During Senator Joe McCarthy’s communist witch hunts in the 1950s, he decided to go after the U.S. Army. The army hired Joseph Welch as its lawyer to make its case during what is known as the Army-McCarthy hearings. When McCarthy claimed one of Welch’s attorneys was connected to a Communist group, Welch responded, “Have you no sense of decency?”
Welch’s question could be asked just as appropriately of Donald Trump. His recent attacks on Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the Gold Star parents whose son, Army Captain Humayun Khan, died in Iraq, contain a ghostly echo of McCarthy’s attacks on the military. The echo grows louder when we hear more of what Welch said to McCarthy.
“Until this moment, Senator, I think I never really gauged your cruelty or your recklessness. . . . Let us not assassinate this lad further, senator. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency?”
Change “Senator” to “Trump,” change “this lad” to “the Khan family,” and the words fit Trump like a glove.
Another possible echo: Welch’s statement marked the beginning of the end of Joe McCarthy’s popularity and his power. We’re at a moment when the same thing may be happening to Donald Trump.
Actually, I wouldn’t bother asking Trump, “Have you no sense of decency?” No point. He’d just blather on about how he’s probably the most decent man you’ve ever met, how his decency built buildings and hired workers and helped make America great.
But I would love to ask every Republican with power and influence in the party — every elected official and every unelected member in the top ranks of the party — have you no sense of decency? How can you continue to further Trump’s candidacy, either with outright endorsements or by criticizing specific things he says while continuing to support him? Do you really believe this man, who deserves to have his vast collection of emotional and psychological weaknesses written up in a psychiatric journal, is fit to be President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the largest and most powerful armed force in the world?
I have no doubt leaders of the Republican Party have bitten their nails to the quick and are watching for Trump’s next outrage with knotted stomachs. I’m sure as I write this, they’re asking themselves, “How far is too far?” The clear answer is, Trump has been going too far for far too long, while too many Republicans have held their noses and tried to tolerate his outrages for the sake of the party. If they have any sense of decency, if they put country above party, they must do everything in their power to make sure Trump is not elected president, and try to salvage what’s left of their diminishing self respect before it’s too late.
A Preemptive False-Equivalency Note: To anyone who plans to write an “Oh yeah, what about Hillary?” comment: No, it’s not the same thing. Trump’s unfitness for office is a thing unto itself, unlike anything I’ve seen in a presidential candidate of a major party in my lifetime.
This article appears in Jul 28 – Aug 3, 2016.
David, get your head out of the sand. Had you known the truth about Kennedy or LBJ you would have said the same thing. Selling access to America by Hillary through her Clinton Foundation scam?
How many Americans did Trump kill in Libya running guns to ISIS?
A Preemptive False-Equivalency Note: To anyone who plans to write an “Oh yeah, what about Trump?” comment: No, it’s not the same thing. Hillary’s unfitness for office is a thing unto itself, unlike anything I’ve seen in a presidential candidate of a major party in my lifetime.
Accept for the community organizer Barrack Obama.
It’s except, not accept. But C for effort. Hear that sound? It’s the wheels coming off. Your man is toast. Can’t run a company. Can’t run a campaign. Can’t run anything except his mouth.
What makes this election so unsettling is that both so-called major parties have let the American people down for so long that the anger and disgust – the lack of decency – have left voters ready to do anything to bring about change, up to an including the nomination and election of one of two of the most well-documented liars to ever run for the office of president.
sgsmith:
Yep, it’s “Choose between a liar and a liar-who-is-also-a-madman, and if you don’t vote against your principles to choose the former, you will be responsible for letting the latter get in.” This piece by Safier is one more example of the genre of persuasion-pieces the Democratic party is using to try to promote Clinton’s unpopular candidacy. “You may not like her or believe, given her ties to Wall Street, that she is capable of doing the right things, but for God’s sake look at her opponent.” (Cf. Safier’s closing remark in the post, “A Preemptive False-Equivalency Note: To anyone who plans to write an “Oh yeah, what about Hillary?” comment: No, it’s not the same thing. Trump’s unfitness for office is a thing unto itself, unlike anything I’ve seen in a presidential candidate of a major party in my lifetime.)
