Home / General / The plot against America, con’t

The plot against America, con’t

Comments
/
/
/
1098 Views

nuremberg

A friend of mine just heard this commercial aired on WLW, a 50,000-watt Cincinnati station whose signal can be heard, at least at night, over much of the eastern half of North America (it’s also the radio home of the Cincinnati Reds and Bengals). It’s part of the media behemoth iHeartMedia — formerly Clear Channel Communications.

Here’s the text of the ad:

Trump publicly identified International Bankers as the destroyers of America, and the power behind Hillary Clinton.

——-The international Bankers around Goldman-Sachs and the FED ARE the organized Worldwide, Christ-hating, America-hating Jewish Shadow Government behind Communism and the New World Order.

—— These Jewish Bankers rig key elections through their control of all five big TV networks, which are issuing the false polls,

—– and their control of the three Big Mega-Election Vendors, — ES &S, Hart, and Dominion — which process 90%+ of our USA vote on SECRET COMPUTER PROGRAMS, with the shameful permission of all 50 Secretaries of State.

—— In a fair count Trump wins by a landslide in all 50 states.

—— If they dare to announce Hillary the “winner”, it will be blatant computer-fraud.

——- We will then not have a legitimate government.

—– See ElectionNightGatekeepers.com – and see you this Sunday at 2 PM on 55KRC – paid for by Dr. Kuimars Kiani for Congress 2016.

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Kerans

    Dr. Kiumars Kiani, — is running for the U.S. Congress in the 1st District of Ohio for the November 8th, 2016 election. He also becomes the 2nd congressional candidate and one of many citizens to join “Team Traficant”, named after the late, great Congressman Jim Traficant, known for his courage in standing up for everyday citizens and fighting the enemies of the USA. –from the linked website

    Also, WLW is the spittoon from which emerged Bill Cunningham, the stupid Jerry Springer.

    • Woodrowfan

      Springer was Mayor of Cincy first then was a newscaster on WLWT, not WLW.

      • Kerans

        I think you misread me. Cunningham came from WLW.

        • Woodrowfan

          Yes, I did misread you. My apologies… I think of Cunningham as more a Limbaugh wanna be rather than Springerish, but I haven’t heard him in ages…

    • Matt

      “known for his courage”. As well as known for being a crook…

      He was expelled from the House after being convicted of taking bribes, filing false tax returns, racketeering and forcing his aides to perform chores at his farm in Ohio and houseboat in Washington, D.C.

      • GeorgeBurnsWasRight

        But he was courageously crooked . . .

      • NickyNelson

        First of all, thank you for posting this information Paul Campos.

        GeorgeBurns & Matt, I don’t believe Traficant was a crook. Our congress and senate; both houses are completely controlled by Israel via the Jewish Lobby; see former congressman and sheriff Jim Traficant who spent nearly 8 years in prison (framed) for going up against the Jewish Lobby explain this fact on Greta and Hannity before they blacked him out of the main stream Jewish owned media and before his quizzical death:

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IV48Hf9YbY

        You can also visit his memorial website I was asked to put together in his memory here: Project Freedom USA

    • NickyNelson

      Thanks Kerans for the info!

  • From his website.

    On September 8, 2016 Dr. Kiumars Kiani (Dr. Q) filed to run for Congress in the 1st district of Ohio. On September 13, 2016, the Hamilton County Board of Elections certified Dr. Q as a legal write-in candidate.

    On September 15th iHeart radio (WLW-AM & WKRC-AM, both Big Talk Stations in the Cincinnati, Ohio area) refused to run a 60-second ad and a 1-hour program which Dr. Kiani had already paid for on Saturday, September 17th and Sunday, September 18th.

  • BiloSagdiyev

    Why, just the other day we were talking about people in other countries east of Europe who think of WWII and Hitler in an entirely different way from the rest of us.

    I googled briefly and stared and my head began to throb, and I shan’t google more deeply from my computer at work… but… wow, what a tool. In both senses of the word.

    Hey, wait a minute! This isn’t just about some screwball with (mysteriously*) deep pockets! ClearChannel took that money and ran that ad. Fuck. Them.

    _

    * International Nazi bankers!

    • ThrottleJockey

      Fair time laws? Above it says Clear Channel refused the ad initially.

