Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 23, 2016

Dems Stage Unflattering Stunt While Trump Spreads The Popular Message

With elections upcoming this fall, the Democrats under Obama decided that reducing their potential might be a good way forward. Ignoring all democratic rules and procedures they initiated a childish stunt to press for legislation that is generally unpopular and loathed by liberals and progressive:

A sit-in on the floor of the House of Representatives by Democratic members halted legislative action for nearly 11 hours Wednesday and appeared likely to continue into Thursday [..]

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., reconvened the House after 10 p.m. for a vote on an unrelated issue, but while the vote went forward, chaos reigned, with Democrats chanting in the well of the House in a demonstration unprecedented in modern times.
The Democrats seemed almost giddy with their revolt, singing “We Shall Overcome” and relishing their ability to bring proceedings to a halt.

At issue are more gun purchase restrictions. A few days after a mass murderer killed 50 people in Orlando with a semi-automatic gun, weapons purchase rules are again of public interest. To take this up may be good politics and makes general sense.

Semiautomatic weapons, like the military derived AR-15 used in Orlando, should be put under the National Rifle Act of 1934 just like other high powered weapons. That laws has clear rules on who can purchase, transfer and use machine guns or  destructive (military) devices. It requires a rather bothersome, lengthy registration of guns and their owners which is fine if one wants to keep such weapons out of the hands of spontaneous, emotionally-driven murderers.

But the Democrats did not want to make sense. They wanted to create a ruckus and decided to go for measures that even their own electorate is likely to reject:

Ms. Pelosi said her caucus was seeking votes on measures similar to two Democratic proposals that failed to advance in the Senate.

One of those sought to ban gun sales to people on the government’s terrorism watch list, while the second would expand and toughen background checks for gun buyers. Those two measures were defeated on Monday in the Senate, along with two Republican alternatives.

The government's terrorist watch lists and no-fly lists are arbitrary and of dubious value. Some 1,500,000 people are at least on one of these lists. At times even toddlers and Senators made the cut. Of the recently active "terrorists" in the U.S. some were on one of those list but could fly and proceed anyway. Others were, like the shooter in Orlando, not on any of them. These lists, and the (secret) criteria to be put on or taken down from them, do not make sense.

The Democrats should have killed the whole arbitrary list system long ago. At least one court found these to be unconstitutional. Instead they now demand to further replace due process with more arbitrary executive decisions within ill defined categories.

If the "terrorists" on those lists are so dangerous why allow them to have driver licenses? Could they not use cars to kill? Why not lock them up without further trial? The potential extensions are endless.

The stunt will probably end in a political disaster for Democratic candidates. If one wants to play the populist card one needs to take up popular issue. Bending to ever expansive demands of the executive, here President Obama, is not one of these.

Donald Trump's speech (transcript) on the stakes of the election made good points on globalization and trade. It was also full of lies and obfuscations. But that will, as the primaries have shown, not diminish his central message nor hurt him within his potential electorate. He hits the right buttons with a lot of people:

Our country lost its way when we stopped putting the American people first.

We got here because we switched from a policy of Americanism – focusing on what’s good for America’s middle class – to a policy of globalism, focusing on how to make money for large corporations who can move their wealth and workers to foreign countries all to the detriment of the American worker and the American economy.

We reward companies for offshoring, and we punish companies for doing business in America and keeping our workers employed.

This is not a rising tide that lifts all boats.

This is a wave of globalization that wipes out our middle class and our jobs.

Those words will ring with many people.

Trump now needs money for the general election. He sold out to hard-line Zionist donors. Within an otherwise isolationist foreign policy view he claimed that "Thanks to Hillary Clinton, Iran is now [...] on the road to nuclear weapons." Neither was Clinton much involved in the nuclear agreement with Iran, nor is Iran on such a road. But Trump will rake in millions from Adelson and other arch-Zionists for making these claims.

His anti-globalization shtick will sell well in fly-over country and with marginalized workers. My hunch is that the media, overwhelmingly in Clinton's favor, will underestimate his pull until the day he wins the election.

