ADVERTISEMENT

Who said that Dem leadership is competent?

Yup. Farmers against food stamps has always made me laugh.

To stay on Toasted's point, it was Will Rogers who said he did not belong to an organized political party, he was a Democrat. To stay on the point that farm reps do things differently, here is Catch-22:

Major Major’s father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a longlimbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. His specialty was alfalfa, and he made a good thing out of not growing any. The government paid him well for every bushel of alfalfa he did not grow. The more alfalfa he did not grow, the more money the government gave him, and he spent every penny he didn’t earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not produce. Major Major’s father worked without rest at not growing alfalfa. On long winter evenings he remained indoors and did not mend harness, and he sprang out of bed at the crack of noon every day just to make certain that the chores would not be done. He invested in land wisely and soon was not growing more alfalfa than any other man in the county. Neighbors sought him out for advice on all subjects, for he had made much money and was therefore wise. “As ye sow, so shall ye reap,” he counseled one and all, and everyone said, “Amen.”

Major Major’s father was an outspoken champion of economy in government, provided it did not interfere with the sacred duty of government to pay farmers as much as they could get for all the alfalfa they produced that no one else wanted or for not producing any alfalfa at all. He was a proud and independent man who was opposed to unemployment insurance and never hesitated to whine, whimper, wheedle and extort for as much as he could get from whomever he could.​
 
To stay on Toasted's point, it was Will Rogers who said he did not belong to an organized political party, he was a Democrat. To stay on the point that farm reps do things differently, here is Catch-22:

Major Major’s father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a longlimbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. His specialty was alfalfa, and he made a good thing out of not growing any. The government paid him well for every bushel of alfalfa he did not grow. The more alfalfa he did not grow, the more money the government gave him, and he spent every penny he didn’t earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not produce. Major Major’s father worked without rest at not growing alfalfa. On long winter evenings he remained indoors and did not mend harness, and he sprang out of bed at the crack of noon every day just to make certain that the chores would not be done. He invested in land wisely and soon was not growing more alfalfa than any other man in the county. Neighbors sought him out for advice on all subjects, for he had made much money and was therefore wise. “As ye sow, so shall ye reap,” he counseled one and all, and everyone said, “Amen.”

Major Major’s father was an outspoken champion of economy in government, provided it did not interfere with the sacred duty of government to pay farmers as much as they could get for all the alfalfa they produced that no one else wanted or for not producing any alfalfa at all. He was a proud and independent man who was opposed to unemployment insurance and never hesitated to whine, whimper, wheedle and extort for as much as he could get from whomever he could.​

Gotta love that novel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvin the Martian
To stay on Toasted's point, it was Will Rogers who said he did not belong to an organized political party, he was a Democrat. To stay on the point that farm reps do things differently, here is Catch-22:

Major Major’s father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a longlimbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. His specialty was alfalfa, and he made a good thing out of not growing any. The government paid him well for every bushel of alfalfa he did not grow. The more alfalfa he did not grow, the more money the government gave him, and he spent every penny he didn’t earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not produce. Major Major’s father worked without rest at not growing alfalfa. On long winter evenings he remained indoors and did not mend harness, and he sprang out of bed at the crack of noon every day just to make certain that the chores would not be done. He invested in land wisely and soon was not growing more alfalfa than any other man in the county. Neighbors sought him out for advice on all subjects, for he had made much money and was therefore wise. “As ye sow, so shall ye reap,” he counseled one and all, and everyone said, “Amen.”

Major Major’s father was an outspoken champion of economy in government, provided it did not interfere with the sacred duty of government to pay farmers as much as they could get for all the alfalfa they produced that no one else wanted or for not producing any alfalfa at all. He was a proud and independent man who was opposed to unemployment insurance and never hesitated to whine, whimper, wheedle and extort for as much as he could get from whomever he could.​

I like this one too

A Day in the Life of Joe Republican
Joe gets up at 6:00 am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good, clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and efficacy. All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance. Now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. Joe takes his morning shower, reaching for his shampoo; his bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know the amount and identity of the substances he was putting on his body.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor to society. Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer upholds these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed hell get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some Liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It's noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.

Joe is home from work, and he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to his dad's; his car is among the safest in the world be cause some wacko liberal (Ralph Nader!) fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmer's Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home. He turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefi that Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees. "We don't need those big government liberals ruining our lives", he says. "After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have".
 
