Did The Steanger in all seriousness tell its readers to go listen to Sublime? I just can’t even…

I still hope y’all have a happy Friday.

It should be noted that in NPR's run-up to the presser, one of the reporters made exactly the same sort of gaffe as Biden, mis-naming a world leader. This happens all the time; I've done it, and I'm sure everyone here has done it at some time or other. Hell, I bet even the big, greasy Cheeto-faced shit-gibbon has done it on more than one occasion. That said, I thought Biden's responses were cogent, to-the-point, a bit on the folksy side in terms of his delivery, but clearly his grasp of foreign policy, what the U.S. has done under his administration, and his ability to answer questions off-the-cuff was no way impaired.

It's like with actors: some are great at cold-reading a script, others give a better reading after reviewing it beforehand, but both can give a good performance; on-whole Biden appears to fall into the former category.

Nathalie, I love ya, but all the Slog AM writers and their anti-Biden ranting is seriously stressing me out. I quit watching MSNBC because Berni Bro Chris Hayes is doing the same thing. There isn't going to be some magical new candidate, so stop dreaming about a fairy tale. It's Biden or orange fascism.

Also, talk about incoherence:

https://newrepublic.com/post/183641/watch-trump-fumbles-terrifying-speech-florida-rally

Relocating the light rail to a different route will likely displace black and brown owned businesses and communities elsewhere. Funny how people pay attention when it's white owned businesses at stake. That said, they have every right to be upset. The folks who run Sound Transit are don't give a shit about displacing the residents of this city. Worse, the Stranger's unceasing public transit at all costs/anti-car mantra continues to betray the fact that their writers, editors, and readership are completely oblivious to the ableism they spew. Must be nice to not have a disability that necessitates a vehicle to allow you any semblance of freedom and to be wealthy enough to live close to where you work.

"Oh, I'm sorry, did you want to live undisturbed and isolated on your little West Seattle island forever? That's not how living in a city works, bucko."

This is an odd way to discuss the plight of small business owners whose "message is not anti-light rail, but rather, they want better relocation compensation, and they want to ensure customers will keep coming even as all this results in a few years of uncertainty."* I guess the Stranger doesn't support women-owned small businesses like Ounces?

https://westseattleblog.com/2024/07/happening-now-rally-for-relocation-supporting-local-businesses-in-light-rails-path/

@3, Joe Biden's candidacy is doomed, and he has only himself to blame. He failed two weeks ago, and he has failed our nation. I realize that the Democrats changing horses midstream can be disconcerting and disruptive, but we have only two courses now: denial or action.

I have chosen action. I have written our two senators, asking them why they have yet to summon the courage to publicly call on Joe Biden to withdraw from the presidential race. I've unsubscribed to all national Democratic mailing lists. Not sure what else I can do as a regular citizen. If Biden or Harris ever makes a fund-raising stop in town in the next few weeks, I'll head out and protest.

As hbb noted, your attack on West Seattle CITIZENS who don't want their ability to earn a living DESTROYED without anywhere near adequate compensation is nonsense and hateful. The business owners are NOT anti-mass transit but they are addressing a real need. Also, do you know how many of the more affordable homes in WS will be DESTROYED as well? BearsonParade is wrong that the homes of POC would be destroyed as an alternative to what is being proposed now since the homes that will be destroyed include those of POC. He IS correct about your entitled judgmental attitude towards mass transit is tiresome, especially since you don't care how many people's lives are harmed and you make ZERO effort to even consider anyone else's position. It's inexcusable and proves that none of you are apparently capable or willing to engage in rational thought and consider that there are other worthwhile perspectives that need to be considered. More mass transit IS overall a good thing but destroying people's businesses and thriving communities, including homeownership for many, matters as well. Get off your high horse and stop acting like your perspective is the only one that matters.

Old people still make verbal typos just like young people.

@5 I don't think light rail expansion has eliminated any driving options in Seattle, other than maybe less parking spots? Do they not build new handicap parking spots into project plans like these? Regardless, I love West Seattle businesses and a fast and efficient light rail option would make it so much easier for me to come down there and support you. Relocating a business is a pain, and I wish it didn't cost anything to do so, but think about the long-term potential.

@2 The President has been wandering around with egg salad in his hair asking what his name is for a LONG time now, most people now accept it, and people in the Biden cult of personality who seriously think this is all about the past couple verbal missteps are only showing off how they don't want to see it.

