What explains Ron DeSantis’s woeful run for president? - The Spectator World

What explains Ron DeSantis’s woeful run for president? - The Spectator World Todd Pierce writes: I read the Spector for the sole purpose to stay informed of what the “Right” has in store for me to make my life, and my loved one’s, and the rest of the world’s, miserable with their constant push for war. Especially when some candiates, like the New Right’s, occasionaly conceal that as the equivalent of “secret writing,” in their designed to deceive campaign rhetoric (oh no, they would never do that, you tell me, but see the “Six-Party Theory” of the Grand Poobah of Right-wing campaigns, Arthur Finklestein, and how he helped the biggest military spender in our history perhaps, Donald Trump, get elected as the “Peace Candidate” for fringe Republicans, while delivering the military goods for “Traditional Republicans). So I won’t deny that this news fills me with glee, without any “regret tone,” when the Spectator was so enthusiastic for “DeSanctimonious” earlier. Though hating to admit I agree with Trump on anything (and don’t give me that **** about him being a “Right-wing Peacenik,” which he wasn’t, and isn’t. And any “plan" he has to end the US war against Russia in Ukraine can be counted on to include upfront “Fire and Fury” nuclear threats against Russia, in the finest "Traditional Conservative” Republican tradition, à la Goldwater, Nixon, and Eisenhower, down to the present day; so throughout my entire life. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/16/eisenhower-defends-use-of-nuclear-weapons-march-16-1955-1224003 He (Eisenhower) responded: “I wouldn’t comment in the sense that I would pretend to foresee the conditions of any particular conflict in which you might engage; but we have been, as you know, active in producing various types of weapons that feature nuclear fission ever since World War II. “Now, in any combat where these things can be used on strictly military targets and for strictly military purposes, I see no reason why they shouldn’t be used just exactly as you would use a bullet or anything else. And see the attached article: "This article examines the question of how serious President Eisenhower was in contemplating the use of nuclear weapons on the Korean peninsula and Chinese mainland. To do this, it surveys Eisenhower’s thinking and policies about the issue from 1953 to 1968 in regard to maintaining the security of South Korea. In contrast to many in the literature who argue that Eisenhower would have been very reluctant to authorize their use or who downplay the significance of his many statements about the use of nuclear weapons, it maintains that the president was much more willing to use nuclear compellent force than many have supposed.” https://www.nytimes.com/1984/06/08/world/us-papers-tell-of-53-policy-to-use-a-bomb-in-korea.html "Documents released today give details on a decision by President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Administration in 1953 to use atomic bombs in North Korea and Communist China, if necessary, to end the Korean War." https://mronline.org/2021/05/31/eisenhower-rejected-military-chiefs-demand-for-nuclear-war-on-china-classified-account-of-58-taiwan-strait-crisis-reveals/ Though to Eisenhower’s credit, he wasn’t as bad as his military advisors and the “Traditional Conservatives” of National Review magazine, who always demanded deference to the most hardline militarists in the military were: "Navy brass in the Pacific had urged unconditional support for Chiang’s regime during the civil war with the Communists and derided as “pinkies” those State Department officials–beginning with Secretary George C. Marshall–who entertained any doubts about the Kuomintang leader. "By 1958, the Air Force was so strongly committed to its role as an exclusively nuclear-weapons delivery organization that it insisted on being able to able to using nuclear weapons in any war it fought in the Pacific region. "The account of the crisis reveals that, when the Air Force Commander in the Pacific, Gen. Lawrence S. Kuter, learned of Eisenhower’s decision to defend the offshore islands with conventional weapons, he relayed the message to Gen. John Gerhart, the Air Force Deputy Chief of Staff. Shockingly, Gerhart responded that the Air Force “could not agree in principle” to the use of SAC forces for such non-nuclear operations." There you have it, precedent for Trump’s "Fire and Fury nuclear coercion threats!" > Trump is relishing his adversary’s slide, naturally. “DeSanctimonious is a terrible candidate,” he declared last weekend, in that glee-dressed-as-regret tone he so often deploys when discussing his failing rivals. “I think he’s out.” ……. > “His campaign is run by dorks for dorks,” says the Trump insider, and it’s easy to see his point. Murdoch, for one, has reportedly gone off him. According to reports, he “has privately winced” at DeSantis’s “anti-woke” messaging. Fox News has duly started making more critical noises about DeSantis. "The editorial board of Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal has not rushed to his defense.” Something else I agree with the Trump campaign on :-)