Posted by b on June 23, 2016 at 8:06 UTC | Permalink


Yep. The piece linked by ProPeace | Jun 22, 2016 8:36:11 PM | 35 in the Open Thread
nailed every toe of the Brexit kick in the teeth, for Freedom & Mockracy, to the floor.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 23 2016 8:42 utc | 1

Oops - first comment in the wrong thread. The Dotage has landed..

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 23 2016 8:48 utc | 2

Trump.. "Her decisions spread death, destruction and terrorism everywhere she touched," Mr Trump said, accusing Mrs Clinton of being a "world-class liar". And
"Hillary Clinton may be the most corrupt person ever to seek the presidency of the United States," he said, accusing her of having run the State Department "like her own personal hedge fund".
Who could disagree with any of that, Clinton has so many faults to attack it is hard to see her winning.

Posted by: harrylaw | Jun 23 2016 9:41 utc | 3

b, 'If one wants to play the populist card one needs to take up popular issue.'

A measure of just how out of touch with Americans democrats are ... They got where they are

because they switched from a policy of Americanism – focusing on what’s good for America’s middle class – to a policy of globalism, focusing on how to make money for large corporations who can move their wealth and workers to foreign countries all to the detriment of the American worker and the American economy.'

The Republicrat is eating their lunch.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 23 2016 10:24 utc | 4

Whatever will happen, the US will end up with a president for whom millions have been spent to explain to citizens how bad s/he is as a person.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2016 10:56 utc | 5

The problem is that most liberals and progressives will not oppose this bill. The watchlist part of the bill is not even mentioned in the many hours of speeches on the House floor. Instead they make very loud, general, emotional arguments about all the people killed by gun violence. Everyone agrees that the violence is horrible.

The Dems are using phrases like "common sense gun laws" and not mentioning that the terrorist watch list is involved. It's deceptive and will almost certainly draw in a vast majority of liberals and progressives who think it's better than nothing.

Other more reasonable alternatives that require a legal case to be made for restricting someone's ability to buy guns are not even on the table. I've watched the speeches on the House floor but haven't watched the media coverage but I suspect they have deleted any discussion about watchlists too.

Posted by: Joanne Leon | Jun 23 2016 11:35 utc | 6

People have to register their cars, why not their guns? The person to whom a gun is registered to be held personally responsible for the gun and the uses to which it is put. Every gun manufactured or imported into the US is registered to ... the manufacturer or importer, in the first instance. The registration changes each time the gun changes hands. Someone, some human being, is to be personally responsible for each gun in the country. Unlike a car, everyone registering a gun must be required to be licensed to use it. To prove proficiency. And to demonstrate a clean record, at the very least.

I'm sure that existing laws are crafted by loophole. Their aim is to keep sales up for the NRA members who make a - literal - killing on the turnover of guns. There's no magic about guns. The 'romance' that is extolled is a smokescreen to cover up and maintain an unregulated industry and is keeping them fat while killing us all, year in and year out. And so often, it seems, the meekest and most defenseless among us.

We have no 'well-regulated militias'. We have thousands, tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of broken people, armed to the teeth. Too many the wards of the CIA. Or able just to pick up a gun - the FBI might even give 'em one, along with a wacko plan for what to do with it.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 23 2016 12:13 utc | 7

A few days after a mass murderer killed 50 people in Orlando with a semi-automatic gun

Very doubtful.

Posted by: RudyM | Jun 23 2016 12:17 utc | 8

According to b, Donald Trump gets billions of dollars of free publicity, instead of being ignored like Bernie Sanders, because the media is overwhelmingly in favor of Clinton, who has every moronic right wing BS charge endlessly repeated...and even left wing critique of Clinton gets some play. Yes we all know how much PR left wing points of view get.

A truly significant part of the rulers favor Trump, including many of the owners of mainstream media, maybe a majority, while a significant part of the rulers, including members of the mainstream media, the military, the so-called "intelligence" community as well as the garden variety right wing nut are bitter opponents of the Clintons. If Hilary was to get elected, she'd be impeached, just like Bill. Except just like Bill, it wouldn't be for what she was really guilty of, but BS.

Any analysis that forgets Trump is one of the owners, and his campaign against politics, is a campaign against politicians who use votes to oppress poor downtrodden businessmen (sic!) and imagines all the powers that be are for Clinton and savaging Our Hero Trump?
It's a swindle.

