by wj
But so soon?
It appears that Senator Cruz’ campaign is gaining enough ground to worry Mr Trump. How do we tell? Because Trump has come out saying that “the party might face a legal headache if it nominates Cruz.” Specifically, ““Republicans are going to have to ask themselves the question: ‘Do we want a candidate who could be tied up in court for two years?’” while the courts make a decision on the subject.
It’s no secret that Cruz is a US citizen who happens to have been born in Canada. He’s a citizen by birth because his parents were US citizens. Just as Senator McCain is a citizen, even though he was born in Panama. (And just as Obama would be a US citizen by birth, no matter where he was born.)
But apparently Trump is concerned enough that Cruz might cut into his support that he felt it worthwhile to return to a favorite theme. For those who have argued that the whole carrying on around Obama had nothing to do with his race, consider: last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.” Sounds as if Cruz, like Obama, just isn’t white enough for him — or at least Trump thinks a lot of his supporters will feel that way.
“For those who have argued that the whole carrying on around Obama had nothing to do with his race, consider: last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.” Sounds as if Cruz, like Obama, just isn’t white enough for him — or at least Trump thinks a lot of his supporters will feel that way.”
Say whaaaat?
“For those who have argued that the whole carrying on around Obama had nothing to do with his race, consider: last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.” Sounds as if Cruz, like Obama, just isn’t white enough for him — or at least Trump thinks a lot of his supporters will feel that way.”
Say whaaaat?
“For those who have argued that the whole carrying on around Obama had nothing to do with his race, consider: last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.” Sounds as if Cruz, like Obama, just isn’t white enough for him — or at least Trump thinks a lot of his supporters will feel that way.”
Say whaaaat?
I thought it wasn’t entirely clear that McCain was a US citizen at birth under the law at the time (constitutionally it’s a different question).
I thought it wasn’t entirely clear that McCain was a US citizen at birth under the law at the time (constitutionally it’s a different question).
I thought it wasn’t entirely clear that McCain was a US citizen at birth under the law at the time (constitutionally it’s a different question).
Cruz also has Cuban citizenship through his father, a citizenship that he has yet to renounce.
I, for one, look forward to the Castro Bros. endorsing their “native son”.
Cruz also has Cuban citizenship through his father, a citizenship that he has yet to renounce.
I, for one, look forward to the Castro Bros. endorsing their “native son”.
Cruz also has Cuban citizenship through his father, a citizenship that he has yet to renounce.
I, for one, look forward to the Castro Bros. endorsing their “native son”.
Marty. ask yourself this. What is the difference between Senator McCain, who was born in Panama, and who nobody worried was not a “natural born” citizen, and President Obama and Senator Cruz? Can you see any other explanation for Trump’s statements about the latter? I’m open to suggestions….
Marty. ask yourself this. What is the difference between Senator McCain, who was born in Panama, and who nobody worried was not a “natural born” citizen, and President Obama and Senator Cruz? Can you see any other explanation for Trump’s statements about the latter? I’m open to suggestions….
Marty. ask yourself this. What is the difference between Senator McCain, who was born in Panama, and who nobody worried was not a “natural born” citizen, and President Obama and Senator Cruz? Can you see any other explanation for Trump’s statements about the latter? I’m open to suggestions….
So lets not become all birthers here, by Cuban law he is not a Cuban citizen, they explicitly do not recognize dual citizenship among other things. As far as Trump goes, I cant find that line wj drew between his previous Canadian citizenship and not being white enough.
So lets not become all birthers here, by Cuban law he is not a Cuban citizen, they explicitly do not recognize dual citizenship among other things. As far as Trump goes, I cant find that line wj drew between his previous Canadian citizenship and not being white enough.
So lets not become all birthers here, by Cuban law he is not a Cuban citizen, they explicitly do not recognize dual citizenship among other things. As far as Trump goes, I cant find that line wj drew between his previous Canadian citizenship and not being white enough.
You have three Presidential candidates. Two were born outside the US (to parents who were US citizens); one has it called into question whether he was or was not born in the US (even though his mother was a US citizen — so it would be the same situation regardless). And yet, Trump et al showed no signs of worrying about whether McCain was eligible. But got really worked up about Obama and now Cruz.
What is the difference there? I can see race/ethnicity. I don’t really see anything else. But, as I say, I’m open to suggestions.