Some company recently released the results of a poll they ran gauging positive interest in a number of potential ticket options (Biden/Harris, Harris/Newsom, Newsom/Whitmer, etc.) They were all comparably mediocre, coming in at like 40-42% favorability (and Trump was roughly the same.) The highest rating and only one that actually polled ahead of Trump (albeit only slightly so @ ~43%) was freaking Clinton/Harris. How much crazy fun would that be!?! I think the DNC should go ahead and announce it as a done deal, just to see if Donald has a freaking heart attack upon hearing the news, which would have to be a distinct possibility.

originalcinner dear, I wouldn't worry too much about what The Stranger's editorial position is, or the comments section. It's sort of devolving into a hipster version of the Seattle Times comments section.

How comforting to know that a personal vendetta between the First Lady and VP prevents the Democrats to make the sober decision they should have made right after the midterm elections.
The lawless fascists are rubbing their hands with glee. “Never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake.”

@3, @13, I would submit that no amount of saying "It's not real! Stop talking about it!" on a story the media can no longer ignore is going to rescue Biden's polls at this point.

"It would be like introducing Winston Churchill and saying ladies and gentlemen Hitler.”

More Churchill myth building. Churchill only became opposed to fascism when it became a threat to England and the British empire. Churchill was not the antithesis of Hitler even if he played a critical role in defeating the Nazis.

@7 Good job! Me too. To everybody else who wants Biden to drop out: Email your legislators and the Whitehouse with your views--they won't know otherwise--or else just STFU.

Oh, it's a story allright, nekrasova dear. In a world full of 24 hour cable news channels, anything's a story, because not that much really happens.

And it doesn't seem like people in the broader world are all that impressed with the alternatives - nor are they clamoring to dump Biden.

https://www.joemygod.com/2024/07/npr-replacement-dems-poll-no-higher-than-biden/

Biden referred to his Vice President as Vice President Trump. The man is too old to be tasked with being the Commander in Chief. Democrats keep gaslighting the American people and no one is buying it. Democrats also had nothing but time (years, in fact) to ensure that the twice impeached, convicted felon, lifelong criminal, white supremacist terrorist, rapist, always grifting con man named Donald Trump couldn't come near the White House EVER AGAIN. They did nothing. Now we're in a shit show and the Democrats only have themselves to blame. It's incomprehensible to me, but then again as a former New Yorker (lived there most of my life), it was incomprehensible that Trump ever became president in the first place. Comey's going around with a sad face about how unfit Trump is to be the Commander in Chief when he's responsible for it happening the first time. No matter who "wins" this farce of an election, we are all so fucked.

@16 is there anyone in history who acted against something/someone that wasn't personally impacting them? That's a really weird sleight against Churchill.

Likely that Motherfucker's pick for VP (today? Sunday?) and next week's Repuke Convention will be so appalling that the Replace-Biden story will die down a bit.

Jesus fucking WEPT I miss what was truly good about the 20th Century!
What a tragedy that Fred and Mary Anne MacCloud Trump weren't both irreparably sterile.

@19- not sure we’re so fucked if Biden wins. Harris is a very capable politician and would be ready to step in if needed- I would expect things to go just fine with her as Pres.

20, Missing the point. The lore is that Churchill acted out of benevolence, not self-interest.

@20 Donald T is someone who only takes action when it benefits him personally. Most of us have slightly more developed morals.

@20 Who said fascism wasn't impacting him before WW2? Churchill benefited from fascists smashing the left so he didn't oppose fascists until they became a threat to his own nationalism. In fact, Churchill clearly approved of fascists when they violently suppressed the left and republican principles in Spain, Italy and Germany. Churchill like Hitler and other fascists explicitly believed in a "superior race" because it justified colonialism and the extreme violence he advocated against native populations that rebelled.

There is this hypothesis that says mid-20th century fascism/nazism didn't arise in a vacuum but out of the belief that superior nations/races should rule over lesser ones even it meant annihilating mass of people. The Jewish holocaust committed by Nazis wasn't the first modern genocide in history: Congo, Namibia, Armenia are all examples of genocides committed during land grab/colonial exploitation. What is weird is not, being critical of Churchill but the continual glorification and whitewashing of a man that stood for evil things.

@16 Churchill was staunchly anti-communist so in places like Italy, he thought Mussolini was a useful tool to block communism, but he was hardly a fascism fanboy. He spoke out publicly against Hitler the year after he came to power and thought the UK government was too conciliatory and was vocally critical of fascism well before the Munich Agreement.