At some point people have to start supporting a third party option. The e-mails leaked right before the Democratic National Convention revealed what was already clear to those paying attention and reading the transparently manipulative New York Times “coverage” of the Clinton and Sanders campaigns during the months leading up to the convention: the Democratic party and its designated candidates will actively work against candidates who don’t represent establishment interests. It’s as true locally as it is nationally. Look at Feinman vs. LaWall or any candidate running on the Democratic ticket for the TUSD Board vs. the candidates selected by the Grijalva network.
The “Democratic” party needs to change its name; it does not in any meaningful way support what we can reasonable assume the word “democratic” should mean: the PEOPLE having a voice in the selection of leadership.
A third party presidential candidate won’t win right away, but if we keep listening to the people who say we’re throwing away our votes when we vote for someone we can in good conscience support, we’ll never get to the point where a third party WILL win at some point in the future.
To Third Party,
But, we have a real problem in THIS election. You are just trying to avoid making a real decision that is here and now. It’s too late to build a viable third party for THIS election.
After THIS election is the time to START building a third party for coming elections.
Joe McCarthy and his secret lists remind me a lot of the the current crop of politicians who want to use a secret no-fly list to ban people from purchasing or owning a firearm.
And no, it is not a false equivalency.
And, the two parties have created the mess they are in. Gary Johnson has my vote, and my political contributions.
Fred,
I understand your point, but some of us are looking at how we got to the place where these two candidates were put forward, as well as what the bad choice presented to us in the general election is. The process and the outcome are, as in all things, directly related.
The Democratic party actively undermined a candidate who had massive popular support. Super delegates, primaries in various states in which independents could not vote, the DNC using its media connections to disparage and undermine Sanders. It was a rigged game from start to finish. And now they expect us to get behind their Wall-Street-bought-and-purchased candidate because her opponent is frightening. Perhaps they should have allowed a fair primary process that would have enabled the people to decide whom they wanted to run against Trump. Then they wouldn’t have the problems they are having rallying their base. The base will rally behind a candidate selected by a fair process, even when the candidate they favor did not win. It will not rally behind “We screwed you in the primary, but put that behind you now and vote for this manipulative, dishonest candidate because the alternative is even worse.”
The party needs to understand that if they do not support proper democratic process, they lose their legitimacy and the strength they might have been able to marshall in opposing a figure like Trump. A third party that can oppose these people both on process and on outcomes is desperately needed, and the time to start building it should have been yesterday, but today will have to do. After November 2016 is not an option.
Voting for Jill Stein.
I guess not when decency is defined as paying $400M in ransom money to Iran, a state sponsor of terror. Just think of the 3AM bank withdrawls our present directed, so that he could fly a Swiss plane to Iran with $400M in currency on pallets
Thank you Wall St Journal for actually reporting news.
Trump is now defending himself by claiming, ad nauseum, that he was “viciously attacked” by Khan and was only defending himself… by saying that Khan had “no right” to speak about him. That’s so un-American I can’t believe Trump is even an American. I want to see his birth certificate. Maybe he was born in a Willy Wonka factory overseas somewhere? I don’t know, I’m only asking the question…
Have You No Sense of Decency?
THE SHAME IS UPON YOU SAFIER, that you have lived so long and stuck at such a level of ignorance, or is it arrested development?
MCCARTHY WAS A PATRIOT purging communist enemies from our country, or did you not know that?
I PERSONALLY was involved in a small way in developing missile systems to destroy Communist Russia – the communist treat WAS REAL.
TODAY THE MUSLIM THREAT is even greater than the communists were then, they are actual doing a lot of killing, or haven’t you noticed?
AT LEAST THE COMMUNISTS VALUED LIFE, so mutual destruction was not an option, not so with Muslims.
MUSLIMS DO NOT VALUE HUMAN LIFE, nor does their religion permit dente.
TELL ME SAFIER why Trump champions purging these barbarian’s, whose religion command the destruction of the US ….
………… LACKS A SENSE OF DECENCY???
…….. What la la land are you living in???????
TELL ME SAFIER, what are you? A communist? Radical Left? Muslim Sympathizer? Or simply a disconnected wordsmith spewing meaningless words.
Just saw on TV that Republicans are now planning an “intervention” to “cure” the nation of Donald Trump. We’ll see what sticks. I assume that the perpetrators of this intervention would exclude the many lifelong, savvy, successful, conservative GOP stalwarts in policy-making, elections and business who now say that they WILL VOTE for Hillary Clinton. Like, for example, Brent Skowcroft, Philip Klein, Henry Paulson, Richard Armitage, Meg Whitman, Richard Hanna, Col. Peter Mansoor, Dan Akerson, Michael Bloomburg, Sally Bradshaw, Marc Andreesen, Larry Pressler, Robert Smith (NY), Charles Fried, Max Boot, et. al. —– That bus is starting to fill up.