To stay on Toasted's point, it was Will Rogers who said he did not belong to an organized political party, he was a Democrat. To stay on the point that farm reps do things differently, here is Catch-22:

Major Major’s father was a sober God-fearing man whose idea of a good joke was to lie about his age. He was a longlimbed farmer, a God-fearing, freedom-loving, law-abiding rugged individualist who held that federal aid to anyone but farmers was creeping socialism. He advocated thrift and hard work and disapproved of loose women who turned him down. His specialty was alfalfa, and he made a good thing out of not growing any. The government paid him well for every bushel of alfalfa he did not grow. The more alfalfa he did not grow, the more money the government gave him, and he spent every penny he didn’t earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not produce. Major Major’s father worked without rest at not growing alfalfa. On long winter evenings he remained indoors and did not mend harness, and he sprang out of bed at the crack of noon every day just to make certain that the chores would not be done. He invested in land wisely and soon was not growing more alfalfa than any other man in the county. Neighbors sought him out for advice on all subjects, for he had made much money and was therefore wise. “As ye sow, so shall ye reap,” he counseled one and all, and everyone said, “Amen.”

Major Major’s father was an outspoken champion of economy in government, provided it did not interfere with the sacred duty of government to pay farmers as much as they could get for all the alfalfa they produced that no one else wanted or for not producing any alfalfa at all. He was a proud and independent man who was opposed to unemployment insurance and never hesitated to whine, whimper, wheedle and extort for as much as he could get from whomever he could.​
Catch-22 is a must read.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marvin the Martian
I like this one too

A Day in the Life of Joe Republican
Joe gets up at 6:00 am to prepare his morning coffee. He fills his pot full of good, clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards. He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee. His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and efficacy. All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance. Now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry. Joe takes his morning shower, reaching for his shampoo; his bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know the amount and identity of the substances he was putting on his body.

Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some tree hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government subsidized ride to work; it saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees. You see, some liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor to society. Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer upholds these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed hell get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some Liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It's noon time, Joe needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression. Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.

Joe is home from work, and he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to his dad's; his car is among the safest in the world be cause some wacko liberal (Ralph Nader!) fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmer's Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. He is happy to see his dad who is now retired. His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.

After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home. He turns on a radio talk show. The host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't tell Joe that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefi that Joe enjoys throughout his day. Joe agrees. "We don't need those big government liberals ruining our lives", he says. "After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have".

tenor.gif
 
They all represent farm districts. Farmers view government support of farming as mandated by God, government support anywhere else as communism that must be stopped.


LOL:

Peterson, who is the ranking member on the Agriculture Committee and rallied Democratic votes to save the farm bill, told The Washington Post on Wednesday, “I’ll be damned if I let anybody screw [the farm bill] up.”

He added that he didn’t know “a damn thing” about the war in Yemen but he didn’t think the legislation the rule blocked would have done much. “All it did was say they couldn’t have a vote or something. Didn’t authorize anything. It didn’t, you know. Our party gets off on tangents. It’s ridiculous.”​
 
Time magazine says that 14 million people may be facing starvation in Yemen.
 
They all represent farm districts. Farmers view government support of farming as mandated by God, government support anywhere else as communism that must be stopped.

Really?

I just looked up one rep, Al Lawson. The district is 84% urban. According to wikipedia, dems hold a 40 point registration edge. I believe it's a dem +20 district. Black voters comprise 66% of democratic voters in the district according to wiki.

From everything I've read, the bill would have immediately moved to a revote with that provision excluded. So yes, I'll call it misconduct on account of those 5. And yes, I do hold leadership responsible for not whipping them.
 
I’m puzzled that we’re blaming Democrats for a Republican bill opposed by all but five House Democrats.

The Republicans are beyond the pale. I dont expect their support. I do expect that every member of the party I'm registered to would oppose this utter crap. Losing 5 on this is inexcusable.

This was a historic opportunity that was blown. It's also a winning issue for Democrats.
 
The Republicans are beyond the pale. I dont expect their support. I do expect that every member of the party I'm registered to would oppose this utter crap. Losing 5 on this is inexcusable.

This was a historic opportunity that was blown. It's also a winning issue for Democrats.

They’ve been beaten down for so long in the house, they don’t realize when they can win anymore.

But that’s about to change.

And I’m with you- those guys should be voted out next time- provided they didn’t read the Yemen provision, or just didn’t care. What’s going on there is insanity, and we’re deeply involved in it. I blame Obama for not doing more about it, because it started under his administration. When we enagage in this type of crap, it undermines what’s left of our moral authority (admittedly not much).
 
They’ve been beaten down for so long in the house, they don’t realize when they can win anymore.

But that’s about to change.

And I’m with you- those guys should be voted out next time- provided they didn’t read the Yemen provision, or just didn’t care. What’s going on there is insanity, and we’re deeply involved in it. I blame Obama for not doing more about it, because it started under his administration. When we enagage in this type of crap, it undermines what’s left of our moral authority (admittedly not much).

We've refueled fighter jets en-route to bombing school buses full of children.

My biggest criticism of Obama's foreign policy is the lack of long-term vision. E.g. the treaty with iran, normalization with Cuba. The manner in which these were constructed allowed the next President to simply blow them up. Not good.
 
And I’m with you- those guys should be voted out next time-

That depends on if another dem could win a general in those districts. It’s important to have the majority so you get more members and the chairmanship on House committees. There’s a trade off.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zeke4ahs
My biggest criticism of Obama's foreign policy is the lack of long-term vision. E.g. the treaty with Iran, normalization with Cuba. The manner in which these were constructed allowed the next President to simply blow them up. Not good.
Again you place blame everywhere but where it's due. First it was Democrats' fault that Republicans give Trump cover for the brutal war in Yemen. Now it's Obama's fault that Congress reflexively opposed the Iran deal and wouldn't imaginably have ratified it as a treaty.
 
Again you place blame everywhere but where it's due. First it was Democrats' fault that Republicans give Trump cover for the brutal war in Yemen. Now it's Obama's fault that Congress reflexively opposed the Iran deal and wouldn't imaginably have ratified it as a treaty.

Yep, Obama did what he could. The Republican Senate is sold on a narrative that meant a real treaty had no chance of passing.
 
Again you place blame everywhere but where it's due. First it was Democrats' fault that Republicans give Trump cover for the brutal war in Yemen. Now it's Obama's fault that Congress reflexively opposed the Iran deal and wouldn't imaginably have ratified it as a treaty.

With the exception of Rand Paul, the Republicans are a lost cause on foreign policy. I dont expect anything from them. It's clear and unstated that they deserve the majority of the blame. I hold my party to a higher standard. With respect to Iran, the end result is an unmitigated disaster. I understand that the Obama team could not have foreseen the election of Trump, but the Iran deal was built on quicksand. Furthermore, the US under Obama was not upholding their end of the deal even prior to Trump reneging.

Yep, Obama did what he could. The Republican Senate is sold on a narrative that meant a real treaty had no chance of passing.

Understood. To counter, Schumer and Menendez were leading the charge opposing the deal. What does that say about the Democratic party?

The one signature, which I will never forgive Obama for is the signing of HR 158, which served as the motivation for the travel ban. This was snuck into a spending bill by Republicans. Obama had the option of refusing to sign onto this racist legislation.
 
We've refueled fighter jets en-route to bombing school buses full of children.

My biggest criticism of Obama's foreign policy is the lack of long-term vision. E.g. the treaty with iran, normalization with Cuba. The manner in which these were constructed allowed the next President to simply blow them up. Not good.


The Obama admin was in full throated support of the Yemen proxy war from the start, and sold over $100b in arms to the Saudis in support of it....along with providing endless logistical support from our military.


https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/yemen-saudi-arabia-obama-riyadh/501365/
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aloha Hoosier
The Obama admin was in full throated support of the Yemen proxy war from the start, and sold over $100b in arms to the Saudis in support of it....along with providing endless logistical support from our military.


https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/yemen-saudi-arabia-obama-riyadh/501365/

Some wise man once said that we should beware the military-industrial complex. Neither party listened. We can make a lot of money selling the Saudis weapons to carry out this war. Never mind we also give them huge amounts of aid to pay for the arms. Either way, defense contractors profit.
 
Some wise man once said that we should beware the military-industrial complex. Neither party listened. We can make a lot of money selling the Saudis weapons to carry out this war. Never mind we also give them huge amounts of aid to pay for the arms. Either way, defense contractors profit.