@26 again show me any historical figure who isn't flawed or had varied perspectives. What you are doing is pulling selective data to diminish the accomplishments of someone who accomplished great things during WWII. It's the same vein as those who tear down Jefferson because he owned slaves. No one has ever said these men were above reproach or were perfect. We honor them and speak highly of them because despite their imperfections they did things that had a profoundly beneficial impact on the world. In the case of Churchill if he wasn't in office the war probably would have turned out differently and not for the good. I would challenge you using your own criteria to name any person in history who acted out of complete benevolence or didn't make differing choices based on the circumstances of the time.

@23 dvs99: Excellent point. I was pondering the exact same thing.
I think most of the Democrats pressuring President Joe Biden to step down see current VP Kamala Harris as better fit to make executive decisions. If California Governor Gavin Newsom was selected as Harris's running mate they would make a good pair; they're often on the same wavelength.
Meanwhile, the very idea of FINALLY putting an educated, well qualified woman in the White House after 248 years is only making the Orange Turd and its rabid MAGA minions even more batshit crazy. If every member of the GOP dies of a stroke from Harris taking the Oval Office this November I'd consider it cause for celebration. The RepubliKKKan Party of Turd brought it all on themselves.
And thus is a once great nation deeply divided.

@28 Well, golly if your question was whether there had ever been a perfect head of state, maybe you should have asked that particular straw man instead of whether any head of state had ever done something that didn’t benefit them personally. Because, you know, those are different questions.

Historical figures are real people and rarely live up to the version of themselves we were taught as children. Reducing them to simplified good guy/bad guy caricatures serves a specific purpose for high school history class, but as an adult you should strive for a more complete understanding of history than the heavily sanitized version you were spoon-fed as a teenager.

@31 - Bingo

"... the heavily sanitized version
[the American Indoctrination]
you were spoon-fed*
as a teenager."

but
it's Such
a Comfort

plus it
makes
it Easy
to Blame
the Victims

*a little lite
Social Engineering
can go a Long motherfucking Ways

I have a college friend who went to Catholic school who was so shocked and disillusioned to find out stuff like FDR had ordered the Japanese Internment and Kennedy had a ghost writer for "Profiles in Courage" and that so many of the founding fathers were slave owners. It really got annoying after a while because his simple worldview was so all-encompassing, and his disappointment so deep. He rejected anything positive anyone had accomplished and always looked for the bad in any historical figure. His girlfriend (now his wife) finally told him to "grow the F up. " (although she didn't say F, she said the whole word, but Slog is a family friendly site)

"Harris is a very capable politician and would be ready to step in if needed- I would expect things to go just fine with her as Pres."

I think that's how most rational people feel, dvs99 dear. Glad to hear you say it.

@33 --
(but Slog
is a family
friendly site).

a. why wasn't
I fucking Informed?

b. have you
Notified
tS?

nyt:
Tensions Mount as
Biden Meets With Democrats
and Rebuffs Calls to Withdraw

After the House minority leader visited the White House to share Democrats’ concerns, President Biden held a tense virtual session with lawmakers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/12/us/politics/hakeem-jeffries-biden-democrats.html

one reader’s comment

“That’s why I’m going out and letting people touch me, poke me, ask me questions,” Mr. Biden responded, according to someone familiar with the call who shared a partial transcript. “I think I know what I’m doing...”

“‘That was great when you were feeling good, Biden — are you OK now?’ That’s what’s underlying. That’s what people are worried about,” he told Mr. Levin. “It’s a legitimate concern for people, but that’s why I think it’s important — I’ve got to get out and show people everything from how well I move to how much I know and that I’m still in good charge.”

No, you already had your big test, after hiding with no unscripted press events, no real primaries, and apparently, not even real cabinet meetings. It confirmed what everyone already knew or feared. The time for showing what you know, for the performance of being "in good charge," is in the past.

When you say things like this, it confirms for the hundredth time that you operate within a bubble of flattery and denial. When people try to show you small corners of the truth, as a gentle way to start, you swagger about how you're the president, you were winning Delaware back when it was purple. Polls? You have so many polls. You know what's going on.

You don't. That's the uncanny disconnect we all keep seeing. It's age but it's beyond age, it's hubris, it's power, it's elitism, all of the above and more. Above all, you're hiding, hiding that you don't know anymore, denying to yourself the depths of your denial.

Bluelotus; LA

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/12/us/politics/hakeem-jeffries-biden-democrats.html#commentsContainer

uh-oh:
nyt:

Biden Is Speaking in Michigan,
With State’s Major Democrats Absent

Mr. Biden is capping a tumultuous week in a key state. But the state’s governor and other high-profile Democrats were scheduled to be elsewhere.

more:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/12/us/politics/hakeem-jeffries-biden-democrats.html

where?
anywhere
Elsewhere
will do Fine.