Posted by: s | Jun 23 2016 12:54 utc | 9

@9 s, 'It's a swindle'

I agree. Write them in! (pdf). It's a one-pager.

Posted by: jfl | Jun 23 2016 13:43 utc | 10

Posted by: s | Jun 23, 2016 8:54:21 AM | 9

It is driven by the business interests of the media. Campaigns get money to spend on advertisements in friendly and unfriendly media, and media get access to politicians for soft interviews. Sanders was covered quite well considering what an outsider he was. And he had money to spend on advertisement. He will be struggling for attention now the democratic race is over.
For the media a race that is decided is bad, a close exciting race is good. To report on policy is boring, but personal stories are good. Negative stuff gets more clicks than positive reporting.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2016 13:55 utc | 11

The debate, position-taking, and campaigning, have been the absolute pits, on both sides. Natch, I only followed it from far off, in the MSM etc. The comments on various sites (mostly afaik under 35s) were apalling in their arguments, almost every ‘fact’ or ‘consequence’ was…wrong.

With a little further thought it looks like the organisation of what the Swiss (who know more about voting than any ppl on earth) call a provoked coin-toss vote. Accomplished by expelling a lot of hot air, contradictory arguments, fake posturing, etc. You study the polls (slice and dice) and appeal to certain sections, get ppl confused about their original opinion, etc. Works better for ‘major’ complex issues than for minor, trivial or narrow ones. (The last coin-toss in CH was about the EU and immigration.)

Imho smarter, more focussed campaigning would have served the PTB (Remain) in first place; I can think of several arguments or counter-Brexit arguments they ignored (as visible in MSM etc.) Empty scare-mongering, fact-bending, rubbish predictions, etc. Like - it was *supposed* to be a coin toss, close to 50-50.

Always thought that *Leave* could not win even on the ‘true’ votes. (Inertia, status quo..) see also — Oui at 1, T bear at 8, others..

Have read that in any case the vote is not binding, extra steps by Parliament (and the Queen?) must be taken to validate it, these may fail. I’m not familiar with GB referenda laws at all, when what was the last one? How does it work? Any Brits to chip in?

Society of the Spectacle (Guy Debord) and Ersatz Democracy.

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 23 2016 14:23 utc | 12

sorry ! I posted on the wrong thread, this was for the brexit thread, apologies...i will re-post it in proper place..

Posted by: Noirette | Jun 23 2016 14:31 utc | 13

9,10;Can I imbibe the drugs you are on,drugs of ridiculousness as reality?
The MSM s coverage of Trump has been one of character and policy assassination,from every quarter.Your conspiracy theory is about as rational as invading Iraq.You hate Trump,ok we get it,but who are you gonna call the bitch from hell,the one standing on the ice cube in a sea of piss from her own stinking legacy?
The Iran deal really isn't a vote getting issue here,as only the Zionists are concerned about it,and Trump,parlaying that angle,is probably only throwing a sop to the Zionists as peace feeler,but it won't work,as his speech yesterday is anathema to these global criminals.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 23 2016 14:40 utc | 14

9;They are in the HBs corner totally this election,any animus towards the clintons is for bent dicks attempt to make peace in Palestine,a most brazen attempt at ending the Israeli expansion project,and the MSM attacked him with the blue dress.
Since then both pos have totally followed the ziotrain from hell.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 23 2016 14:43 utc | 15

After a few weeks on interminable uninterrupted by "presumptive nominee" status, it appears that the Democratic party -- with shameless lack of logic and principles -- is engaging in (shameless) political theater of the meaningless remember-better-days variety ... and the (shameless) cheerleaders are exhorting the fans to cheer wildly and (shamelessly and thoughtlessly) many are obediently doing just that.

This should alienate anyone with half a brain wrt no-fly-lists, FBI terror lists, and FBI entrapment strategies ... and better thought-out proposals not receiving sit-down-strike advocacy. The relationship between "legal guns availability" and "violence" or incidence of mass shooting is (cough) tenuous.
What's very interesting is how "liberal" supporting this no-fly/no-buy list based "control" cannot see the real Islamophobia and gross civil liberty violations they are endorsing the use of "terror lists" for anything.
The "party" is doubly down pandering to the be-very-afraid rights-for-security mantra

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jun 23 2016 15:13 utc | 16

Apparently the US House of Representatives Democrats believe they override the US Constitution and Bill of Rights by staging a public show of dissent.