      • postmodulator

        Those have not been a thing since, what, 1986?

        • Just_Dropping_By

          You’re thinking of the Fairness Doctrine. The Equal-Time Rule is presumably what ThrottleJockey was referring to, which restricts broadcasters’ ability to reject political advertising.

          http://www.factcheck.org/2004/06/false-ads-there-oughta-be-a-law-or-maybe-not/

          Stations can reject ads for any reason from political groups other than candidates. And they may reject ads from all candidates for a given office. But if they take ads from one candidate, they can’t legally refuse ads from opponents except for technical reasons (such as being too long or short to fit standard commercial breaks, or if the recording quality is poor) or if they are “obscene.” Rejecting a candidate’s ad because it’s false is simply not allowed.

          • nixnutz

            Although that link is quite old. I think the precedent of Pamela Geller’s Islamophobic ads on the MTA contradicts that in part; a federal judge said they were required to run them, prompting them to stop running political ads entirely, after which he said it was OK to refuse hers. So I think that first sentence is probably out of date, the main point is the same, the station could not have refused to run the ad, but that’s no longer limited to candidates’ ads.

            • Just_Dropping_By

              Uh, no, the Geller case has no relevance to this issue. The Geller case was decided based on the First Amendment because the M.T.A. is a government agency.

    • LeeEsq

      People in countries immediately south of Europe also have some interesting views on Hitler and the Nazis. During World War II, the Axis powers tended to be popular in the Middle East and North Africa and kept a lot of their popularity after the war. Many former Nazis found refuge in Syria and Egypt. Needless to say that this colors Jewish perception a lot.

      • J. Otto Pohl

        The lie that all Arabs are Nazis and that is the only reason they oppose Israel really needs to be put to rest. More Arabs in North Africa, Palestine, and even in Europe in places like the French underground fought with the Allies against the Axis then served on the German side. Nasser was not an Egyptian version of Hitler no matter how much certain Israelis and Americans claim that anybody that opposed the Israelis just wants to rebuild Auschwitz.

      • sonamib

        Well, lots of Nazis found refuge in North and South America as well…

        • J. Otto Pohl

          But, Latinos are not a politically incorrect people like Arabs that can be villified at will by the liberal left US political establishment.

  • BiloSagdiyev

    Heyyyy, isn’t this a case where diversity makes America richer? Nazi crankery isn’t just for cranky white American-born men!

  • wengler

    If conspiracy theories had radio channels, this one would be on the Golden Oldies.

  • MacK

    People may not like Andrew Sullivan, but his piece in New York is seriously scary, and there is a lot to agree with about the Republican Party:

    http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/11/andrew-sullivan-trump-america-and-the-abyss.html

    • ASV

      Andrew Sullivan can only speak in the passive voice these days.

      • rea

        Things can onnly be sopken of by Andrew Sullivan in the passive voice these days

      • MacK

        I don’t really have a lot of time for him – but, Trump is scaring the crap out of a Conservative like Sullivan.

        • BiloSagdiyev

          First they came for the Oakeshottean conservatives, and I said, “Huh? Oakshootawhatnow?”

      • I believe he prefers the term “power bottom voice”.

        • rea

          Hey, some of my best friends are bottoms–where would we be without them? So, let’s stick to his politics and not his sex life, unless “power bottom voice” is intended as a reference to flatulence.

          • unless “power bottom voice” is intended as a reference to flatulence.

            “Power bottom voice” is the good Herr doktor’s vigilant correction of the tendentious (as being patriarchically cis-normative) term “passive voice”.

    • mpavilion

      For their part, the feckless Democrats decided to nominate one of the most mediocre, compromised, and Establishment figures one can imagine in a deeply restless moment of anxiety and discontent. They knew full well that Hillary Clinton is incapable of inspiring, of providing reassurance, or of persuading anyone who isn’t already in her corner, and that her self-regard and privilege and money-grubbing have led her into the petty scandals that have been exploited by the tyrant’s massive lies.

      Hi, fuck you

      • howard

        department of why andrew sullivan is not to be read.

        • petesh

          Thanks, saved me the click

      • scott_theotherone

        Thanks for reminding me why I haven’t missed that guy one fucking bit.

      • MacK

        Yeah, I didn’t agree with that, but the rest – the holy f*ck the Republicans are batshit, from Sullivan – this batshit. By the time Sullivan is saying what he’s saying about the Republicans….they are

        • Ronan

          This is always his schtick. Sullivan declares existential crises on at least a tri annual basis.

          • BiloSagdiyev

            How can we miss him if he won’t stay retired?

            • This is always his schtick. Sullivan declares existential crises on at least a tri annual basis.

              How can we miss him if he won’t stay

              non-existent?

        • Nick056

          I don’t understand this comment. Sullivan hasn’t endorsed a Republican for President since 2000. People here hate him for good reasons (his opinions about Sarah Palin, the Bell Curve, and both Clintons) and for bad reasons (he said mean things about liberals 15 years ago) but he’s not much of a modern conservative in any meaningful sense. He’s freaking out about Trump because that’s what he does and because he essentially no longer supports any conservatives.

          • efgoldman

            He’s freaking out about Trump because that’s what he does

            He’s freaking out about Trump because he’s deathly afraid that Obergfell might be reversed.
            It’s always about Sully. Always.

          • BiloSagdiyev

            and for bad reasons (he said mean things about liberals 15 years ago)

            I’m sorry, but I’ve got a little bit of a short fuse about being called a traitor for not jerking off to each and every one of the numerous wars these niwits find for us.

            • N__B

              Exactly.

      • BiloSagdiyev

        Self-regard? In a politician? Hold the presses!

        Also, if the subject is self-regard, weren’t you just talking about Trump?

        • ASV

          Also, if the subject is self-regard, aren’t you Andrew Sullivan?

      • Bleh. Needs moar silent meditation.

        I guess he’s not going for the “‘reasonable’ guy who supported the opposition and now thinks that means he gets to be listened to for the rest of the term” thing this time.

      • Didn’t Sullivan begin his career by attacking Hilary Clinton’s health-care initiative? I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that when he calls her a “compromised candidate” he doesn’t say much about who compromised her.

        • rea

          He’s been an enthusiastic Clinton-hunter since the early 90s, yes.

          • mpavilion

            I wonder, if C. Hitchens were still around, what he would be writing these days… he also seemed to hate fascists and Clintons in near equal measure.

            • I’ve wondered about that too.

            • Origami Isopod

              Given his overall misogyny and Islamophobia, I imagine he would be writing a great deal about the “threat” of “SJWs.”

              • leftwingfox

                Yep. I’m pretty confidant that he would have gone full asshole had he lived, and can’t help but shake my head at the atheists on the Social Justice side of the divide who still think he was one of the good guys.

                • Origami Isopod

                  the atheists on the Social Justice side of the divide who still think he was one of the good guys.

                  They exist? I can see a blogger like PZ Myers giving Hitchens credit where due; e.g., his exposé of Mother Teresa. But pretty much any atheist who still admires Hitchens on the whole has gone over to the alt-right/Slymepit/GG side.

                • leftwingfox

                  Yeah, I still see commentators on FTB and the Patheos Atheism areas who are otherwise pretty good about social issues sighing wistfully over Hitchens on occasion. Not often, but enough to stick in my memory.

                • Origami Isopod

                  I don’t get it. He’d have pretty much sided with Dawkins and Harris on everything. I guess his having been gone for years now is clouding their memories or producing nostalgia. (I also imagine that these are mostly white guys who miss him.)

            • tsam

              I wonder, if C. Hitchens were still around, what he would be writing these days… he also seemed to hate fascists and Clintons in near equal measure.

              What are you, a masochist?

              Fuck that pseudointellectual bigot.

        • Phil Perspective

          Didn’t Sullivan begin his career by attacking Hilary Clinton’s health-care initiative?

          Did he critique it directly? I thought he was the one who gave a platform to Betsy McCaughey while he was Marty Peretz’s waterboy at The New Republic.

          • I recall Sullivan citing his campaign of coordinated rat-fucking against Clinton-care as the professional accomplishment he was most proud of. He spent his career out of lying about Clinton, and now blames the Democratic voters for choosing a candidate that Republicans lie about.
            Somewhere out there is a fire waiting for him to die in it.