It would be so fascinating if Natalie and TS folks practiced journalism. They would have quickly discovered that Nucor and Port of Seattle told sound transit they would not budge on allowing easements that would have had the lightrail line go through their properties. Apparently TS doesn’t care to look into back room deals that are easily discovered via google and basic research. The Stranger made lots of money off “Backpages” and human sex trafficking. Im looking forward to that investigation.

@34 Catalina Vel-DuRay: +1 Agreed.

@27 Churchill was not just anti-communist, he was anti-labor and violently repressed every worker movement that occurred during his tenure prior to ww2. He claimed that labor was the "enemy within" and was totally uncompromising. Fascists weren't just killing Bolsheviks ("international Jews" according to Churchill) but anyone on the left and beyond who advocated for democracy, like when Franco crushed the Spanish republic with Churchill's approval. Listen to Tariq Ali on the topic of Churchill relationship to fascism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUHd5vrA7eQ&t=2310s

@28 I am not talking about someone who had personal contradictions, like Thomas Jefferson waxing lyrical about democracy yet owned slaves during the late 18th century, but about a 20th century white supremacist (European colonists belonged to a "superior race") who loved war and empire, hated anyone rebelling against economic and/or colonial oppression, and was an efficient leader for a relatively brief span of a long career.

@29 "I think most of the Democrats pressuring President Joe Biden to step down see current VP Kamala Harris as better fit to make executive decisions."

I think most of the Dems pressing Biden to step down are less concerned with his ability to make executive decisions and more concerned with his ability to convince independent and undecided voters that he can do so. If he loses we'll never get to see whether Kamala can step in if needed, and it's increasingly looking like he'll lose. He needs to put his ego aside and bow out gracefully for the good of the country.

People do good deeds all the time, sometimes knowing they will have no or even negative benefits.
Older folks might remember being asked to rewind a video cassette before returning it. Just to be nice. Others might remember firefighters going into the towers on 911 knowing it was futile but doing their duty... Trump and other assholes would call them suckers.
Guess my world is a little brighter, better and nicer than district 13s. They should get out more.
However, politicians are pretty transactional, like 13, and shouldn't be categorized with the rest of us.

41 - And if the Biden replacement has an 'October surprise' but in a bad way? Hopefully not but it's still an knowable unknown and seems equal risk as staying with Biden.

@39: "Churchill was not just anti-communist, he was anti-labor..."

Member of Parliament Winston Churchill, successfully arguing for a minimum wage in Britain, 1909:

"It is a serious national evil that any class of His Majesty's subjects should receive less than a living wage in return for their utmost exertions. It was formerly supposed that the working of the laws of supply and demand would naturally regulate or eliminate that evil." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_Boards_Act_1909)

@30 that's not what I was asking. You dismiss Churchill's accomplishments and attempt to ridicule those who look to him as someone to honor because (in your opinion) he also had points of view that were contradictory. Catalina noted it best in her post @33. It's so tiring when people drone on and on about how bad historical figures were because of their own bias. As I stated above no historical figure (world leader or otherwise) is perfect. We honor them not because they are but because they did great things in spite of those imperfections. Your other error is that you are judging Churchill but the standards of today. Is there any leader from the 1930s/40s (government or otherwise) who wouldn't be labeled a white supremacist based on today's standards? If you want to tear down Churchill and other historical figures based on selective facts and differing standards that's your choice but I think its myopic and only serves to make you somehow feel better about yourself.

@42 I don't disagree with you at all. People are generally good and I think given a choice go out of their way to help others in need. Let's not conflate that with decisions made by leaders. Their primary obligation is to the people they were sworn to protect and are often filled with complexities. It's never a good/bad binary.

@41 thirteen12: Among the downsides of this benighted country is the unbelievable number of neofascist idiots who have no clue whatsoever how to vote wisely, and who will never accept the electing of a woman president in these deeply divided states.
It amazes me that so many in this same demographic consider the Orange Turd, a twice impeached convicted felon, unscrupulous con man, murderer, sexual predator, pathological liar, systematic racist, and rapist the "answer". DJT is the end of the world.