Ciro Verde – you sound like you hate America and what it stands for. Why?
Peabo, what do you think it stands for? Because somebody doesn’t match your opinions does not make them a hater. I’m surprised you didn’t trot out racist, or homophobe. Other lefties do it, when they can’t defend their thinking.
Thinking_Allowed:
Do you think that list of Republicans voting for Hillary should boost confidence in her and / or undermine confidence in Trump? I’m not sure I get your point.
Hank Paulson? Good God. If anyone needed confirmation that a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for Goldman-Sachs and Wall Street affiliated groups running our country and being allowed to continue exploiting the middle class by turning them into an army of educated servants indentured to the wealth interests, a Paulson endorsement relieves whatever doubt we might have had. Paulson was one of the chief architects / proponents for bailing out the banks while leaving citizens encumbered with the debt the banking system created through their malfeasant practices. Here’s an account with highlights from one of the more dramatic scenes in negotiating that deal, from UK’s The Guardian:
“It was, according to accounts filtering out of the White House, an extraordinary scene. Hank Paulson, the US treasury secretary and a man with a personal fortune estimated at $700m (£380m), had got down on one knee before the most powerful woman in Congress, Nancy Pelosi, and begged her to save his plan to rescue Wall Street. Please don’t blow up this deal, Paulson pleaded. Pelosi tried to keep it light. “It’s not me blowing this up. It’s the Republicans,” she told him. Paulson sighed. “I know,” he said. The exchange – and those in the room said Paulson was only half joking – took place moments after a White House meeting that was supposed to endorse a $700bn bailout ended in acrimony.”
And Paulson is voting for Hillary. Not surprised. What does surprise me is how many people don’t pay enough attention to what goes on in this country not to be hoodwinked by the BS the vested financial interests are promoting. Read this editorial in The Progressive, which gives some good information but draws the wrong conclusions, and the comment stream following it:
http://www.progressive.org/news/2016/07/188885/bernie-and-hillary-delegates-forge-uneasy-peace-now-what
The author of the editorial describes the manipulation on the floor at the convention and then says progressives should work within the Democratic party to transform it. Here are a couple of highlights from the comment stream: “Taking over the Democratic Party? That’s like wanting to be infected with cancer to find a cure!” “You’ve just given more reasons to never vote for this fraudulent pseudo-progressive in the $12K Armani clothes. The convention’s phoniness is a perfect metaphor for Clinton, particularly when you add in the war-mongering general, the repression of opposing viewpoints, the orchestrated emotions, the canned music. I’ll NEVER be ready for the likes of this neoliberal/neocon hybrid.”
If you love this country so much, Rat T, then prove it. Show you understand the strengths, don’t just bitch about imaginary threats. You let your fear get the better of you. America wasn’t built on fear. Sharia isn’t going to happen here. There is no war on Christmas. Obama isn’t coming for your guns. Joe McCarthy tried to make America operate more like Russia, not keep us safe from it. It’s an irrational and unpatriotic stance – to protect America by rejecting everything that makes America great. I wish you no luck.
Wow, that’s quite a list you’ve got there.
I love America.
I’ve been aware of USAmerican pResidential “elections” since Ike’s 2nd nomination.
This year’s is the most egregious case of “vote for OUR candidate or we’ll kill this puppy” I’ve ever seen…the two worst “choices” in history…
Folks, in Arizona the safest, sanest vote is for Jill Stein – Green Party…!
The new leader of GOP is a coward, a loser. He calls for torture and murder of anyone, and their families, that he suspects of terrorism. As un-American as is possible. A grifter, a con man working the biggest swindle of his career.
Thank you, Mr. Safier.
Mr. Verdi: McCarthy was a coward, a fear-monger. We do not countenance fear-mongers and religious bigots here. It is, quite simply, un-American.
Fewer than 9% of voting age Americans voted for either Trump or Hillary. These candidates are a symptom of non participation, not corruption. It really is as simple as that.
In the case of the Democratic primaries, Hillary trounced Bernie by nearly 4 million votes and over 800 delegate votes. Even if we were to distribute super delegate votes according to individual state delegate distribution laws, she still wins handily. This was not a close primary and Bernie’s ‘massive support’ which another poster mentioned, just never materialized.
