Wow. 

Comments (10)

From MSNBC this morning:

 Donald Trump asked a foreign policy expert advising him why the U.S. can’t use nuclear weapons, MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough said on the air Wednesday, citing an unnamed source who claimed he had spoken with the GOP presidential nominee.

“Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went to advise Donald Trump. And three times [Trump] asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times he asked at one point if we had them why can’t we use them,” Scarborough said on his “Morning Joe” program.

If this is accurate – and given Trump’s past policy pronouncements, it almost certainly is – a critical point has been reached, 52 years later (almost to the day). I wrote about it in my book The War Room.

The background to “Daisy,” Tony Schwartz explained to me many years later, was simple: conservatives of Goldwater’s ilk scared people. Even before he won the Republican Party’s presidential nomination in a nasty fight at the Cow Palace in San Francisco in July 1964, the hard-line conservative had alienated many Americans with words and deeds that were inarguably extreme. 

In fact, near the end of his acceptance speech, Goldwater resolved any doubt about that, when he hollered: “I would remind you that extremism in the defence of liberty is no vice! And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!”

Goldwater wanted to use the bomb, too, just as Trump now apparently seeks to do. So Schwartz and the Democrats came up with the ad that changed everything – an ad so powerful I later named my company after it. 

Here it is. Time for a rerun, wouldn’t you agree?

Comments (15)

Sing along!

Comments (3)

Real Clear Politics:

What’s it mean?

• It means Hillary got a much bigger convention bounce than the short-fingered vulgarian did. 
• It means the DNC convention – with better visuals, more flags, more patriotism – is the way to go for the next three months. Keep doing what works, folks. 
• It means that the media, who cannot resist chasing every shiny ball Trump rolls past them, are not helping the bilious “billionaire” as much as they once did. 
• It means that being organized and disciplined (as the Dems are, as the GOP isn’t) still works. 
• It means that terrorist attacks – eg., Nice, Munich, etc., that I have always feared as an October Surprise – don’t appear to impact public opinion for long periods of time. These attacks have (sadly) become frequent enough to command less of a hold on passions in a way that benefits Trump (happily). 
• It means – as I’ve always said – the American people are like people everywhere: they will always gravitate towards the candidate who isn’t a prick. 

Comments (17)

Ah, the Twitter warriors. 

Sirius XM’s Charles Adler first drew it to my attention, on his popular satellite radio program. An octogenarian Roman Catholic priest was slaughtered by ISIS subhumans in France, his throat slit at the altar. Charles read out the Twitter response of Stephane Dion, our minister of Foreign Affairs:

 “Saddened to hear of hostage taking in #Normandy <https://twitter.com/hashtag/Normandy?src=hash> church resulting in death of priest. Canada stands together with #France <https://twitter.com/hashtag/France?src=hash> #Rouen <https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rouen?src=hash> .”

 Then Charles read aloud what Jason Kenney tweeted, the guy running for the Alberta PC leadership while drawing a federal MP’s salary: 

 “A ‘hostage taking resulting in death?’ It was a premeditated terrorist murder: Priest forced to kneel, throat cut.”

 Charles wanted to know what I thought about that exchange. So I told him Dion’s words were wholly inadequate. The murder of a frail old priest, in a sanctuary that provides only love and fellowship? That wasn’t merely something to be “saddened” about. It was disgusting, despicable, diabolic crime. It wasn’t just “sad.” It was Satanic. It was, per Shakespeare, the actual thing of darkness.

So, Charles asked, was Jason Kenney – again, an Alberta politician drawing a generous federal salary – right in what he said? I guess so, I told Charles. But, I added: “Jason Kenney is full of crap.” In fact, he’s the worst kind of loathsome hypocrite. He’s got his head fully up his ass, I told Charles.

Let me explain. Kenney, back when he was somewhat relevant, was often referred to as Stephen Harper’s Minister of Everything. Perhaps he was. He was Minister of Employment and Social Development; he was Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism; he was Minister of Defence. In his day, he had armies and tanks at his disposal. He had billions of dollars and thousands of public servants to deploy as he saw fit. He had power, real power.

But what happened when tough-talking Jason had the power to do something about terror? Well, on just one day, an ISIS fanatic carried a gun to the War Memorial, murdered a soldier, jogged across Wellington, commandeered a minister’s car, drove it to Centre Block, shot up the place, and then got into a gun battle with some guards and cops.

What did Jason Kenney do to prevent that from happening? Nothing. But he certainly kept tweeting away about it, sitting in some hiding place somewhere. Before Cpl. Nathan Cirillo’s family could be properly notified – while the crisis was still unfolding, in fact, and when the Department of National Defence had declared “there will be no public release of his name or condition until it is certain all information is accurate and the family has agreed to do so” – Kenney’s corpulent little thumbs tapped out a tweet that disclosed that a soldier, later identified as Cirillo, had been killed.