You have three Presidential candidates. Two were born outside the US (to parents who were US citizens); one has it called into question whether he was or was not born in the US (even though his mother was a US citizen — so it would be the same situation regardless). And yet, Trump et al showed no signs of worrying about whether McCain was eligible. But got really worked up about Obama and now Cruz.
What is the difference there? I can see race/ethnicity. I don’t really see anything else. But, as I say, I’m open to suggestions.
You have three Presidential candidates. Two were born outside the US (to parents who were US citizens); one has it called into question whether he was or was not born in the US (even though his mother was a US citizen — so it would be the same situation regardless). And yet, Trump et al showed no signs of worrying about whether McCain was eligible. But got really worked up about Obama and now Cruz.
What is the difference there? I can see race/ethnicity. I don’t really see anything else. But, as I say, I’m open to suggestions.
So Trump ran a close race against McCain? Which is the difference I see in all those people. Trump really never had a reason to try and get people to worry about McCain. Just like he didn’t worry much about Cruz until now.
So Trump ran a close race against McCain? Which is the difference I see in all those people. Trump really never had a reason to try and get people to worry about McCain. Just like he didn’t worry much about Cruz until now.
So Trump ran a close race against McCain? Which is the difference I see in all those people. Trump really never had a reason to try and get people to worry about McCain. Just like he didn’t worry much about Cruz until now.
last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.”
Could be he was pandering to parochial religious interests, rather than racism.
To the degree that Cubans are religious, they’re mostly Catholic.
As far as race, Cubans run the gamut, although Trump’s audience may or may not be aware of that.
last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.”
Could be he was pandering to parochial religious interests, rather than racism.
To the degree that Cubans are religious, they’re mostly Catholic.
As far as race, Cubans run the gamut, although Trump’s audience may or may not be aware of that.
last month Trunmp was in Iowa saying “not too many evangelicals come out of Cuba.”
Could be he was pandering to parochial religious interests, rather than racism.
To the degree that Cubans are religious, they’re mostly Catholic.
As far as race, Cubans run the gamut, although Trump’s audience may or may not be aware of that.
And in 2008, when both McCain and Obama were running (and Trump was not)? And Trump was leading the charge on where Obama was born….
And in 2008, when both McCain and Obama were running (and Trump was not)? And Trump was leading the charge on where Obama was born….
And in 2008, when both McCain and Obama were running (and Trump was not)? And Trump was leading the charge on where Obama was born….
Obama was the Democrat? You know, Trump is called every name, racist, misogynist, homophobe. But he really is just anti Democrat AFAICT. They created the tent, he is just against anything in it.
Obama was the Democrat? You know, Trump is called every name, racist, misogynist, homophobe. But he really is just anti Democrat AFAICT. They created the tent, he is just against anything in it.
Obama was the Democrat? You know, Trump is called every name, racist, misogynist, homophobe. But he really is just anti Democrat AFAICT. They created the tent, he is just against anything in it.
Right, because e.g. Mexicans are Democrats. Having said that, I have no idea if he’s actually racist, but he’s certainly willing to pander to racism.
Right, because e.g. Mexicans are Democrats. Having said that, I have no idea if he’s actually racist, but he’s certainly willing to pander to racism.
Right, because e.g. Mexicans are Democrats. Having said that, I have no idea if he’s actually racist, but he’s certainly willing to pander to racism.
I’m betting a high percentage of illegal aliens are Democrats at this point. As I watched a protest last night of undocumented aliens protesting to get a drivers license. Like there was no cognitive dissonance in that at all. You are a criminal, protesting and being interviewed on the news because you have no fear of being arrested or deported by this administration.
I cant understand how anyone watching could think badly of them. You know, they just want a better life. Like bank robbers and wall st con artists and drug dealers and ….
I’m betting a high percentage of illegal aliens are Democrats at this point. As I watched a protest last night of undocumented aliens protesting to get a drivers license. Like there was no cognitive dissonance in that at all. You are a criminal, protesting and being interviewed on the news because you have no fear of being arrested or deported by this administration.
I cant understand how anyone watching could think badly of them. You know, they just want a better life. Like bank robbers and wall st con artists and drug dealers and ….
I’m betting a high percentage of illegal aliens are Democrats at this point. As I watched a protest last night of undocumented aliens protesting to get a drivers license. Like there was no cognitive dissonance in that at all. You are a criminal, protesting and being interviewed on the news because you have no fear of being arrested or deported by this administration.
I cant understand how anyone watching could think badly of them. You know, they just want a better life. Like bank robbers and wall st con artists and drug dealers and ….