Meanwhile next to nobody will vote in the mid term elections or the local and state elections in between those.
Who are politicians beholden to? They are beholden to participating parties and as of late those parties which are participating are the big donors and those with money, so they get the deference, not the minuscule number of voters who vote by party lines. If the American people would just participate in the system this would not be the case, but until people actually start voting it will be more of the same.
Back to the bickering boys and girls…..
HumanBean, you write, “In the case of the Democratic primaries, Hillary trounced Bernie by nearly 4 million votes and over 800 delegate votes.”
How many state’s primaries disallowed those not registered with the Democratic party from voting in the primary? Arizona’s did. How many disenfranchised voters does this represent?
We rely on the “4th estate” — the media — to get us information about elected officials, candidates, and campaigns. How many media outlets connected with the DNC were persuaded to promote Hillary Clinton and undermine Sanders? It was quite obvious that that was what was happening in the NYTimes, one of the largest and most influential “liberal” newspapers in the US.
What has happened with the two party system in this presidential election contest is not just the result of voter apathy, people choosing not to participate. It’s voters’ (accurate) perception of corruption that inspires their non-participation. Get your cause and effect relationships right.
Thanks, pops! And well put!
It would be interesting to know how many commenters — and which ones — are Pima County Democratic party precinct committee people. Personally, I’d love to see disclaimers from commenters with that affiliation, especially when they begin their posts with remarks like “The new leader of GOP is a coward, a loser” and end them with remarks like, “Thank you, Mr. Safier.”
His name is right there. Have you tried using Google?
Why should those who don’t know who the PCDP P.C.s are have to look them up? The idea would be for them — if they support honesty and transparency — to add caveats to their posts so everyone can know when official party reps are using the comment streams to promote the cause of the party for which they fulfill an official function and / or using the comment streams to score brownie points with party leaders.
I’d like to know who can confirm that they heard this:
” He calls for torture and murder of anyone, and their families, that he suspects of terrorism.”
Comments = brownie points? You overvalue comment threads.
Perhaps. But I’d still like the PCs to identify themselves for those who don’t already know who they are.
Why wouldn’t they do so? I’m sure they’re not ashamed to be official representatives of the local party, and no doubt they want their commentary to be understood for what it is. Just like the DNC wanted their position on Sanders v. Clinton to be understood for what it was.
Right?
If you say so. I’d hope someone with a position in either party would have more important things to do than lurk on a comment thread, but I guess John Huppenthal proved there’s always time to wallow. But why stop at the Dems? If you’re so eager for disclosure, why not ask those paid by Rosemont or the NRA to fess up? Or we could just wipe the dust off our hands and get back to insulting each other, like any of this bickering will change opinions.
I’m just responding to something I’ve seen happen more than once in these particular comment streams: Pima County Democratic party precinct committee people jumping in to defend the official party line and pat David Safier on the back. I wouldn’t recognize affiliates of Rosemont or the NRA, but sure, let them disclose their affiliations when they comment on pieces relevant to their own particular set of interests.
As for whether there’s any use in commenting…there may not be. But sometimes it’s satisfying just to have your say. Especially when it’s David Safier’s blog, which includes so many things in it that well-informed “progressive” readers should be questioning.
I’m not all that familiar with Safier’s posts. I know he primarily covers education. It seems like you have a pretty good handle on which commenters on his threads have a vested interest. Do you call them out on it?
Bickering changes many minds. Commenters and readers alike, look at the discussion, test the links if provided, and watch how each side treats the other. You have helped change the minds of many, whether you know it or not. Thank you for your input.
Yes, Arizona only allows people to vote in the primary for the party they are registered to vote for. This was true last year, the year before that, the year before that and so on. This was not a new rule and to call this ‘disenfranchisement’ is petulant and pathetic and a disservice to legitimate cases of voter disenfranchisement.
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse to bitch about it after the fact. Either the Sanders campaign did a poor job educating their supporters or their supporters just weren’t that interested in their candidate enough to learn how to vote for him. It really is as simple as that.
If you do not like that AZ has closed primaries (and I agree with you!) it takes participation in off cycle elections to make those changes, so participate! Learn how to vote and educate others on how to vote. Don’t just complain that is wasn’t handed to you. You have just proven my point that local and state elections matter more than the every 4 years presidential cycle. Those rules are in place because of the people who are participating in the system. If you want to change that, participate! It really is that simple.