      • bender

        I mostly agree with the first half of Sullivan’s assessment of HRC (the “incapable of inspiring” etc. bit). I say mostly because when HRC was First Lady, she inspired my late mother, who remembered Eleanor Roosevelt. IMO HRC is no more self-regarding, privileged and money-grubbing than the average politician, and I’m pretty sure Sullivan is judging her more harshly because of her sex.

        • Attezz

          Sullivan really hates women, the stuff he wrote about Sally Ride immediately after she passed was disgusting.

          • N__B

            What the hell did Ride ever do to Sullivan? Her public persona was as non-objectionable as a person’s can be.

            • djw

              If I recall correctly, he was upset she wasn’t out (enough) about her sexual orientation for Sullivan’s tastes.

              • N__B

                Huh. And here I thought that how someone deals with that issue is their own business.

                Live and learn.

                • tsam

                  Maybe it’s because she didn’t write long screeds sympathizing with fascist assholes who hated her because of her orientation. I mean, that shit’s just unforgivable.

              • BiloSagdiyev

                Oh, geeziss. And what large organization full of mostly men and ex-military people was he trying to climb the pyramid of to get a very rare job slot, in the late 70’s and early 80’s? And during the reign of ooh, let me see, is this a preznit that Sullivan likes – Ronald Reagan?

                I don’t just reserve that gripe for guys of his politics. I think some people, say, writers, live so far from the world of “working within a giant institution” that they’re just kind of blind to the complications involved.

                • Origami Isopod

                  That’s not untrue. But Andrew Sullivan has never really cared about anything except what’s best for Andrew Sullivan. The fact that Ride could have lost her career would not have registered with him as a “real” problem.

              • Origami Isopod

                From what I read after I looked up the Ride thing last night, he was also upset that her orientation was not mentioned in obituaries. Which, at first, sounds more reasonable than his peeve that Ride didn’t out herself when it still would have cost her her career. However, other LGBT writers disagreed with him on that count as well.

                • tsam

                  Sullivan is such a typical right winger in that regard–I’m gay, and you all HAVE to do gay my way.

                  The BONERS of homosexuality?

          • Colin Day

            No LGBT solidarity?

            • Origami Isopod

              “Solidarity” has never required anyone to out themselves when it would be a grave danger to their well-being.

              • tsam

                Or if they just don’t fucking want to. That’s their battle to fight, not ours. Solidarity means we support and respect their decisions on how out or not out they are.

                • Origami Isopod

                  I’m cishet so I certainly am not going to demand anyone come out. It’s none of my business, if nothing else. As an intercommunity issue, though, I understand it’s been contentious at times. The overall consensus seems to be that people in a safe place to come out should at least consider doing so.

                • tsam

                  Yeah–I know a lot of people don’t come out because their actual safety, job security, relationships, etc…are threatened. That needs to go away. Being a straight male, it’s my job to help ensure that it’s safe to come out if they choose, and absolutely not my place to question people’s choices.

          • I get the feeling he thinks women are fair game for attacks he wouldn’t feel free to direct toward men. It seems to permit him to make, and take credit for, both sides of an argument, without harming anyone it would bother him to harm. This creates the appearance of reasonableness that has played so well with certain liberal outlets, like TNR.

            We know he would never, ever praise appeal to the lizard-brain, being such a good liberal and all, yet he does often praise emotional appeals. So he splits the difference by directing the good part one way and the bad part the other way. Since he has no apparent convictions, and can’t bring himself (for good reason) to wholeheartedly choose the R establishment, his split corresponds to the oldest one in the world.

            • Of course, to get back to the topic of the post, if he were doing the same but against Jews instead–picking the most obviously Jewish or Jewish-sounding-surnamed individual among a group of the likeminded for attack–everyone, not least the editors of TNR, would be up in arms.

        • smott999

          Don’t you love it when men pontificate on how un-inspiring the first woman nominee in history is?

          • lizzie

            THIS x A GAZILLION

            • smott999

              But when women turn out in huge nbrs it will just be us voting w our vaginas

      • Sly

        Sullivan rails against the proto-fascist with one breath, and indulges in the same conspiracy mongering and right-wing grievance culture that propelled the proto-fascist to begin with in the next.

        In other words, totally in keeping with his character.

      • FOARP

        Sorry, Clinton is useless as a candidates, as her struggle to overcome first Bernie Sanders and now Trump have shown. She should have walked both competitions.

