May 15, 2017

The edited NYT's "Duopoly Guide to Presidential Behavior"

The duopoly, face to face on many issues
The New York Times editorial board just published its "The Republican's Guide to Presidential Behavior."

In the desire for true bipartisan honesty — or rather, true anti-duopoly honesty — I've edited it, with italics about similar behavior by Bill Clinton and/or Barack Obama, and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, in cases where such applies.

Or, in the case of the Times' "Putin Did It" bullshit, simply written in "bullshit."

So, herewith, the Congressional Republican’s Guide to Presidential Behavior.
If you are the president, you may freely:
• attack private citizens on Twitter
Didn't Bill, and Hillary, do this pre-Twitter? The "vast right-wing conspiracy" was a mix of truth and bullshit, esp. since Hillary's never ever explained her cattle future killings.
• refuse to take responsibility for military actions gone awry
Killing civilians, and not calling them "civilians," but "collateral damage," as Obama did, works well.
• accuse a former president, without evidence, of an impeachable offense
Or accuse a former president's Veep or others of an impeachable offense, then as president, for the first of a jillion times, say, "I'm looking forward now."
• employ top aides with financial and other connections to a hostile foreign power
BULLSHIT.
• accept foreign payments to your businesses, in possible violation of the Constitution
Al Gore as Clinton's Veep, for the 1996 re-election campaign. Remember the Chinese donor solicitations on official government property? The NYT has the top Google search story on "Frank Giustra" + "uranium" + "Clinton Foundation." And Ken Silverstein has yet more on presidential-level Dems feeding at the the foreign capitalism hog trough.
• occupy the White House with the help of a hostile foreign power
BULLSHIT.
• intimidate congressional witnesses
NOT a "threat" or "intimidation" in normal use of the word. Besides, Sally Yates gets a separate ding for advising Obama not to commute Leonard Peltier's prison time. Strange that the name "Leonard Peltier" never even gets mentioned by the NYT.
• allow White House staff members to use their personal email for government business
Hillary's private email server.
• use an unsecured personal cellphone
Obama had to be "nudged" off his BlackBerry.
• criticize specific businesses for dropping your family members’ products
• review and discuss highly sensitive intelligence in a restaurant, and allow the Army officer carrying the “nuclear football” to be photographed and identified by name
Going back far longer, but JFK ditching the nuclear football to fuck bimbos.
• obstruct justice
Bill Clinton and "is." Clinton asking Monica Lewinsky to perjure herself. Barack Obama and refusal to pursue war crimes cases, if not a legal definition of "obstruction of justice," an ethical one.
• hire relatives for key White House posts, and let them meet with foreign officials and engage in business at the same time
Hillary Clinton running Bill's Hillarycare plan.
• collude with members of Congress to try to shut down investigations of you and your associates
Clinton did not, that I know of, do this with members of Congress, but did with WH staff.
• repeat untruths
Clinton, many a time. Remember how members of your own op-ed board loathed the start of his administration? Obama, repeating half-truths many a time on drone strikes, as well as full untruths at other times, like the killing of Anwar al-Awlaki.
• lie
See immediately above.
If you’re a Republican legislator, stick this list on the fridge and give it a quick read the next time you get upset at a president.
If you're tired of the duopoly, and the MSM's bullshit, stick this modified list on your refrigerator.


Counterpunch has yet more on Obama's and Clinton's (or Clintons') behavior, but notes that they had a certain liberal style. A je nais se quois? That allowed them to get away with Republican policy actions.

Things like this are why intelligent, independent-minded people who know politics laughed at the Times' aggressive post-election circulation drive and related news and opinion, long before its hiring of Bret Stephens gave us reason to laugh more and to say Eff You at the same time.

No comments: