action*, then I am going to be aware that there is that 1 in 5 who will be "open" to discussing policy and practices.
They are still my fellow Amurkans and I am still interested in fomenting alliances with my fellows which subvert the UniParty Deep State narrative.
Nicely done. It suits my intents and purposes here in the fray within this very disillusioned Peoples Republic of Berkeley.
Nice Trump vs Anti-Trump riot is planned for today. So sure it's going to get ugly, the City Junta cancelled the City-subsidized Farmer's Market that's held adjacent to the City Hall battlefield where this fiasco is to take place.
The LibFashes are *desperate*. Baseball bats have been banned for the day. Imagine.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 12:55 PM
I see I have competition for monkey of the year. When this a baboon show up. His ass is red and he speaks in fragmented spittle. We have issues in the simian community with these guys escaping and having a hard time adjusting to human values and intellect.
Don't feed him as a precaution.
Posted by: J. Fred Muggs | April 15, 2017 at 01:01 PM
Incoming! Instalance!
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 01:07 PM
From the last thread re the EX-IM bank.... hold your nose and put on your Rowdy Roddy Piper magic sunglasses to see through the spin of this PBS-sourced article on the EX-IM.
Cast a wide net on Gurgle and came up with this and many others. The headline snagged me in turn.
Straightforward, if not grossly oversimplified, explanation of what the EX-IM is, it's orgins and how the bank works for whom.
From this article I can begin framing a perspective on *the why* of POTUS' change in position.
What else came to mind after reading: every institutional complex subsidized by American taxpayers must be subject to scrutiny--- what is its mission and what has been the consistent impact of the expenditure of OUR DEENAYRO.
At least from this article it's clear that the USG has been priming the export pump for making US exports competitive against The Panda and other powerhouse producers competing in those markets.
Now, the question is, what INCENTIVES can POTUS craft that will allow private capital to cohere around a *NEW* taxpayer-free banking apparatus for lending money for the same distinguished mission that this post-WWII institution was established to fulfill.
Weaning the economy from the federal teat and the flow of cheap paper money is going to take time. It's going to take some imagination.
And for those among us who believe that POTUS can just take a razor and slash, fail to understand that this might work over at State and EPA. But when it comes to selling durable goods (like railroad engines overseas), POTUS needs a credible and surgical plan to set the change in motion.
My two devalued pesos worth of insight on the matter.
And, in the spirit of pre-emption, yes, PBS is a rotten outfit that needs gutting. I agree. Yet, as someone said re NRO, there are some worthy pieces that come across from time to time.
This one is my segue into the morass of the Ex-Im. How this institution works and how it is likely to be changed (whatever form) will affect how I do business in the mid-term future (yes, I am not planning to die or retire anytime soon!).
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/stop-pretending-know-export-import-bank/
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:10 PM
Woke up this morning and thought it was Sunday. The delusion held until I opened AT and alas(!)--- NO PIECES!!!!
;)
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:11 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/04/american_resurrection.html
Posted by: Miss Marple the Deplorable | April 15, 2017 at 01:11 PM
Non-Catholic Easter joke you might have already heard.... from Mrs. Kid:
The Rooster Who Didn't Now about Easter
Rooster walks into the barn and sees brightly colored eggs laying about *everywhere.*
Struts out of the barn and promptly, in detail, proceeds to beat the tar out of the peacock.
Pah-doomp-toomp- toomp.
I'm here all week. Try the squid.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:14 PM
Neither of the Democrat shills will EVER read, or need to respond, to this article. None of their gullible Lefty readers will, either. They are in their safe space, so, you're preaching to the choir.
Posted by: Thomas Hazlewood | April 15, 2017 at 01:21 PM
By the way, the MOAB cost $170,000
So the barely house trained monkeys in the MFM overstated the cost and explosive force by a magnitude of at least a thousand? Impressive expertise on display imo.