Change does not start with the president. It starts with voting locally and getting involved at the state and local level.
I really am amazed that some of these people can even put their pants on correctly in the morning without someone holding their hand. It is sad.
And to respond to your complaints about the so called ‘4th estate’, Hillary and Trump had the spotlight on them and Bernie never did. You are correct. But that spotlight shines both ways. Hillary and Trump received as much negative press and coverage as they did positive, part of being in the spotlight means you are a target.
Can you imagine if that spotlight had shown on Bernie? He never had to face the negative press the way that Trump or Hillary has. The few times he did, he faltered big time. His poll numbers surely would’ve suffered even more if he had that spotlight shining brighter. He was not a perfect candidate and nobodies savior, but for new and naive voters it is easier to think that one man or a ‘national movement’ will change everything. They couldn’t be more wrong.
It all starts locally.
Instead of focusing on the presidential election why don’t you educate yourself about the local candidates for state government? The proposals and ballot initiatives? I know, I know, that takes work and time. It is a lot easier to just believe in a false prophet/savior.
Watch these mind numbed robots cheer for the liar. Wait until they figure out what she said. Is it a lie again, or is this what she plans to do ?
http://www.dailywire.com/news/8050/watch-crowd-cheers-clintons-call-raise-taxes-robert-kraychik
My, my, HumanBean, what venom! I must have hit a nerve in my comment about voter “apathy,” the primaries, and the press. You make so many false assumptions in your replies that I’m not going to try to address them all, except to say I am involved and informed, at the local level, the state level, and the national level. More than most. Anyone who knew what my commitments and past service for the cause had been would laugh out loud at your ill-advised scolding admonitions.
My suggestion to you is that you do a little more analysis of the way the party with which you affiliate is structured. Those of us who’ve been involved and are now going through the painful process of dealignment or realignment are not as willing as you are to assume that the structures you shrug off are innocent of mal-intent — or changeable through continued involvement. We’ve been involved. We know how it works.
Rat T: thank you for the kind remarks. Please let me know if at any point I manage to convince you that Supporting Public Ed Means Supporting Local Reform — or that public ed may in fact be worth supporting. That would indeed be an achievement.
I am not a Democrat, but hey what is a political season without mutually assured assumptions right? 🙂
Wait. Rat T wasn’t getting all sweet on me? Oh mercy.
I was actually complimenting both of you.
I have never opposed public education. I oppose TUSD as they currently operate. Educrats have taken it over and because of that the children come last and the tax payer is supposed to just shovel more piles of money to a lying, mismanaged school district.
This is who the liberals support. They are 100% consistent standing against America and Americans and for terrorists, thugs and killers of cops.
Khan defends Sharia law responsible for the executions of gays and women in 11 countries
http://www.infowars.com/what-the-media-isnt-reporting-about-khizr-khan/
Reading the comments and attacks on other comments (from both sides, though probably a little bit more from the liberals), remind me of the old question asked in court by an attorney, “When did you stop beating your wife?”
Face it, both major parties have created the mess they are in. If the “never Trump”, and “never Hillary” voters had a spine, they would be voting for Gary Johnson, or at least Jill Stein.
The irony – or is it tragedy – is when the Democratic and Republican parties accuse voters of “throwing your vote away” by voting for third party candidates. Considering the choices the Republican and Democratic parties have coughed up for 2016 it seems the voters are left with throwing away or throwing up their votes this year.
Simply put if someone defends indecency they have no decency . If someone doesn’t recognize that there is a huge difference between the Democrats and Republicans, then that person cannot recognize ethical platforms vs. unethical platforms or humane platforms vs. inhumane platforms. There is no comparison and I am a proud Democrat who is looking forward to Hillary being our next president with Bernie Sanders being a progressive compass for her with the new organizations he is starting. There is a huge difference between candidates and parties. I now have hope for our country when I think of those two forces together and what they want and can do for our country. So now I focus more on local races….. We have got to get a new legislature in AZ that values education!
Ah, “Guardians” makes a rare re-appearance in these comment streams, providing the same kind of commentary we used to be able to expect with some regularity.
The Sanders and Clinton forces are not “together,” Guardians, nor will Bernie Sanders be Ms. Clinton’s “progressive compass” — what an incredibly naive idea. Did you watch his face when she referred to him in her speech at the convention? Did his expression and manner give you the impression that the two of them are now best friends?