I just find it ironic that everyone is suddenly acting like the Yemen/Saudi issue is a GOP partisan effort....when the whole mess was entirely initiated by a Democratic administration with basically zero input from Congress.

Hell, even just 9 months ago, 10 Dem Senators joined Republicans in blocking any action to limit the President's hand.
 
With the exception of Rand Paul, the Republicans are a lost cause on foreign policy. I dont expect anything from them. It's clear and unstated that they deserve the majority of the blame. I hold my party to a higher standard. With respect to Iran, the end result is an unmitigated disaster. I understand that the Obama team could not have foreseen the election of Trump, but the Iran deal was built on quicksand. Furthermore, the US under Obama was not upholding their end of the deal even prior to Trump reneging.



Understood. To counter, Schumer and Menendez were leading the charge opposing the deal. What does that say about the Democratic party?

The one signature, which I will never forgive Obama for is the signing of HR 158, which served as the motivation for the travel ban. This was snuck into a spending bill by Republicans. Obama had the option of refusing to sign onto this racist legislation.


Mike Lee cosponsored the Yemen resolution that passed today with Bernie Sanders.
 
I just find it ironic that everyone is suddenly acting like the Yemen/Saudi issue is a GOP partisan effort....when the whole mess was entirely initiated by a Democratic administration with basically zero input from Congress.

Hell, even just 9 months ago, 10 Dem Senators joined Republicans in blocking any action to limit the President's hand.

Yep. The problem is it took time for the war to hit the news cycle. I mean it was in the news, but the numbers have become more and more staggering. So suddenly people are concerned. I think Churchill said that one can count on Americans to do the right thing after they exhaust every other possibility. It reminds me of Rwanda, it took some time to build up the size of humanitarian crisis that made Americans notice it.

I
 
  • Like
Reactions: twenty02
Mike Lee cosponsored the Yemen resolution that passed today with Bernie Sanders.

Fair.
The Obama admin was in full throated support of the Yemen proxy war from the start, and sold over $100b in arms to the Saudis in support of it....along with providing endless logistical support from our military.


https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/yemen-saudi-arabia-obama-riyadh/501365/

I've been criticizing our participation in Yemen for YEARS on this very forum.
Yep. The problem is it took time for the war to hit the news cycle. I mean it was in the news, but the numbers have become more and more staggering. So suddenly people are concerned. I think Churchill said that one can count on Americans to do the right thing after they exhaust every other possibility. It reminds me of Rwanda, it took some time to build up the size of humanitarian crisis that made Americans notice it.

I
I dont think that's the problem. First all of Americans are completely NIMBY. If they dont see something in front of their face, they don't care about it. (That's people in general, not just americans). Its the same reason there is no coverage of the travel ban now. Second, people relate much more easily to a personal narrative. When you say 1 million starving or 85k dead, those are just numbers. God forbid, one person is wrongly imprisoned in Tennessee and the outrage is much more palpable. Yet, in terms of harm there is no comparison. The only difference is the personal narrative. People relate to it as if it's their own family member.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Digressions
Yep. The problem is it took time for the war to hit the news cycle. I mean it was in the news, but the numbers have become more and more staggering. So suddenly people are concerned. I think Churchill said that one can count on Americans to do the right thing after they exhaust every other possibility. It reminds me of Rwanda, it took some time to build up the size of humanitarian crisis that made Americans notice it.

I

The larger geopolitical issue is that Iran and the Saudis have been fighting a cold war/proxy war in the region for 40 years.... and it's nowhere close to easing. It sucks, but at the end of the day every US President is forced to side with the Saudis vs Iran/Russia.
 
Yep. The problem is it took time for the war to hit the news cycle. I mean it was in the news, but the numbers have become more and more staggering. So suddenly people are concerned. I think Churchill said that one can count on Americans to do the right thing after they exhaust every other possibility. It reminds me of Rwanda, it took some time to build up the size of humanitarian crisis that made Americans notice it.

I

Edit: and the thing that really put Yemen in the public eye was the unrelated killing of JK. Completely unrelated, but a very strong personal narrative, which then directed attention toward the Saudis overall conduct...
 
That depends on if another dem could win a general in those districts. It’s important to have the majority so you get more members and the chairmanship on House committees. There’s a trade off.