I’m betting a high percentage of illegal aliens are Democrats at this point
because they vote in Democratic primaries ? because they vote Democratic in Presidential races ? because they give money to Democratic politicians ?
I’m betting a high percentage of illegal aliens are Democrats at this point
because they vote in Democratic primaries ? because they vote Democratic in Presidential races ? because they give money to Democratic politicians ?
I’m betting a high percentage of illegal aliens are Democrats at this point
because they vote in Democratic primaries ? because they vote Democratic in Presidential races ? because they give money to Democratic politicians ?
Because this administration has deported more than any previous ones?
Because this administration has deported more than any previous ones?
Because this administration has deported more than any previous ones?
not today….
not today….
not today….
I am not at all sure why anyone cares what Donald Trump thinks.
But evidently, enough people do. These are people I don’t hold in high regard. Donald Trump is a huckster. People who cannot see that he’s all about self-promotion aren’t worth my time.
Sorry if I’ve stepped on any toes, here.
I am not at all sure why anyone cares what Donald Trump thinks.
But evidently, enough people do. These are people I don’t hold in high regard. Donald Trump is a huckster. People who cannot see that he’s all about self-promotion aren’t worth my time.
Sorry if I’ve stepped on any toes, here.
I am not at all sure why anyone cares what Donald Trump thinks.
But evidently, enough people do. These are people I don’t hold in high regard. Donald Trump is a huckster. People who cannot see that he’s all about self-promotion aren’t worth my time.
Sorry if I’ve stepped on any toes, here.
Slart,
Donald Trump is an accomplished CEO and corporate equivalent of a huckster. However, IMHO, the Trump phenomenon is an important event, the other side of the Obama coin. As Obama ran on hope and change as a marginally qualified candidate almost 8 years ago, Trump is employing the same tactics to attract another demographic. Sweeping statements and rhetorical resonance that bonds him to a previously unrepresented demographic is what got Obama elected and reelected. It may, though probably not, be enough to get a nomination for Trump.
The message is that there is some reasonably large percentage of people in this country who are ready to follow whoever tells them that their thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes matter. Same message, delivered the same way, different constituency.
So who will ever be the candidate that candidly says s/he will represent all, or most, of the people and convinces people s/he means it? Not Trump, Obama didn’t even want to, Hilary can’t. You really can’t self describe as a socialist or libertarian and hope to. IDK.
But just ignoring Trump will be a mistake in the sweep of history.
Slart,
Donald Trump is an accomplished CEO and corporate equivalent of a huckster. However, IMHO, the Trump phenomenon is an important event, the other side of the Obama coin. As Obama ran on hope and change as a marginally qualified candidate almost 8 years ago, Trump is employing the same tactics to attract another demographic. Sweeping statements and rhetorical resonance that bonds him to a previously unrepresented demographic is what got Obama elected and reelected. It may, though probably not, be enough to get a nomination for Trump.
The message is that there is some reasonably large percentage of people in this country who are ready to follow whoever tells them that their thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes matter. Same message, delivered the same way, different constituency.
So who will ever be the candidate that candidly says s/he will represent all, or most, of the people and convinces people s/he means it? Not Trump, Obama didn’t even want to, Hilary can’t. You really can’t self describe as a socialist or libertarian and hope to. IDK.
But just ignoring Trump will be a mistake in the sweep of history.
Slart,
Donald Trump is an accomplished CEO and corporate equivalent of a huckster. However, IMHO, the Trump phenomenon is an important event, the other side of the Obama coin. As Obama ran on hope and change as a marginally qualified candidate almost 8 years ago, Trump is employing the same tactics to attract another demographic. Sweeping statements and rhetorical resonance that bonds him to a previously unrepresented demographic is what got Obama elected and reelected. It may, though probably not, be enough to get a nomination for Trump.
The message is that there is some reasonably large percentage of people in this country who are ready to follow whoever tells them that their thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes matter. Same message, delivered the same way, different constituency.
So who will ever be the candidate that candidly says s/he will represent all, or most, of the people and convinces people s/he means it? Not Trump, Obama didn’t even want to, Hilary can’t. You really can’t self describe as a socialist or libertarian and hope to. IDK.
But just ignoring Trump will be a mistake in the sweep of history.
We can hope that from the sweep to the dustbin is but a short step.
We can hope that from the sweep to the dustbin is but a short step.