Do you know what the term “neoliberalism” means, Guardians? If not, look it up. It will be an important concept for you — and the rest of the nation — to master if your favored candidate, “Hillary” is elected. That will be her playbook — not the “OK we’ll toss you crazy progressives a few bones” planks added to a Democratic platform. We’ll have about as much hope of seeing that platform implemented if Billary is elected as TUSD teachers had of getting 100% of the 123 money applied to their salaries. (Or 301 money applied to their bonuses, rather than stockpiled in the district’s bank accounts.)
If there is such a “huge difference” between the candidates and parties, why are so may Republicans voting for “Hillary”? The huge difference to be discussed in this election is between what Hillary represents and what the Democratic party used to stand for before the Clintons got ahold of it. Those who don’t take the trouble to understand US history seem to have missed the massive shift to the right of both parties about as obvious as the broad side of a barn to anyone paying attention to what has happened in this country over the course of the last several decades. The so-called Democrats now occupy the same space on the ideological spectrum that middle-of-the-road Republicans used to occupy. What used to be a run-of-the-mill Democrat is now disparaged as a “socialist.”
(As for local races, the TUSD Board is definitely an important one, just as important as the AZ legislature, but I doubt that you’ll be voting for anything other than continuance of the same sad dysfunction you have repeatedly excused in your comments. It must be embarrassing, these days, to have to try to defend it. Safier seems to be one of the last die-hards willing to do it, and his arguments — stretched thin as they are to cover such LARGE improprieties and mendacities — have at this point grown unbelievably shabby and flimsy. Once the embarrasm-intendent and the need to excuse his constant mis-steps leaves town — which may be fairly soon — someone will have to pull some of these ludicrous arguments Safier made out of the Tucson Weekly archive and remind him of the role he was asked to play in this farce. “The raise given in early May out of M&O funds was in fact a loan to be paid back out of the 123 funds if the proposition passed.”)
Right. Amazing how much some among us prove true the notion that “humankind cannot bear very much reality.” Many prefer to tell themselves — and others — very silly, very happy little bedtime stories while much of the progress we’d managed to make as a nation gets undone under the aegis of the “Democratic” party and its agents, from Hillary down to a TUSD Board that doesn’t know how to do anything but capitulate to Ducey et al. — promoting the passage of 123 and then refusing to apply it to raise shockingly insufficient teacher salaries, outsourcing subs, agreeing that teacher credentialing requirements should be reduced, picking fights with the deseg authority and wasting deseg money on massively inflated legal bills, etc., etc., ad nauseam.
If a constant diet of BS is what you like, locally and nationally, seems like you’ve picked the right people to provide it to you.
And first prize for the windiest comment goes to…(see above).
And the first prize for having little to offer but insults to other commenters goes to …(see above).
Aw, shucks.
Shawn Lucas is dead? Does that make three?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/breaking-lead-attorney-dnc-fraud-case-found-dead-1-week-serving-dnc-papers/
Hmm…it appears someone at The Weekly is an Alex Jones sympathizer.
Wow, and I thought I was the only person all riled up…I’ve been posting on FaceBook, but then again I have no followers. I want someone, anyone, Anderson Cooper, Chris Cuomo, Charlie Rose, hello out there, to ask Mr. Trump about Canada, the 49th parallel, the northwest passage, Canada’s stance on immigration, Syrian refugees, the Prime Minister Justin Trudeau; Canada’s policies towards welcoming refugees.
If Trump thinks he has trouble with Mexico and the wall, he will really walk into a wall when he turns his attention to the Great White North (the reference is to snow/climate). Most Canadians, and all my relatives in Nova Scotia, are watching this election with amusement. Everyone likes to grumble about their own country, but you better believe Canadians would stand behind Trudeau, their country, and their wonderful history…Mr. Trump would be in danger of being tarred and feathered but probably more laughed at.
Canada is a country wealthy with many cultures and wealthy with natural resources, a lot of which are untapped. We were brought up believing the Northwest Passage belonged to us. Now with global warming, many countries are trying to get a share of the action re opening up of this waterway. Do some research on Canada….it will become more and more important to all of us who live in North America.
Watching 20 year old West Wing shows. One episode brings up the President’s secret MS diagnosis that has not been made public. The conclusion is that there are some legal issues with that. Hopefully, Tr’s family is managing his issues, but, even so the administration should be verifying that there is not a diagnosed medical issue going on.