@43 Phoebe in Wallingford: I share your concerns.

a shooter?

looks like either
a False Flag operation
or eltrumpfster's just had
a close brush with his Maker

his calls for
MartiaL Law're
prolly hours away

& now he'll
get to bring along
his well-Regulated Militia

to all his upcoming
Nuremberg
Rallies

and yet
we were
Promised
Nuremberg
Trials. buh-Bye
Democracy. we
only Barely knew ya.

apparently
eltrumpfster's ok.
put Down the Champagne

in Other News:

nyt;
OPINION
GUEST ESSAY
this one’s a bit Long

Bernie Sanders:
Joe Biden for President

I will do all that I can to see that President Biden is re-elected. Why? Despite my disagreements with him on particular issues, he has been the most effective president in the modern history of our country and is the strongest candidate to defeat Donald Trump — a demagogue and pathological liar.

It’s time to learn a lesson from the progressive and centrist forces in France who, despite profound political differences, came together this week to soundly defeat right-wing extremism.

I strongly disagree with Mr. Biden on the question of U.S. support for Israel’s horrific war against the Palestinian people. The United States should not provide Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing extremist government with another nickel as it continues to create one of the worst humanitarian disasters in modern history.

I strongly disagree with the president’s belief that the Affordable Care Act, as useful as it has been, will ever address America’s health care crisis. Our health care system is broken, dysfunctional and wildly expensive and needs to be replaced with a “Medicare for all” single-payer system. Health care is a human right.

And those are not my only disagreements with Mr. Biden.

But for over two weeks now, the corporate media has obsessively focused on the June presidential debate and the cognitive capabilities of a man who has, perhaps, the most difficult and stressful job in the world.

The media has frantically searched for every living human being who no longer supports the president or any neurologist who wants to appear on TV. Unfortunately, too many Democrats have joined that circular firing squad.

[present company Included]

Yes. I know: Mr. Biden is old, is prone to gaffes, walks stiffly and had a disastrous debate with Mr. Trump. But this I also know: A presidential election is not an entertainment contest. It does not begin or end with a 90-minute debate.

Enough! Mr. Biden may not be the ideal candidate, but he will be the candidate and should be the candidate. And with an effective campaign that speaks to the needs of working families, he will not only defeat Mr. Trump but beat him badly. It’s time for Democrats to stop the bickering and nit-picking.

I understand that some Democrats get nervous about having to explain the president’s gaffes and misspeaking names. But unlike the Republicans, they do not have to explain away a candidate who now has 34 felony convictions and faces charges that could lead to dozens of additional convictions, who has been hit with a $5 million judgment after he was found liable in a sexual abuse case, who has been involved in more than 4,000 lawsuits, who has repeatedly gone bankrupt and who has told thousands of documented lies and falsehoods.

Supporters of Mr. Biden can speak proudly about a good and decent Democratic president with a record of real accomplishment. The Biden administration, as a result of the American Rescue Plan, helped rebuild the economy during the pandemic far faster than economists thought possible.

At a time when people were terrified about the future, the president and those of us who supported him in Congress put Americans back to work, provided cash benefits to desperate parents and protected small businesses, hospitals, schools and child care centers.

After decades of talk about our crumbling roads, bridges and water systems, we put more money into rebuilding America’s infrastructure than ever before — which is projected to create millions of well-paying jobs.

And we did not stop there. We made the largest-ever investment in climate action to save the planet. We canceled student debt for nearly five million financially strapped Americans. We cut prices for insulin and asthma inhalers, capped out-of-pocket costs for prescription drugs and got free vaccines to the American people.

We battled to defend women’s rights in the face of moves by Trump-appointed jurists to roll back reproductive freedom and deny women the right to control their own bodies.

So, yes, Mr. Biden has a record to run on. A strong record. But he and his supporters should never suggest that what’s been accomplished is sufficient.

To win the election, the president must do more than just defend his excellent record. He needs to propose and fight for a bold agenda that speaks to the needs of the vast majority of our people — the working families of this country, the people who have been left behind for far too long.

At a time when the billionaires have never had it so good and when the United States is experiencing virtually unprecedented income and wealth inequality, over 60 percent of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, real weekly wages for the average worker have not risen in over 50 years, 25 percent of seniors live each year on $15,000 or less, we have a higher rate of childhood poverty than almost any other major country, and housing is becoming more and more unaffordable — among other crises.

This is the wealthiest country in the history of the world. We can do better. We must do better. Joe Biden knows that. Donald Trump does not. Joe Biden wants to tax the rich so that we can fund the needs of working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the poor.

Donald Trump wants to cut taxes for the billionaire class. Joe Biden wants to expand Social Security benefits. Donald Trump and his friends want to weaken Social Security. Joe Biden wants to make it easier for workers to form unions and collectively bargain for better wages and benefits.