Meanwhile in Chiraq (City of Chicago) a democratic administration gives us a kill rate that exceeds the US deaths in Afghanistan ...

Fathers Day weekend (June 18th & 19th) 13 dead 42 wounded. Year to date "So far this year, about 1,800 people have been shot across the city and more than 200 of those wounded have died of their wounds, according to records kept by the Chicago Tribune."

Posted by: ALberto | Jun 23 2016 15:21 utc | 17

The Democrats conventionally blame the "necessity" of pandering to the republican/conservatives for their long-standing inaction on issues like gun control ... but as keeps being mentioned, they allowed the assault weapons ban to expire without a fight (probably **not** because it also was just window-dressing, ineffective and paradoxically raised the popularity of the "banned" weapon type)

Democratic party duplicity (deliberate, strategic) even on "traditional" issues hopefully will sink in. Interesting article over at Jacobin that challenges the now legendary noble sacrifice of control of the South "for a generation" by the "champions of the civil rights movement" due to racism. Apparently Southern white working class already felt sold-out by the Democrats abandoning them in favor of anti-union fat cats who destroyed not only white unions, but also black unions and integrated unions. On top of the recent public re-evaluation of "the Bill Clinton legacy" a "disturbing" picture emerges.

Also currently relevant as non-union "reindustrialization" seems to favor the south (solid red states).

Posted by: Susan Sunflower | Jun 23 2016 15:42 utc | 18

Who wrote this article and what, exactly, is their point? The author refers to Trump's "anti-globalist shtick", a seemingly durogatory jab. So is Moon of Alabama now pro-globalist, meaning you support transnational corporate interests? And you fault Trump in particular for accepting Zionist funding. Have you read Bernie Sanders' AIPAC speech? If anyone is pro-Zionist, it is Bernie. But this you failed to mention. And exactly which "lies" of Trump's are you referring to? Are you now defending Hillary Clinton?

No wonder the author's name is nowhere to be found. What a shameful article!

Trump's speech was excellent. See transcript at:

Posted by: Karl Pomeroy | Jun 23 2016 16:57 utc | 19

I disagree. I think it sends a message that the Dems give a fuck about what is happening in America for a change and are willing to do something forceful about it. The "childish" slur is a republican meme, which effective enough as propaganda will not spread beyond those inclined to vote straight elephant ticket to begin with.
All the more reason to try and get those 51 State officials fired ASAP, cause that old broad is going to the oval office.

Posted by: Northern Observer | Jun 23 2016 17:53 utc | 20

The issue has many facets, trying to get away from that will get us nowhere. We the American People must see it all for what it truly is. The revolution began many generations ago. Each generation has had to contend with the corruption from the past as well what he/she sees in their time. Problem's that looked like they were solved in earlier times were not solved But, have been allowed to fester. And, for better or worse this Nation IS tearing itself apart. I don't much care for Lincoln But, he did make a very astute observation. "A house divided will surely fall". The road we are on is a road that should never be traveled. I have no answers, And, I do not see a way back either. We in our time may again see a new delay for the inevitable. I don't have the ability to see the future. But as I have heard many times "The past is prologue". The older I become the more I begin to understand that.
The only thing I will say. Is that not everyone who says they are your friend is your friend. But, that is a responsibility for us to figure out.
Sun Tzu
Know your enemy as you know yourself.
May we understand and see the time when WE too may be able to understand and proclaim that "Today is a good day to die".
Find Peace and Solace.


Posted by: noman | Jun 23 2016 18:16 utc | 21

Trump Speech June 22, 2016. 42 minutes. Very interesting.

Posted by: ALberto | Jun 23 2016 18:38 utc | 22

Scotland - Protest Trumps visit by flying Mexican flag. Calling Trump racist ...

1. Mexican is not a race.
2. This coordinated attack illustrates the lengths to which the PTB will go to further their agendas.
3. PTB/MSM desperation on the cusp of madness.