Posted by: Captain Hate | April 15, 2017 at 01:25 PM
So Republicans strongly support a successful precision bombing of a military installation from which chemical weapons were launched, after it is demonstrated to have been successful (in substantial part because it was not announced to the world beforehand). This is obviously because they are partisan rubes who will support anything "their" President whatever he does (even though many of them didn't support him in the election or after it).
They don't support a proposed attack on the "Syrian government" with unspecified goals announced weeks in advance by a dithering administration which had previously demonstrated just how comprehensively they can fuck up any military action, in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, along with their abiding disdain for our military. This is obviously because they are partisan rubes who would oppose anything proposed by a Democrat.
I am just not smart enough to be a Democrat pundit.
Posted by: boatbuilder | April 15, 2017 at 01:25 PM
Ton. Kiloton. Whatever.
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 01:47 PM
Ton. Kiloton. Whatever.
And here I usually worry about nano-, pico-, and femtomoles. Let's get small!
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 01:49 PM
Dropped myself behind enemy lines last night and stumbled into "Amy Goodman" and her Democracy Now! project on the public channel.
Beside being an unsightly mess, Goodman's "news" show featured a sniveling behemoth from Afghanistan who called herself a "media professional", and a hunger striking granny who travels the world racking up Nobel prize votes. She just missed this year from the accolades Goodman showered upon the shriveled Vitamin B complex deficient nobody.
Goodman focused on MOAB. Lucky for me my quill and pad were handy... after the first 5 minutes hearing "what the US calls the Mother of All Bombs" every 10 seconds, I started counting.
In a 45 minute span (commercials free of course) Goodman led her guests through a litany of allegations about MOAB and the "atrocities" perped by ONLY THE US on the Afghan people.
Goodman used the "what the US calls phrase" 83 times in 45 minutes. Everytime she interrupted her guests she interjected that phrase. It was the last phrase uttered as she signed off.
When the camera was on Goodman it was one screen. When it was on the guests we had a split screen. One side was the behemoth or Scurvy Granny and the other was the youtube loop of MOAB doing its thing. Over and over and over.
So the LibFash narrative from the extreme Left goes something like this: The US military has not released casualty figures yet so it means *thousands* of children and mommies have been killed.
The Afghani media professional said that the region is a thriving area where there are hospitals and schools and all the amenities of a highly organized society. Hmmm. Really? An area under control of the Taliban has schools? Hospitals?
And she said that the tunnels were actually dug and established by the CIA during the heyday of the Soviet invasion. So--- "if the tunnels weren't there in the first place, would the US even need to bomb helpless people living there?"
Hmmm.
Then the Scurvy Granny chimes in about the tunnels. "Are we supposed to take seriously the government's claim that it was all about tunnels and weapons of a group of ragtag militants? "
Wait it gets better: "If the US were to have dug tunnels to store its weapons, such as all the drones, the transport planes, MOABs, helicopters...the tunnel system would have to be the size of the Grand Canyon!"
Huh?
These counterpoints reminded me of things drunk sophomores get into in their dorm rooms. Their last reasoning neuron blipping like a soap bubble.
Once Goodman dispatched the Scurvy G-maw and al-Behemoth following the condemnation of the US for polluting the drinking water of thousands of Afghan children with this single bomb attack, Goodman proceeded to an amusing installment featuring two Afghani "medical professionals."
Hilarity ensued. The two mp's stood with their backs to the camera "for security reasons because Kaw-bull is such a dangerous, dangerous place" as Goodman told us.
So here we are looking at the backs of the men because they are in so much danger while Goodman proceeds to ask them questions in her annoying style of yammering first, answering her own question, then asking it USING THE MEN'S ENTIRE NAMES.
"Dr. Al Beeb Hanshooshi, tell us, ....." "Dr. Al Shawerma Risotto, please explain...." No voice disguise, nothing. At one point the two men looked at each other revealing their full profiles better than any booking photo might on a post office wall in Duluth.
The split screen bomb footage deployed whenever the camera moved from Goodman's mug to the hapless "doctors".