If the rep doesn’t care, or even worse, didn’t even look at the inserted provisions, I don’t care what party they belong to at that time. They’re not worthy of their seat. Time to get someone in that’ll actually do their damn job.

The larger geopolitical issue is that Iran and the Saudis have been fighting a cold war/proxy war in the region for 40 years.... and it's nowhere close to easing. It sucks, but at the end of the day every US President is forced to side with the Saudis vs Iran/Russia.

Which is why we need to really jump in headfirst into investing into the development of alternative energies. Not only would it provide good jobs/ it would lessen or even eliminate our need to have a consistent Middle Eastern oil supply. I realize our domestic oil production has greatly increased, but that’s a short term fix.

Never mind that taking those actions could literally keep the world from imploding via global warming.

Instead, we’ve got an administration help bent on propping up coal.

And, we could still support the Saudis, but do so with the understanding that they have to behave. And if they don’t, they have to realize that there will be consequences that will hurt them. Given their reliance on our aid and military weaponry/systems knowledge, we should have the upper hand in this relationship.

Instead, we’ve got an administration that conditions our relationship strictly in terms of the possible amount of arms we can sell them.

In short, we still may have to rely on them to some degree. But we could do it a hell of a lot differently. There’s something really rotten about Trump’s inability to hold SA or Russia accountable for anything.
 
Some wise man once said that we should beware the military-industrial complex. Neither party listened. We can make a lot of money selling the Saudis weapons to carry out this war. Never mind we also give them huge amounts of aid to pay for the arms. Either way, defense contractors profit.
We don’t give Saudi Arabia aid to pay for US Arms. They spend their own money.
 
Last edited:
With the exception of Rand Paul, the Republicans are a lost cause on foreign policy. I dont expect anything from them. It's clear and unstated that they deserve the majority of the blame. I hold my party to a higher standard. With respect to Iran, the end result is an unmitigated disaster. I understand that the Obama team could not have foreseen the election of Trump, but the Iran deal was built on quicksand. Furthermore, the US under Obama was not upholding their end of the deal even prior to Trump reneging.



Understood. To counter, Schumer and Menendez were leading the charge opposing the deal. What does that say about the Democratic party?

The one signature, which I will never forgive Obama for is the signing of HR 158, which served as the motivation for the travel ban. This was snuck into a spending bill by Republicans. Obama had the option of refusing to sign onto this racist legislation.
Rand Paul couldn't even reach a peaceful agreement with his neighbor about which corner of his own yard to put the windfall from his trees. In fact, didn't his neighbor kick his ass?

Hard to think Rand Paul could be effective in foreign policy as to Russia, as to China, as to Mexico, as to Fredonia, as to the Mideast, as to NATO, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
The Obama admin was in full throated support of the Yemen proxy war from the start, and sold over $100b in arms to the Saudis in support of it....along with providing endless logistical support from our military.


https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/09/yemen-saudi-arabia-obama-riyadh/501365/
America has maintained a seamy relationship with Saudi Arabia for decades because of oil. This has persisted even though the Saudis are a repellent regime, and they have been a fount of extremism and the very terrorists who kill us. Meanwhile, our relationship with Iran has been nothing but hostile since the Shah's fall and the hostage crisis. Add that Iran is Israel's bitter enemy and our thinking on that subject basically stops. These problems are bipartisan, and they both lead us to a bad place in Yemen.

But as that piece from the Atlantic reports, Obama's support for Saudi's war in Yemen was less than full throated. Indeed, our support came despite Obama's deep misgivings about our Saudi "friends" and their reciprocal antipathy for him. Remember also that Obama was then trying to negotiate the politically fraught Iran deal, with all its moving pieces.

More to the point, though, Trump isn't merely the latest Republican version of our long-standing Saudi coziness. To the extent we aren't taking direction from Israel, Trump has outsourced our Middle Eastern policy to the Saudis. His first foreign trip was to Saudi Arabia, a bad choice badly executed. He supported the Saudis against our ally Qatar, where we have a huge military base. He's doubled down in Yemen even as the magnitude of the catastrophe has become clear. He's now being dissed in Congress, which seems motivated to rebel over Yemen by the absurd lies the Saudis have induced him to tell us about Khashoggi.

Maybe Trump has read and thought deeply about all of this, then reached the strategic judgment that the wisest Middle Eastern policy is "Do whatever the Saudis want." Or maybe the corrupt unfit imbecile is doing the Saudis' bidding because they pay him a lot of money. Even though I happily concede a lot of your point, Trump is uniquely subject to criticism here.
 