        This is not a double-standard. This is the truth. Trump and Sanders were both, in their own ways, easy targets.

        • Origami Isopod

          Once again: How to Suppress Women’s Writing Political Achievements. “She got nominated, but her opponents were jokes, so it doesn’t really count, even though she’s still leading in the polls.” Isn’t it funny how that charge wasn’t leveled against Obama, considering that 2008 was the year of Palin? Also, fuck off.

        • guthrie

          Indeed, so useless that she beat them.
          By that logic, since Obama was clearly so wonderful in comparison, he should have gotten both houses and a hygue majority of the popular vote.
          Yet he didn’t.

    • Ronan

      Got through the first para where Sullivan claimed he was only one taking the threat seriously.
      Got to the second where he claims the further the race has gone on the more likely a Trump victory is. (Na)
      Got to the third where he admits to not having a temperament for political analysis. So I agreed and left it there.

      • StellaB

        Did he leave out the part about us liberals being the fifth column?

        • Ronan

          I didnt get that far, but I assume it was included.

      • MacK

        Funny, someone I know said by the way that Comey had done a deValera – referencing DeV’s infamous signing of the book of condolences, and his insistence that this demonstrated his moral purity, neutrality and statesmanship/shit…

        • Ronan

          Or Haughey during the Arms crisis. Giving support to violent extremists intent on destroying the state….

      • djw

        Yep. That column is much, much more about Sullivan than it is about Trump and his supporters.

        • Origami Isopod

          This is the case for just about all Sullivan columns.

    • Aaron Morrow

      Sullivan and his fellow conservatives built that; even Chait admitted this week that liberals were right to note that misogyny and racism seems to be inherent in modern conservatism.

      Mpavilion already noted the predictable irony of Sullivan’s sexism located in the same essay, but ditto.

      • BiloSagdiyev

        even Chait admitted this week that liberals were right to note that misogyny and racism seems to be inherent in modern conservatism.

        Well, that’s a start. Now what about all of those prior centuries?

    • postmodulator

      Just to pile on to all the other Sully criticism, the guy who typed the phrase “may mount a Fifth Column” doesn’t ever get to call anyone else a demagogue.

      • MacK

        That Trump and the Republicans are scaring the living crap out if those who used to be their partisans is significant.

        • Aaron Morrow

          That Sullivan is fine with his sexism and not Trump’s in the same essay makes me think that the scary part to him is the fact that bigotry without tax cuts sells just as well, if not better, than standard Republican bigotry.

          • BiloSagdiyev

            Yep. And just snobbery. Donald is uncouth and clownish and he has agitated the lowly people into a mob. And he’s saying all the quiet parts loud, when he should be using dogwhistles. Why, Donald is the un-Reagan. (When it comes to style… however, in other ways, well…)

      • may mount a Fifth Column

        I thought we’d agreed to stick to his politics, not his sex life.

    • AMK

      A far more accurate account of the past year is that an openly proto-fascist cult leader has emerged to forge a popular movement that has taken over one of the major political parties, eroded central norms of democratic life, undermined American democratic institutions, and now stands on the brink of seizing power in Washington.

      He gives Trump far too much credit. The proto-fascists have been in power in Washigton (or at least Capitol Hill) since 2010.

    • Murc

      Others have already made salient points, but I feel like piling on.

      The right has been spectacularly craven. Trump has no loyalty to the party apparatus that has elevated him to a possible victory next Tuesday — declaring war on the Speaker of the House, attacking the RNC whenever it fails to toady to him, denigrating every single rival Republican candidate, even treating his own vice-presidential nominee as someone he can openly and contemptuously contradict with impunity. And yet that party, like the conservative parties in Weimar Germany, has never seen fit to anathematize him, only seeking to exploit his followers in the vain and foolish delusion that they can control him in the future in ways they have not been able to in the past.

      Sullivan has always been spectacularly ignorant of the fact that American politics are, more and more, driven from the bottom up, rather than the top down. He acts like Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were selected by the party apparatuses, which rose them to power.

      It doesn’t work that way here. This ain’t the UK. Hell, even the UK ain’t the UK anymore. Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were selected by the great masses of the rank-and-file. Indeed, whoever becomes President? Something like half the people who gained them that victory will have also participated in the primary that chose them as a candidate in the first place.

      The Republican Party never acted to anathemize Trump because Trump was and is the choice of the party. The party apparatchiks would, justifiably, have lost their jobs if they’d tried; the party would have imploded.

      The Democrats, with the exception of Obama, have long been unable to marshal emotion as a political weapon, advancing a bloodless rationalism that has never been a match for the tribal national passions of the right. Clinton’s rallies have been pale copies of the bloodthirsty mobs Trump has marshaled and whipped into ever-higher states of frenzy. In every debate, she won on points, but I fear she failed to offer a compelling, simple, and positive reason for her candidacy.

      This, and all of the rest of the Sullivan’s critiques of the Democrats and Hillary, basically boil down to him saying they aren’t speaking to the lizard hindbrains of the electorate and/or they’re not dumbing themselves down enough. Marshaling emotion as a political weapon is dangerous, volatile, and not to be trusted. The Republicans thought they could wield that sword safely. Look what has happened to them.

      Many people have long said that Sullivan is looking for a Daddy to worship at the feet of, just like all other conservatives; it is just his tastes are more refined than many others. I used to think that was true. I don’t so much anymore.

      What Sullivan has are a set of very, very specific political fetishes. He wants these fetishes catered to. He wants a leader who will jack him off precisely the way he likes to be brought to completion. Barack Obama got him there, because coincidentally Obama’s style perfectly aligned with these fetishes.

      Hillary Clinton does not get him there. So he whines and bitches about her, because she isn’t giving him that special feeling he wants. Policywise, she’s mostly not that distinguishable from Obama, but her style doesn’t give him a boner. You’ll notice that all his kvetching about her had nothing to do with substance and everything to do with image.

      I give Sullivan some credit for having a very clear vision of just how terrible Trump is. The man is capable of genuine political and policy insight at times. He’s just self-aware enough to not be considered a conservative in good standing (he’d be much happier if he were, he could just be their Token Gay and sup at the trough of wingnut welfare from now until infinity) but not self-aware enough to ever really break free of his ego.

    • Burning_River

      A political hurricane has arrived, as globalization has eroded the economic power of the white working classes, as the cultural left has overplayed its hand on social and racial issue

      Yes, that push for equality for all citizens is such overkill.

      • as globalization has eroded the economic power of the white working classes

        Heaven forbid that the Republican war on unions should share any of the blame.

        • BiloSagdiyev

          Or for NAFTA. Why, only Bill Clinton is to blame for that. Forever and ever. Nothing was done by the previous administration on that project, oh no.

      • Origami Isopod

        Well, except for white cis gay men. Their rights matter, per Sully.

    • No Longer Middle Aged Man

      And y’all call Sully overly emotional.

      He’s basically knocking Hillary for venial sins: that she’s Establishment (dispute that), doesn’t bring a lot of new people into the tent (see polls), petty scandals, caginess and deviousness (see her staffs own descriptions of her). It’s penny ante shit, some true, some smoke.

      Sullivan has always detested/despised (maybe hated?) both Bill and Hillary to an irrational extent, was guilty of publishing not only bell curve but also Betsy McCaughey’s utter lies about healthcare (Stephen Glass may have been more truthful-fact checking was clearly not a thing at NR under Sullivan). And while he apologized for the fifth column bit, it’s always in my mind that he can be not just unhinged but moralistically hateful when aroused.

      So there’s plenty to knock about Sullivan. But for this pretty mild criticism of Hillary–in the middle of a full on Sully style OTT denunciation of Trump–brings out this level of pearl clutching amen chorus, then I suspect that Karen24 and I are not the only ones who are just about shitting ourselves in fear of this coming Tuesday.

      Edit: My apologies to Karen24, I should not have interjected her into my rant.

      • so-in-so

        So, he’s TJ and King Goat?

      • IM

        And while he apologized for the fifth column bit,

        No, he never did that. He dishonestly redacted it and explained it away and danced around it, but he never apologized for calling half of the USA traitors.

        And his recent comment once again shows his CDS and his misogyny.

      • BiloSagdiyev

        (Stephen Glass may have been more truthful-fact checking was clearly not a thing at NR under Sullivan).

        Er, TNR? Not National Review? That he was at TNR and did all these shenanigans (as an Oakeshottean conservative, don’t you know) is an important chapter of the thick book of “even the liberal New Republic.”

      • Nick056

        These are all good points. It’s a barometer of the fine commenters here that Sullivan calls Clinton uninspiring and they lose their shit.

        I understand hating the guy for the way he writes about women (Palin, Sally Ride, Hillary Clinton) or the way he endorsed what is effectively “race realism” in Charles Murray, whose book Coming Apart is after all a pre-Trump example of demanding empathy for the white working class. These are inexcusable beliefs.

        But obsessing over the fifth column remark without noting his subsequent work on Bush and torture, or talking about his work against Hillarycare without noting he advocated passing the ACA, is what’s called stacking the deck. Sullivan is the guy who’s been on both sides of lots of significant issues. Only talking about the points when he was wrong is silly. And let’s not get into what it means to say he’s looking for a string daddy, or to make jokes about bottoming, etc. We don’t need to talk about it because he know just what it is: acceptable homophobia directed at a target who “deserves” it.

        • Origami Isopod

          Gosh, it’s almost as if Sullivan has a history that gives his writing baggage! Oh, wait, I forgot, we’re not “playing fair” if we don’t take conservatives at face value, and thus we’re being bad, mean liberals.

          • Nick056

            Yes, the thing you get from me citing Palin and Murray is that I’m oblivious to Sullivan’s baggage. For sure.

    • Cassiodorus

      I think I mentioned on another thread yesterday, but his recent appearance on Adam Harris’s podcast combined both of them being insufferable idiots about Clinton with very smart takes on Trump. Their stupidity on Clinton helped to amplify their Trump points in some point, since it made the level of danger posed clearer.

  • jim, some guy in iowa

    last two weeks, republicans in the next county have been running an ad with photos of all their candidates and polling places listed and the tagline is “SAVE AMERICA- Vote Republican”

  • so-in-so

    Hmmm, Dr. Kiumars Kiani is a suspiciously foreign sounding name… couldn’t be a “Real American”(TM).

    • ThrottleJockey

      Yeah he should’ve changed his name to KC Keane. Now that sounds like a real ‘Murrican from real ‘Merica.

    • Woodrowfan

      he’s Iranian, and signed an online petition asking the Shah-pretender to convert to Zoroastrianism, “the true Religion and Identity of the Aryan-Iranian peoples”

      • BiloSagdiyev

        Say, weren’t we just talking about the different uses of the word “Aryan” just the other day? You meet the most interesting people when hiding from the Nazis!

      • LeeEsq

        I think the Iranians were actually considered Aryan under the Nazi ideology.

        • Alfred Waddell

          Trolley Mctroll!

          • Frankly, I’d prefer Wilmington.

          • cpinva

            um, no they aren’t caucasion at all, if you’ve ever actually met any. they didn’t “turn” to Islam, they were conquered into it, as with so many other countries in the area. the only “idea” they have about jews, is what the imams see as being in the interests of themselves and Iran. religion only enters into it as a convenience. the average Iranian couldn’t give two shits less about the jews/Palestinians/etc.

            should do some actual research, before revealing yourself publicly as a low-rent troll. have some pancakes and syrup.

            • J. Otto Pohl

              Persians who under the Qajar’s made up only half the population of Persia are not Caucasian they are Aryan. But, a lot of Caucasians particularly Azeris as well as some Armenians do live in Iran and have Iranian citizenship. The position of the Azeris (Iran’s largest minority) is complicated, but I think one could say that they are Iranian in terms of their legal citizenship status and Caucasian in terms of ethnicity. Since there are twice as many Azeris in Iran as in Azerbaijan it is not correct to say no Iranians are Caucasian.

      • so-in-so

        I’m sure the Trumpistas will be all in favor of giving power to Zoroastrians if they where to win…

        Sorry Dr. Kiani, I doubt you’ll pass the Briebarter’s tests for very long.

        • J. Otto Pohl

          There are three new Zoroastrian temples in Sulaimani.

  • JonH

    From LinkedIn, Kiani describes himself as “CEO & Founder at The Asha Interdimensional Enterprises LLC”

    • BiloSagdiyev

      Interdimensional? Yeah, he probably just smokes weed and cuts paper and uses Scotch tape to make Mobius strips and stares at it.

      (I’m not saying it like it’s a bad thing.)

  • Julia Grey

    Whack. A. Loon.

    No really, whack him.

    .

    With a wet pillow.

  • creature

    That part of Ohio, has been, and continues to be, rife with nutcase politicians and a hotbed of the sickness that has begotten Trump. As to Traficante, he was a shining light to every greedhead and mobster in the Youngstown area. Good riddance to that guy.

  • Alfred Waddell

    Trolley Mctroll!

    • efgoldman

      CLEANUP ON AISLE ANTI-SEMITIC TROLL!

      • Alfred Waddell

        Trolley Mctroll!

    • Casey

      Nate Silver is Jewish, you fucking idiot. You can’t even do racism well. Pathetic.

    • YRUasking

      Bookmark it, liberals race-traitors!

  • (Don’t engage the Nazi. No platform.)

    Here’s a “great” article on why some random women are voting Trump:

    http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/11/9-women-on-why-theyre-still-voting-for-trump.html

    (Very) nut graf:

    I heard that he said something about groping women, and I’m thinking, Okay, No. 1, I think that’d be great. I like getting groped! I’m heterosexual. I’m a woman, and when a guy gropes me, I get groping on them! I grope them back. Groping is a healthy thing to do. When you’re heterosexual, you grope, okay? It’s a good thing. Try it. I wonder if Nixon groped Pat. Since December, I’ve done very little reading. I’ve heard little snippets here and there on the radio, and I don’t watch TV. I’m just going on what I have at the gut.

    Similar:

    I think it’s a disgrace to have Clinton as our first woman president. She does not represent women at all — or me, as a woman, at all. I’m sorry. Her husband is such scum. I’ve never heard about Trump cheating. I know he’s had multiple marriages — which, in today’s society, who doesn’t?

    “I’ve never heard about Trump cheating.” Willful ignorance.

    • (((Hogan)))

      Don’t engage the Nazi.

      Proto-Nazi, actually.

      • Musashi

        Either way, I hate Illinois nazis

    • BiloSagdiyev

      I heard that he said something about groping women, and I’m thinking, Okay, No. 1, I think that’d be great. I like getting groped! I’m heterosexual. I’m a woman, and when a guy gropes me, I get groping on them! I grope them back. Groping is a healthy thing to do. When you’re heterosexual, you grope, okay? It’s a good thing. Try it. I wonder if Nixon groped Pat. Since December, I’ve done very little reading. I’ve heard little snippets here and there on the radio, and I don’t watch TV. I’m just going on what I have at the gut.

      Wow. I tell you, liberals were right back in the 70’s when they were screaming about lead paint chips and leaded gasoline.(And earlier this year, with the leaded water.)

      (Unscrews air canister #373, screws on air canister #374, squeezes air horn button)

      HONK!

      PEOPLE! WE’RE TALKING ABOUT CONSENT!

  • FOARP

    You know, the “Plot Against America” sounds an awful lot like the “Plot Against The British People” supposedly ongoing right now.

    Say what you like about yesterday’s ruling (I think it was wrongly decided, on the basis of the UK government arguing its case badly) but the response from the media (even including the Daily Telegraph, which is supposed to be a quality news paper) labelling the High Court judges “Enemies of the People” is just plain crazy. I don’t know how this kind of conspiracy theorising, which in the post-9/11 era seemed to be such a dominion of the left, got to become so dominant on the right.

  • AreaMan

    Ok, I need to decloak to say that against better advice upthread I read that Sullivan piece. I am truly scared for the first time.

  • NickyNelson

    Here is a summary of the Reasonable Access Law; the book is not complete. The issues that we encountered getting this Ad run and the Sunday radio shows on 55KRC will be added to the book prior to its final release.

    WHY the FCC licensed Major Radio and Television Stations
    MUST run the ads of Federal Candidates

    The Reasonable Access Law is an essential informational and educational weapon in the arsenal of everyday Americans, but its existence needs to be widely known, and utilized on as wide a scale as possible. That is the purpose and mission of this booklet.

    This is a summary with the first 5 chapters included
    You can download it for free here: http://electionnightgatekeepers.com/whats-the-reasonable-access-law/

It is main inner container footer text