Posted by: ALberto | Jun 23 2016 18:45 utc | 23

The civilian AR-15 rifle is not a machine gun. That is, it is not capable of fully-automatic fire (thus not subject to the 1934 machine gun act) and it is not high-powered.

It is also, for those who may be confused, not an assault rifle.

By definition no semi-automatic weapon is an "assault" rifle, despite all the incorrect "definitions" that are floating around all over the web.

Assault rifles are designed for the military, to military specifications. They are: Any short-barreled, low-to-medium power, detachable magazine fed rifle with full auto and select-fire capability. ("Select-fire" means, usually, the ability to toggle between full-auto and three-round burst fire.)

Anyone is of course free to take any position they care to on any type of weapon, but I think that useful discussion is impossible where terms and definitions are "flexible" and so much mis-labeling is going on.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Jun 23 2016 19:00 utc | 24

The purpose of the second amendment was for the people to have at least equal weaponry as the government military to prevent tyrannical government. That's why Americans' right is to ARMS, not rifles and pistols. At the time ARMS described war weaponry.
So how does ever more restrictive anti ARMS for the people "put the American people first?" Especially now with every kind of military machinery scattered throughout the nation, just waiting to round up civilians for the empty FEMA camps.
It gets ever more infuriating when sites such as this treat every last obvious false flag, with no proof of ANYTHING as though it was an actual happening as lied by the media and is now chiseled in stone with NO REAL INVESTIGATION WHATSOEVER BY ANYONE.

Posted by: Tony B. | Jun 23 2016 19:21 utc | 25

So the despicable Trump, telling some truths - of what he himself is endlessly guilty of, and will still be guilty of as potential president - will betray everything he says he believes in for the power, money, and a cave-in to the Pentagon, CIA and other "deep state" members.

On the tactics side, Trump should immediately demand 1 on 1 debates against Hillary, and as many debates as possible, to attack Hillary as many times as possible since the media refuses to convey the better parts of his message. And that will require people watching it live rather than the rigged pro-Hitlary editing that will come later as a "news" recap or "commentary".

Compare trumps attack on Hillary to what Bernie Sanders never did. Sanders is truly a coward. Sanders effectively admitted this himself, that he always cares more about the defence of the grotesquely evil Democratic party then any of his fake self professed "principles".

Posted by: tom | Jun 23 2016 19:25 utc | 26

In the West, people are made to vote until the desired outcome is achieved.. frankly speaking though, I don't think a vote for in or out will change much.

The voting is just an outlet to make people feel theire opinion matters but as b's pointed out, the powers that be have a vested interest in UK staing within the EU so won't be surprised if the remain camp wins. They've invested so much in this porject to simply watch it destroyed by some digruntled peasants.

Welcome to democracy!!! :)

Posted by: Zico | Jun 23 2016 19:26 utc | 27

Damn, wrong thread.. Please ignore my post..

Posted by: Zico | Jun 23 2016 19:28 utc | 28

@20 noman.. good post.. thanks

@22 alberto... i didn't look at the link, but trump was responsible for a large golf course in scotland that pissed off a lot of ordinary scottish folks... it had to do with his railroading tactics and more... might be why they are protesting...

Posted by: james | Jun 23 2016 19:44 utc | 29


Let me guess. You think it was a false flag to take our guns away, right?


Gibberish. The AR-15 is an M-16 (or rather, it's the other way around). Just because the full-auto has been taken out doesn't change the fact that it is an assault rifle.

Anyway, the shooter used a Sig Sauer MCX, not an AR-15. This doesn't really change anything; it's also an assault rifle.

Posted by: Calathai | Jun 23 2016 21:21 utc | 30

@29 Calathai,

Are you saying that absolutely zero people were killed by friendly fire? Are you saying that the terminology "assault rifle" has any useful meaning outside of identifying which gunmakers didn't give enough to the Democratic Party Inc. last cycle?

Posted by: Jonathan | Jun 23 2016 22:00 utc | 31

jfl@7 says "We have no 'well-regulated militias'. We have thousands, tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of broken people, armed to the teeth. Too many the wards of the CIA. Or able just to pick up a gun - the FBI might even give 'em one, along with a wacko plan for what to do with it."