In the 15 minute segment, Goodman used the MOAB phrase just 23 times.
What "might have happened" with the MOAB strike "must have happened" to "it did happen."
Okay. Got it, Amy.
What frosted my mini-wheats was the logic which goes like this: if you bomb your enemy then you will only create more terrorists.
Here is where the LibFash media is woefully underschooled with their Masters in Social Work theories about why people do heinous shit.
The sharia scholars and jurists give the imams (who are in every country around the planet) the rationale for waging the jihad as a solemn, sacred and highest duty of the most devoted.
Bringing infidels to Allah by the pen or the sword--- either option works and works well because it is an organized *convention* of their code (I refuse to call it a Faith).
War is a kill or be killed proposition---always has been and always will be.
Bad drinking water and starvation motivate people to survive, not bear arms against the perceived agents of those conditions.
Taking up arms requires a galvanizing ideology which emulsifies all of those grievances into a moldable fighting force.
And for the MoMos that is the ideology of jihad couched in the fervor of their prophet.
Amy Goodman wholly discounts the ideology of violent Islamic jihad and its scalable execution in the name of their moon god as a DNA-like source code of this cancer across the world.
The DNA of jihad is what gives the jihad both scale and its duplicatable efficiencies of asymmetrical warfare based on martyrdom and self-sacrifice.
But Goodman is pounding this drum of insinuation:
"Just give them your donuts and a debit card and they will stop the killing."
Okey dokey.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:52 PM
Pretty sure the idjits in the press would fall for a meme of how devastatingly destructive a nanoton bomb could be, DrJ.
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 01:53 PM
"femtomoles"
For a nanosecond it seemed tamales had been subjected to the gender memes of the Left.
;)
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:57 PM
Nano! Nano! said a sad clown back in the day.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:58 PM
Killfile is indeed my amigo. No baboon ass on my screen anymore. What's not to love?
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 01:59 PM
I can't wait until the military drops the "Cisgendered Ultra Neutered Thermobomb" on Amy Goodman...
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 01:59 PM
lyle,
I'm giving a shot at the wine decorking idea. A couple of Davis Enology Profs are very excited about the idea, and the preliminary economics look very good. It will be an unusual NSF proposal, but I think it may well be sexy enough to sell.
We'll see!
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 02:02 PM
lyle: I was half-expecting her to put on a pair of Rachel Maddow specs so she could impress her viewers even more.
I took great delight in sending my screed this morning over to Pacifica Radio in Berkeley.
There the lemmings have erected a phallically-inspired shrine to their queen dilletante.
A man might "need a maid", but over there, who needs a man?
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:04 PM
Too harsh? How about the "Bomb Intersectionality Nexus Thermodevice"?
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 02:04 PM
How about "The Parental Guardian of All Bombs?"
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:06 PM
"The Bomb With Two Mommies"
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:07 PM
You have a strong stomach kev, wait wait don't tell me, was about my limit.
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 02:07 PM
I think the "decorking" thing has been perfected, DrJ. I trust you're working on the cork "de-tainting" part. Sign me up, pard. 😎🍷
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 02:08 PM
Heh. The Left doesn't have to be more than anti-trump.
It worked for y'all with Obama.
A lot of mischief is accomplished by opposing every appointment and legislation without discromination...
Not that discrimination is necessary for dealing with the Man-Child.
There is not enough good stuff for losing.
Posted by: Cuck Trump | April 15, 2017 at 02:09 PM
narciso--- i can only do it while fasting.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:09 PM
lyle,
I will! But if it works as we now are planning, it would be transparent to the oenophile. It is a real opportunity worth potentially about $100 million per year. Really!
Of course some test samples might be able to be arranged. :)
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 02:11 PM
What IS Trumpty Dumpty's Syria strategy?
Remember...boots on the ground always follows.
Posted by: Suck the Pipe | April 15, 2017 at 02:13 PM
Interesting the LibFash obsession with the derisive term "cuck", short for "cuckold."