America has maintained a seamy relationship with Saudi Arabia for decades because of oil. This has persisted even though the Saudis are a repellent regime, and they have been a fount of extremism and the very terrorists who kill us. Meanwhile, our relationship with Iran has been nothing but hostile since the Shah's fall and the hostage crisis. Add that Iran is Israel's bitter enemy and our thinking on that subject basically stops. These problems are bipartisan, and they both lead us to a bad place in Yemen.

But as that piece from the Atlantic reports, Obama's support for Saudi's war in Yemen was less than full throated. Indeed, our support came despite Obama's deep misgivings about our Saudi "friends" and their reciprocal antipathy for him. Remember also that Obama was then trying to negotiate the politically fraught Iran deal, with all its moving pieces.

More to the point, though, Trump isn't merely the latest Republican version of our long-standing Saudi coziness. To the extent we aren't taking direction from Israel, Trump has outsourced our Middle Eastern policy to the Saudis. His first foreign trip was to Saudi Arabia, a bad choice badly executed. He supported the Saudis against our ally Qatar, where we have a huge military base. He's doubled down in Yemen even as the magnitude of the catastrophe has become clear. He's now being dissed in Congress, which seems motivated to rebel over Yemen by the absurd lies the Saudis have induced him to tell us about Khashoggi.

Maybe Trump has read and thought deeply about all of this, then reached the strategic judgment that the wisest Middle Eastern policy is "Do whatever the Saudis want." Or maybe the corrupt unfit imbecile is doing the Saudis' bidding because they pay him a lot of money. Even though I happily concede a lot of your point, Trump is uniquely subject to criticism here.

I think we (I don't mean "we" literally) vastly underestimate the control that Israel has over Congress. Stephen Walt has written on the subject extensively. The recent American Zionist gathering was no exception. Political opposite ranging from Morton Klein to DWS coming together in agreement. Anecdotally, walking the walls of Congress you observe significantly more yarmulkes than would be anticipated on a per-capita population basis. Half of the people I met with had interned either with the Israeli embassy or AIPAC.

Many states prohibit dual nationality, or at a minimum prohibit elected officials from holding dual nationality. I'm not prepared to argue in the affirmative, but it's something to consider.

Wrt Yemen, the Houthis were freedom fighters who led a popular revolt against an oppressive dictator. The Iranians had limited interested in Yemen until the US and Saudi Arabia stuck their anuses where they didn't belong. We have basically created the conditions necessary for anti-American radicals to thrive. It's the complete opposite of national security and national interest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
Rand Paul couldn't even reach a peaceful agreement with his neighbor about which corner of his own yard to put the windfall from his trees. In fact, didn't his neighbor kick his ass?

Hard to think Rand Paul could be effective in foreign policy as to Russia, as to China, as to Mexico, as to Fredonia, as to the Mideast, as to NATO, etc.

So what? Take a look at his voting record. He is basically a non-interventionist. We have a very poor track record of success post-intervention.
 
I think we (I don't mean "we" literally) vastly underestimate the control that Israel has over Congress. Stephen Walt has written on the subject extensively. The recent American Zionist gathering was no exception. Political opposite ranging from Morton Klein to DWS coming together in agreement. Anecdotally, walking the walls of Congress you observe significantly more yarmulkes than would be anticipated on a per-capita population basis. Half of the people I met with had interned either with the Israeli embassy or AIPAC.

Many states prohibit dual nationality, or at a minimum prohibit elected officials from holding dual nationality. I'm not prepared to argue in the affirmative, but it's something to consider.

Wrt Yemen, the Houthis were freedom fighters who led a popular revolt against an oppressive dictator. The Iranians had limited interested in Yemen until the US and Saudi Arabia stuck their anuses where they didn't belong. We have basically created the conditions necessary for anti-American radicals to thrive. It's the complete opposite of national security and national interest.
It's ridiculous how much influence Israel has in Congress. (That largely explains why the Iran deal couldn't have been a treaty.) And from our perspective, the real bad guys in Yemen -- the sort of people who think like al Qaeda -- are all on the Saudi side. Unless, as you say, we radicalize Shiites to start attacking us here at home.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
ADVERTISEMENT