We have no well-regulated militias due to a series of federal laws dating from the Militia Act of 1903 by which state militias have been federalized and subject to co-option by and activation in the US federal military. Further, though states are allowed to have militias that are not subject to co-option by and activation in the US federal military, those in those state militias are subject to conscription in the US federal military. Prior to 1903 well-regulated state militias were the rule.

And who are these "hundreds of thousands of broken people" he speaks of? Who broke them? How are they broken? I rather prefer the word "citizens"! If they are broken, I suggest that it has been the policies of the US government that broke them.

Assuming, arguendo, that he is right, what's the point of gun laws if these broken people, er, citizens, can get them from the FBI.

I rather think his "broken people" are citizens who have been broken by the government's abandonment of them, a government dedicated to its own pleasures and the pleasures of those who fund it through the manifold instruments of bribery.

Posted by: Macon Richardson | Jun 24 2016 0:25 utc | 32

Were the White Helmets in Orlando? Because there's staged rescues of wounded people being carried by civilians. Right past the camera... TOWARDS the club.

Posted by: Colinjames | Jun 24 2016 1:25 utc | 33

"Just because the full-auto has been taken out doesn't change the fact that it is an assault rifle."

You'd have one hell of a time convincing the military of that. By their definition an assault rifle must be full-auto.

The big problem here is, if everyone thinks it's a good idea to just make up their own definitions for everything, no one will be able to understand anything that anyone else says.

Just because you say that a squirt-gun that squirts out pink pansies is an "assault rifle," that doesn't make it an assault rifle.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Jun 24 2016 1:50 utc | 34


Assault rifle very much does have a meaning. Assault WEAPON is the meaningless made-up term that doesn't mean anything. Get it straight.


Funny, since the M16A2 expressly had the full-auto removed because soldiers in Vietnam wouldn't stop panicking and emptying their entire magazines in one pull of the trigger. Guess it isn't an assault rifle (that last bit was sarcasm).

And what, exactly, would you call these things? They're not battle rifles, they're certainly not DMRs.

Posted by: Calathai | Jun 24 2016 2:34 utc | 35

20;The demoncrats who have let every trade steal,globalization destruction,and the war of terror destroy our economy and cohesion now play the victim ,as they take away more of our freedoms,and destroy our Constitution,all for Zion,all for divide and conquer,and the worst politician in American history,HRC.

Posted by: dahoit | Jun 24 2016 13:30 utc | 36

pomeroy @19: you need some news from planet Earth (the third one from the local star, if you have problems locating it). "Sanders AIPAC speech" was not given in front of AIPAC audience but in Utah, during a meeting with his supporters. There was a consensus that AIPAC attendees would shout him down (I think he would be assaulted as well), so he wisely gave it two thousand miles away. By the way of contrast, Trump went full pander to AIPAC-ers and attacked Obama and Clinton as insufficiently supporting TODiTMA (the only democracy in the Middle East).

From Huffington Post:

Checking off the boxes for his hawkish pro-Israel audience, Trump slammed the United Nations, the Iran nuclear deal, and the “culture of hatred” in Palestinian society. But he reserved his characteristic sneer for Obama and extended it to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, his likely opponent as the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

“You see, what President Obama gets wrong about deal-making is that he constantly applies pressure to our friends and rewards our enemies,” he said, roping in Clinton, whom he described as “a total disaster, by the way.”

“She and President Obama have treated Israel very, very badly,” he continued, to more cheers and applause.


One can summarize Trump's "anti-globalism" positions as readiness to break all the treaties except support for Israel. He fights Establishment's "American exceptionalism" with hyper-exceptionalism. In both cases, "except Israel", remind me the timeless lyrics of Mikado:

MIK.: In a fatherly kind of way
I govern each tribe and sect,
All cheerfully own my sway

KAT. : Except his daughter-in-law elect!
As tough as a bone,
With a will of her own,
Is his daughter-in-law elect.

MIK. : My nature is love and light
My freedom from all defect

KAT. : Is insignificant quite.
Compared with his daughter-in-law elect!
Bow Bow
To his daughter-in-law elect.

To his daughter-in-law elect.

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Jun 24 2016 14:09 utc | 37

The comments to this entry are closed.