Donald Trump wants to let multinational corporations get away with exploiting workers and ripping off consumers. Joe Biden respects democracy. Donald Trump attacks it.

This election offers a stark choice on issue after issue. If Mr. Biden and his supporters focus on these issues — and refuse to be divided and distracted — the president will rally working families to his side in the industrial Midwest swing states and elsewhere and win the November election.

And let me say this as emphatically as I can: For the sake of our kids and future generations, he must win.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/13/opinion/joe-biden-president.html

Leaders are the ones
Who Step Up
Thank You
Senator
Sanders

looks lile
it’s a Mess

One Spectator Is Dead After Chaos at Event in Pennsylvania

A suspect and a spectator were dead after an armed person fired a weapon at Donald Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania, an official said.

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/07/13/us/biden-trump-election

I find the upcoming election, a contest between a guy who folks claim is unfit for office, at times, due to age, and perhaps a general problem with oration he has had most of his life... and another guy who many of his top advisors say is unfit for office on his best days, who's father had dementia earlier in his life than this guy has shown to date.

When your enemies are afraid of you, that is something to notice.
When you allies are afraid of you, it is something 'completely different.'

Dozens Killed
After Israel Targets
Architect of Oct. 7 Attacks in Airstrike

It was unclear if the top Hamas military
commander in Gaza survived. Gazan
authorities reported at least 90
dead and 300 wounded in
a humanitarian zone.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/07/13/world/middleeast/israel-hamas-deif-mawasi-khan-younis.html

can we Stop
funding this
Massacre?

bibi’s like
eltrumpfster
only the latter’s
got the mKkKonnell ct

with dread pirate
Roberts* at the helm
an uncle Thomas and his
little ginny overtossing the USA

*his wife
billing other
lawyers Tens of Millions
it’s Good to be Married into the ussc
in a country so Corrupt we made it Legal.

NO more
Money to
that nutnyahoo
and his Genocide

@20, @45: Churchill was warning about the dangers of Naziism and Hitler long before Stalin signed his non-aggression pact with the Axis. As France fell and Churchill led the Battle of Britain, Stalin's regime provided ample raw material exports to Nazi Germany. The classist, racist, and sexist Churchill, dedicated defender of the British Empire, was totally right about Hitler, whilst Comrade Stalin, and the international left who blindly followed him, were totally wrong. The international hard left, forever doubleplus unallowed to criticize their Dear Leader, has never forgiven Churchill for this.

@45 I don't think your question is relevant to Churchill's case. I don't see many contradictions about him. His racism isn't a bug but it's a critical feature that guided him throughout his political life to take the side of colonialists in every single case put before him, which are quite a few. He was quite unapologetic about it:

"I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place."

Not only many of Churchill contemporaries disagreed with him but many people still think like him today (i.e. Palestine) which makes it even more important to point out there was little in Churchill that we should idolize today. We are still trying to extract ourselves from the messed up world he molded to his image. Colonized people are still very far from having recovered from the pillage and underdevelopment that resulted from his policies. It's certainly not about me. It's about all of us.

Good people on both sides.

“We are still trying to extract ourselves from the messed up world he molded to his image”

I shudder to think what the world would look like without him. It’s pretty clear you don’t get it and don’t want too, I’ll go back to my original question. Can you name any historical figure who we should look to for inspiration or should honor for their deeds based on your standards?

@55 You'd likely feel very differently if you were Indian, Pakistani, Palestinian, Kenyan, South African, Irish, Welsh, and on. The list is very long. So perhaps you should check your privilege because it's in the way of YOU getting it. Dismissal of the bleak legacy of colonialism and imperialism is consistent with full-throated support of Israel's attempts at making Palestinians disappear to better steal their land, which is also what Churchill advocated because a European settler state among Arabs was advantageous to Britain.

Do you also shudder at the thought of what the world would look like without Stalin who played a greater role than CHurchill in breaking the back of Nazis armies? Do we have to look up to him too? Why not? Right, because the rest of his legacy is horrific, which shows that being an efficient leader during wartime isn't necessarily consistent with greatness.

I wouldn't go out of my way to discuss Churchill if he wasn't ridiculously eulogized for what he wasn't, which btw he wasn't until resurrected by Thatcher in order to propagandize the Falkland war and probably because of their similar history of conflict with British miners. There are legions of 20th century politicians with more benign views and actions with respect to race and subjugating the natives. If you really need to honor someone, why don't you pick one of those as long as you don't whitewash their legacy.

