A Quote by Glenn Greenwald

The American national security state is totally bipartisan. My biggest problem is with the Democrats, like Feinstein and Pelosi, who are defending it because there is a Democrat in the White House, and they are party loyalists and hacks before they are public servants.
The Republican Party is the party of national security. There's hardly a national security wing of the Democratic Party anymore. So if we turn away from it, that'll be a big problem.
Chuck Schumer and Nancy's Pelosi party lost. Chuck and Nancy's party haven't won an election that counts other than Barack Obama's presidency in 2008 and 2012. Every other election the Democrats have been running with national House/Senate racers, they're losing.
National security advisors, like White House Chiefs of Staff, their job generally if they`re - if they`re competent and qualified and effective is to be honest brokers in the White House.
Forty percent of Americans describe themselves as conservative, 36% independents, and 20% liberal. And these independents are abandoning the Democrat Party in droves. And a key point, they're abandoning the Democrat Party without the Republican Party giving them any reason to go to them. They're just abandoning the Democrats because they don't like what they see.
We have a media that goes along with the government by parroting phrases intended to provoke a certain emotional response - for example, "national security." Everyone says "national security" to the point that we now must use the term "national security." But it is not national security that they're concerned with; it is state security. And that's a key distinction.
Am I a Democrat? Yes, I'm a Democrat. But at the end of the day, when I take the oath as a senator it won't be to do the bidding of the Democratic Party or a president in the White House. I will be there to fight for the people of South Carolina.
Whether we're talking about what the role of the government is, what you think of the United Nations, political leaders or how to respond to [Hurricane] Katrina and whether it had anything to do with race, across a wide variety of issues we see differences between mainstream black and white American opinion that dwarfs anything in American public opinion, period. Democrat versus Republican, men versus women, conservative versus liberal, the black/white divide is the biggest, one of the biggest in the world, and certainly the largest gap in the United States.
National security is a really big problem for journalists, because no journalist worth his salt wants to endanger the national security, but the law talks about anyone who endangers the security of the United States is going to go to jail. So, here you are, especially in the Pentagon. Some guy tells you something. He says that's a national security matter. Well, you're supposed to tremble and get scared and it never, almost never means the security of the national government. More likely to mean the security or the personal happiness of the guy who is telling you something.
It's the Democrat Party that is destroying the integrity of the American electoral system. It's not Vladimir Putin. It's not Dmitry Medvedev. It's the Democrat Party, which has sought to destroy the integrity of the American electoral system, all because they're a bunch of spoilsports who lost the election.
The image the Republicans have of themselves needs the image they have of the Democrats to bring it into sharp focus. The Democrats are plainly a disreputable crowd; the Republicans, by contrast, are men of standing and sobriety. Many a middle-class American in many a small town has had to explain painfully why he chose to be a Democrat. No middle-class American need feel uneasy as a Republican. Even when he is a minority--for example, among the heathen on a college campus--he can, like any white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant, warm himself before his little fire of self-esteem.
If we've got Democrats, whether they be in the House or the Senate, that are not willing to put our national security as their very top priority and secure our borders, I think it's time that we get someone else in that position and that goes regardless of party.
When I worked in the Obama White House, people in national security positions had been uneasy making broad public arguments, particularly about political matters.
There isn't a Democrat in politics alive who does not know what the Obama presidency has meant for the Democrat Party around the country. They've lost 1,500 seats. The Democrats only have five states, ladies and gentlemen, where they control the governorship and the state legislature, only five!
American national security and American economic interests, of course - every president, every secretary of state - that is the primary goal. As you are in this job and in the work, you begin to see, though, that in the long run, both American economic interests and American national security are better served when there are other decent countries in the world who are both your allies and even when your adversaries are acting more decently.
People still assume the White House Correspondents' Association works for the White House, when in reality, it's a group of journalists who cover the White House. It's a branding thing, but because it has the 'White House' before it, people think they're just King Joffrey's goons.
It's very easy to unite a party around opposition or wanting to get the White House back. That's a unifying message, and you're seeing the Democrats uniting around being the party of 'no' and the party of 'resist.'
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!