Rick Perlstein wakes up to the racist reactionary proto-fascist foundation of the American Right:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/11/magazine/i-thought-i-understood-the-american-right-trump-proved-me-wrong.html?_r=0

Better late than never. To be fair, while I was always aware of that foundation, Obama's two elections briefly convinced me that the Left was correct that it was economic populism and not racism/sexism/bigotry that was the new driver of national discontent, but unlike Bernie and his bots, Trump's campaign very quickly convinced me to go back to my original view of the GOP as the latest avatar of hate and ignorance going back to the Know-Nothings, the CSA, the Klan, the fans of Mac the Knife and the communist witch hunts, and the Dixiecrats.

There are some  Trump voters who are more stupid than evil, but by and large, the Right represents the dark forces of the anti-Enlightenment.

A bit more on Syria.

A lot of Obama fans are saying he "learned from Libya" not to get involved in Syria. There are some problems with that.

First, Syria isn't Libya, just as Libya isn't Iraq, just as Iraq wasn't Afghanistan. This habit of trying to generalize and draw "rules" is always a mistake, as well as lazy, ignoring that even Muslim dictatorships are different, as are the circumstances that might call for-or against-military action. Every case needs to be examined on its own merits, not by comparison with other places and situations which may be very different. (For that matter Korea and Vietnam were very different as well.)

Second, Obama didn't learn from Libya. In both Syria and Libya he acted belatedly and in split-the-difference fashion, without a long term strategy. In Libya, the results may have been bad for Libyans, but Syria has been a disaster for the West, destabilizing Europe, helping to bring Trump to power and helping Putin. That was because Obama didn't stay out of Syria, he did just enough to prolong the war.  That suggests, though it doesn't prove, that Hillary was right in wanting to do more immediately to help the rebels (not all of whom at the time were anti-Western). Or that Obama should have actually done nothing, rather than drawing red lines he then ignored.

None of which means supporting Trump now: Trump isn't Obama, much less Hillary. He is an evil ignorant clown and nothing he touches can be expected to turn out for the good, never mind the best. But I oppose Trump, without embracing Obama's policies, or adopting the view that US military intervention is always wrong. As I said, case by case, situation by situation.

A military response to Assad's latest war crime is not in itself unreasonable, if carried out by a legitimate administration with care and thought, after preparing both Congress and the public. But this administration is neither legitimate or rational, and no effort was made to consult with Congress or outline plans to the public. What this really is is an attempt to boost Trump's approval ratings with the usual "rally round the flag" effect, and in the short run, with the help of an always incompetent MSM, I expect it will do just that.

But the bounce won't last, and this is a card with limited ability to replay.