@56: “Do you also shudder at the thought of what the world would look like without Stalin…”

Ha, ha, ha. You began your slagging of Churchill @16: “Churchill only became opposed to fascism when it became a threat to England and the British empire.”

Stalin actively aided Hitler’s warmongering, literally until the day Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union. Soviet grain fed the Wehrmacht and Luftwaffe during the invasion of France and the Battle of Britain. Metals from Soviet mines fed German weapons factories.

We have no need to “imagine” what the world would have been, because the Secret Protocol of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact had divided Europe into Nazi and Soviet regions of influence.

(And after Stalin’s playing European warlord had lost the Soviet Union their farmlands and factories, where did his regime obtain food and supplies? The United States.)

@56 you still didn't answer my question...

You don’t need to idolize or honor any historical figures at all. You’re certainly welcome to but it’s not a requirement. You would be better served trying to understand the past on its own terms rather than romanticizing it to make false idols of real, complicated people.

@58 I did provide a longish discussion of all of your remarks. I stopped short of giving you a name but since you insist I'll say contemporary FDR who has a few blemishes on his legacy but overall appears to have been a very decent man (who wouldn't if picked by Eleanor for life long companion)

@57 You apparently do not realize that Stalin being awful and yet an effective war leader do nothing to discredit the notion that Churchill was awful yet was an effective war leader. 3/4 of all WW2 German military losses occurred when fighting the Russians (also helped by America's industrial capacity), which fits the narrative that the Soviets broke the back of the Nazi war machine.

Anyhow, my initial comment was that CHurchill approved of fascists because they were destroying the left until the Nazis became a problem for England and its empire. And even after the war, Churchill enabled the stay of Franco's dictatorship (who quit in 1975!) because he was a useful check against the resurgence of the left in Western Europe, the Spanish people be damned.

@60 couldn’t you say the same about FDR when it comes to Japanese imperialism and the brutality they were inflicting in Korea and China? He didn’t care until Pearl Harbor. My point is these are all complex people making decisions with multiple variables. If you want to cherry pick one you really have to throw them all under the bus. That’s your right or you can be like @59 and insist no one is special. For my part I think people need hero’s or inspirational figures to give them hope and aspirations do great things themselves. I’ll remember Churchill for the profound evil he saved the world from and be grateful he did.

@60: I was merely pointing out that your inaccurate criticism of Churchill @16, could instead have been very accurately applied to Stalin -- but with the rather large addition that Stalin ACTIVELY AIDED Nazi warfare. Instead, you explicitly equate Churchill with Stalin. This does nothing for the idea anyone should take seriously your opinion of Churchill.

Yes, after Stalin did plenty to enable Hitler, the peoples of the Soviet Union then suffered greatly, and labored immensely, to defeat Hitler's invasion of their lands. How that redeems Stalin I leave for you to explain, but I have great confidence you'll work your admiration for Stalin's NKVD execution squads in there somewhere.

@62 "you explicitly equate Churchill with Stalin."

You are lying again. Sharing some characteristics (bad guys, great war leader) doesn't say that one was as bad as the other.

" How that redeems Stalin I leave for you to explain"

Lie #2. My point was precisely that being a great war leader didn't necessarily redeem one from the awful things they otherwise did.

Either your reading comprehension is very poor or you are very stupid or your intellectual honesty is in the gutter.

" your admiration for Stalin's NKVD execution squads"

Here we go again. Smearing your opponent when you can't win an argument on the internet. Pathetic little shit.

@63: "Sharing some characteristics (bad guys, great war leader) doesn't say that one was as bad as the other."

Read your own stuff harder. From @60: "... Stalin being awful and yet an effective war leader do nothing to discredit the notion that Churchill was awful yet was an effective war leader." You explicitly (and groundlessly) equated Stalin with Churchill. If you want to show how Churchill supplied the Nazi war machine, or dispatched secret-police execution squads to kill any RAF pilots whose squadrons suffered defeats in the Battle of Britain, please do so.

As @33 and @45 pointed out, we admire leaders who, despite great imperfections, accomplished great things. Absolutely no one here has claimed that Churchill was perfect by modern standards, or by any standards. You started slagging on Churchill @16 by applying standards you have since clearly refused to apply to Stalin. As I wrote @52, Churchill earned the ire of the international hard left by proving absolutely correct about Hitler, when Stalin (and his lackeys in the West) proved so very, very wrong. So far, you've done nothing here to contradict that point.