Fitting projection by the shriveled survivors of the now 50 years gone "summer of (free) love."
They've internalized enough sexually-based shame that they have to project it into the political arena.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:14 PM
God. A femtomole mention. If I remember right and it was long time ago. That is a mole that is 10-15th power. Only weedavey could see it in his glass of Paddy's.
Posted by: Jim Eagle | April 15, 2017 at 02:14 PM
Avogadro had a lot of time on his hands.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:15 PM
It's Bannon's signature expression, klever.
Btw: is it possible to see your toes or shoes when walking upright?
Posted by: Suck the Pipe | April 15, 2017 at 02:18 PM
That's too much of a sacrifice:
hrttps://t.co/3cdYZW02v4
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 02:19 PM
Robbie Capp got a D- in sophomore chem back in high school.
He sealed his fate while introducing his paper during "final presentations" for Brother Cyriac.
"Avocado's Mole"
Bro made him "take a seat." Not a fan of sarcasm?
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:19 PM
$100 mil seems on the low side for the chaps with 100,000 bottle cellars to forever rid themselves from the possibility that their 2013 Petrus won't be cork-tainted in 30 years, DrJ. YUGE! 😬
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 02:19 PM
Seats are reserved for bipeds, confused quadraped.
Posted by: Suc | April 15, 2017 at 02:23 PM
Seats are reserved for bipeds, confused quadraped.
Posted by: S | April 15, 2017 at 02:23 PM
Tx for this link, Narciso.
[link] https://t.co/3cdYZW02v4 [/link]
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:26 PM
JiB,
I had to make a file with all of the prefixes:
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 02:26 PM
Your rubber sword is kind of an insult, certainly not a challenge.
Does anyone here actually have sword skills.
Placing my ad here for a worthy opponent.
Posted by: Sinbad | April 15, 2017 at 02:26 PM
Dr. J:
patents pending?
Kapitalist Kev
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:29 PM
And today, we mark a seemingly little remarked upon 4th anniversary
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 02:30 PM
Sinbad has been cleansed.
But my retinas were scalded by his sword commentary before pulling the trigger.
Sinbad.... not even the master of his tiny pork sword.
Good grief.
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:30 PM
TM,
Maybe those Poll numbers are simply because Kerry talked about bombing "Daesh," and Obama talked about bombing "ISIL," while Trump talks about bombing "ISIS"---maybe Dem's are only interested in bombing euphemisms, whereas from the git-go Repubs have been interested in bombing the enemy.
Posted by: daddy | April 15, 2017 at 02:32 PM
When your ship comes in Dr J, remember those who fed you samosas while in port. ;)
Posted by: Clarice Feldman | April 15, 2017 at 02:33 PM
KK,
No patent applications yet.
As a rule I don't file for patents until I demonstrate proof-of-concept. Namely, I need the data first. It is amazing how quickly a year passes if you go the provisional route.
And I don't like thought patents -- they just are stronger if you have data.
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 02:33 PM
Boston Marathon Bombing.
"Boston Strong!"
MAGA
Posted by: Account Deleted | April 15, 2017 at 02:33 PM
Surrendering so soon?
Klever gets bold during my breaks...addressing my posts...lacking any baseline courage to duel with an actual opponent.
I bet he's all courageous in the safety of his car...gesturing with his finger...safe in his confines...heh.
Posted by: Sinbad | April 15, 2017 at 02:34 PM
Clarice,
I will never forget the Ossobuco!
Posted by: DrJ | April 15, 2017 at 02:34 PM
It's more like the dragon's teeth that cadmus dispatched,
Posted by: narciso | April 15, 2017 at 02:36 PM
BTW I am a passenger on United Airlines boarding in 30 minutes. Nobody so far has offered me $10,000 for my seat.
Posted by: daddy | April 15, 2017 at 02:37 PM
Ossobuco, you say?? I propose a cook off!!
Posted by: lyle | April 15, 2017 at 02:41 PM