Ah, the Twitter warrior, I said to Charles. The cyber-combatant. The one who dispenses John Wayne tough-guy talk from the safety of the sidelines – and occasionally violates DND rules, so as to look like he’s in charge, a la Alexander Haig.

Charles Adler was surprised by my total contempt for Jason Kenney, I think. He asked why I was so exercised about all this.

Here’s what I said, almost word for word: “I’ve written a lot of words for politicians over the years. So I tend to be skeptical about a lot of things they say. And I’m particularly skeptical about Twitter tough talk. Donald Trump has built a career on Twitter. What matters is what Bill Clinton did [after the Oklahoma City terror attack]: he hunted them down, applied justice, and he put them to death.”

So Charles let me go on: “Jason Kenney is full of crap. When he was there, and when he was in a position to do something about terror…he didn’t. I don’t think we should be taking any lessons from Jason Kenney. And, you know, I’m just kind of sick of political people, and a lot of cops, talking tough about this stuff – but, every day, bad things keep happening, like what happened in France. So, you know what, guys? Maybe you should all get off Twitter, and get your heads out of your asses, and maybe you should start doing something different from what you’ve been doing – because your little Twitter wars really aren’t protecting us, the citizens. Because Twitter wars, about who can express themselves with a tougher adjective? They’re all crap.”

Charles Adler told me that I should share my words with you, and now I have. My free advice to political people stands: save your puny “our thoughts and prayers go out to [fill in the day’s victims].” Save your Jason Kenney-style tweets, Twitter warriors.

Get off Twitter and go and actually do something. Because what you’ve been doing, to date, hasn’t worked – for us, the people you have sworn to protect.

 

 

 

Comments (3)

Comments (10)

Dear USA: You will need to pass an IQ test before we let you in. Signed, Canada.

Comments (8)

The latest, from the Times:

Khizr Khan, the soldier’s father, lashed out at Mr. Trump in an interview on Saturday, saying his wife had not spoken at the convention because it was too painful for her to talk about her son’s death.

Mr. Trump, he said, “is devoid of feeling the pain of a mother who has sacrificed her son.”

Gov. John Kasich of Ohio, a rival of Mr. Trump’s in the Republican primaries who has refused to endorse him, castigated him on Twitter. “There’s only one way to talk about Gold Star parents: with honor and respect,” he wrote, using the term for surviving family members of those who died in war.

And Hillary Clinton, Mr. Trump’s Democratic opponent, said he “was not a normal presidential candidate.”

Why is this controversy – one in a long, long string of controversies – potentially lethal for Trump?

Because veterans prefer Trump to Clinton, that’s why. 

And that’s why the Democratic convention in Philly was awash in flags and patriotism and soldiers – because Hillary and her strategists know that mistakes like the Khan mistake will peel away votes from Trump. Just like the McCain mistake did.

The Republicans are in the process of losing the Pro-Military Party mantle. They will regret it. 

Comments (24)

[H/T Daughter Two.]

Comments (3)

Hillary had some tough acts to follow – the Obamas, Bill, Joe. The pressure was on. 

I looked at the speech as a speechwriter does. That’s how I started off in politics, after all. Writing speeches for Jean Chretien.

Here’s the good:

• Her visuals were amazing – I don’t think she is capable of taking a bad picture
• Despite a sore throat, she didn’t stumble or fumble – her delivery was good
• She was best, I thought, towards the end – where she was talking about the rights of minority communities, and our collective obligation to defend them
• The speech touched on every theme and issue that was out there

And the not-so-good:

• That last point – touching on every theme and issue that was out there – was also the main weakness of her speech
• It was a laundry list speech – written by a team of speechwriters, and likely run through a couple focus groups
• Like all laundry list speeches, it kind of lacked a centre
• The main challenge of the speech was not sounding like a president – we all already know that she has an unbelievably impressive CV and is eminently qualified for the Oval Office
• The main challenge was addressing her greatest weakness – her persona, her personality, her humanity: she needed that speech to connect with people, and make them feel more comfortable about her
• I don’t think the speech accomplished that – not because she lacks humanity and the common touch, but because they tried to cram too much stuff into one speech

That all said, I think it probably did what they wanted to do. It reminded people that she is thoughtful and smart, and that she is not a maniac. 

Therefore, the ballot question, for one of the most important elections of our lifetimes – even for those of us up here in Canada – remains the same: 

Donald Trump. That’s what this thing is all about. 

And, here we go. 

Comments (28)