This is how ALL exchanges I have ever had with you have devolved: You can't win by the strength of your arguments so you start making stuff up and twisting the meaning of what was said to justify your outlandish accusations.,

"You explicitly (and groundlessly) equated Stalin with Churchill"

You are lying. Neither Churchill nor Stalin meet some threshold of goodness to be out on a pedestal and held as role models. It doesn't make them equivalent.

"If you want to show how Churchill supplied the Nazi war machine"

This is a strawman argument. I never attempted to do so. I said that Churchill approved of fascists destroying the left, propped up dictatorships to prevent the rise of the left and committed numerous war crimes to defend the British empire.

"Absolutely no one here has claimed that Churchill was perfect by modern standards, or by any standards."

Another strawman argument: I never asked anyone to be perfect including Churchill. I only claimed Churchill was not the antithesis of Hitler and shouldn't be idolized as was implied in the quote I was discussing.

"by applying standards you have since clearly refused to apply to Stalin"

This is a lie. I clearly indicated Stalin had a terrible legacy, which was an integral part of my argument.

"Churchill earned the ire of the international hard left "

Churchill earned the ire of the common man. Just go to Wales, India, etc

" Stalin (and his lackeys in the West)"

One has to be a simpleton or an authoritarian to claim that critics of Churchill love Stalin.

@65: Once again, “I was merely pointing out that your inaccurate criticism of Churchill @16, could instead have been very accurately applied to Stalin -- but with the rather large addition that Stalin ACTIVELY AIDED Nazi warfare.” You seem unable to understand both your original criticism of Churchill was wrong, and that it far better applied to Stalin.

If you want to pick some example of another leader being equivalent or better than Churchill on fighting fascism, then you might want to pick one who was, you know, actually equivalent or better than Churchill on fighting fascism, not one who actively enabled the most destructive fascist regime in all of history — at the very same momemt Churchill was actively fighting said fascist regime.

@66 Around in circles we go ..... This is another favorite technique of yours: you ignore everything said in the reply to your immediately preceding comment because as shown, it's all to obvious you were lying/twisting/strawman arguing, and you pivot back to a previous comment you made while ignoring it was previously debunked.

Have fun in your sand box.

'You can't win by the strength of your arguments so you start making stuff up and twisting the meaning of what was said to justify your outlandish accusations

[and]

you ignore everything said in the reply to your immediately preceding comment because as shown, it's all to obvious you were lying/twisting/strawman arguing, and you pivot back to a previous comment you made while ignoring it was previously debunked.'

this is why Wormtongue
excelled at Junior High:
a Gift for rhetoric, an
Unrelenting Need
for Bullying and a
Complete Lack
of Integrity.

it sorta worked
then & mostly
still works
now.

thank
you for
even Bothering
averagebob. he'll
Never stop: he just
Cannot Help himself.

@67: So, is “eliminationist” a word? Do you still need my help with that?

Your inability to make coherent, factually-based points to support your beliefs is not actually my problem.

"Your
inability to
make coherent,
factually-based points
to support your beliefs
is not actually my problem."

nope
it Ain't
your Problems
lie much much Deeper.

seek
Help
Soon.

@68 "mostly
still works
now."

If one assumes that whoever wrote the last comment wins

"he just
Cannot Help himself."

1) the need for dominance and power over others
2) Lies and cheats to achieve dominance

... not very healthy to put it mildly

so much
Promise. so
much Toxicity.
so Little self-reflection.

it's just
Sad af.

@72: What’s your definition of “genocide”? You use it all the time, you must know what it means, correct?

@73:

Professional
help. good
luck!

@67: You keep moving the goalposts. What you wrote @16 was very clear: "Churchill only became opposed to fascism when it became a threat to England and the British empire." That statement is wrong, as Churchill was warning of the dangers of Naziism and Hitler long before anyone else was, and long before Germany "became a threat to England and the British Empire." (Indeed, prior to the Battle of Britain, Hitler attempted to get peace terms with Britain, and Churchill was the reason he could not.)

You alone have used the word "antithesis" here; everyone else simply recognized Churchill was a longtime, dedicated opponent of Hitler, and gave him credit for it.

You took a brief, tangential reference to Churchill being a wartime opponent (not "antithesis") of Hitler, and used it as the basis for a long string of bitter complaints, loudly saying what everyone else here already knew about Churchill, none of it relevant to the original headline post. Just how all-consumingly angry and bitter must one be, to react in this manner at the mention of someone long dead? Your arrogantly condescending assumption, that you knew more about Churchill than anyone else here, was repeatedly shown to be wrong, and yet you continued your pompous lecturing. If you think that does not suggest, "the need for dominance and power over others," then you're wrong about that, too.