We can hope that from the sweep to the dustbin is but a short step.
No question that Trump cannot and should not be ignored. Or that he is speaking to a significant constituency that feels like their views are ignored by (most) other politicians. But what he says speaks to what those people’s views are, does it not?
As for the comparison to Obama. Yes, Obama spoke to a different group of voters. But did he do it by demonizing anybody? I don’t remember it that way, but my memory may well be faulty.
No question that Trump cannot and should not be ignored. Or that he is speaking to a significant constituency that feels like their views are ignored by (most) other politicians. But what he says speaks to what those people’s views are, does it not?
As for the comparison to Obama. Yes, Obama spoke to a different group of voters. But did he do it by demonizing anybody? I don’t remember it that way, but my memory may well be faulty.
No question that Trump cannot and should not be ignored. Or that he is speaking to a significant constituency that feels like their views are ignored by (most) other politicians. But what he says speaks to what those people’s views are, does it not?
As for the comparison to Obama. Yes, Obama spoke to a different group of voters. But did he do it by demonizing anybody? I don’t remember it that way, but my memory may well be faulty.
Comparing the rhetoric of Obama and Trump and finding any sort of equivalency beyond that which can be found between that of any two politicians taken at random is, well, interesting. Consider my so-called mind boggled.
Comparing the rhetoric of Obama and Trump and finding any sort of equivalency beyond that which can be found between that of any two politicians taken at random is, well, interesting. Consider my so-called mind boggled.
Comparing the rhetoric of Obama and Trump and finding any sort of equivalency beyond that which can be found between that of any two politicians taken at random is, well, interesting. Consider my so-called mind boggled.
there is some reasonably large percentage of people in this country who are ready to follow whoever tells them that their thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes matter.
Not all thoughts, feelings, fears, and hopes are the same.
Ergo, not all messages are the same.
Just as a point of interest.
As far as representing all, or most, of the people, that’s a tall order, because all, or most, of the people don’t want the same things.
Whoever wins will represent a distinct set of demographics. Everybody else will piss and moan about it until 2016.
Then it’s lather, rinse, and repeat.
GLTA
there is some reasonably large percentage of people in this country who are ready to follow whoever tells them that their thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes matter.
Not all thoughts, feelings, fears, and hopes are the same.
Ergo, not all messages are the same.
Just as a point of interest.
As far as representing all, or most, of the people, that’s a tall order, because all, or most, of the people don’t want the same things.
Whoever wins will represent a distinct set of demographics. Everybody else will piss and moan about it until 2016.
Then it’s lather, rinse, and repeat.
GLTA
there is some reasonably large percentage of people in this country who are ready to follow whoever tells them that their thoughts and feelings, fears and hopes matter.
Not all thoughts, feelings, fears, and hopes are the same.
Ergo, not all messages are the same.
Just as a point of interest.
As far as representing all, or most, of the people, that’s a tall order, because all, or most, of the people don’t want the same things.
Whoever wins will represent a distinct set of demographics. Everybody else will piss and moan about it until 2016.
Then it’s lather, rinse, and repeat.
GLTA
ladies and gentlemen, Ted Cruz:
the whole party is completely devoid of intelligence.
ladies and gentlemen, Ted Cruz:
the whole party is completely devoid of intelligence.
ladies and gentlemen, Ted Cruz:
the whole party is completely devoid of intelligence.
^That
^That
^That
Cleek, is Cruz concerned that the atheists will force removal of any religious symbols in the National Cemetery? Or is he thinking that the Muslims will take over and remove any symbols but their own?
Just curious which fantasy he is embracing.
Cleek, is Cruz concerned that the atheists will force removal of any religious symbols in the National Cemetery? Or is he thinking that the Muslims will take over and remove any symbols but their own?
Just curious which fantasy he is embracing.
Cleek, is Cruz concerned that the atheists will force removal of any religious symbols in the National Cemetery? Or is he thinking that the Muslims will take over and remove any symbols but their own?
Just curious which fantasy he is embracing.
God is going to remove them all, just to remove all doubt that he has abandoned us.
God is going to remove them all, just to remove all doubt that he has abandoned us.
God is going to remove them all, just to remove all doubt that he has abandoned us.
I think I have to agree with Marty’s initial point (not with the later ones). It does not matter whether Trump is actually racist. His racially tinged attack on Cruz is just tactical since he knows that stuff like this works and he will always use the crudest way of attack possible since that is part of his persona (and shtick). If McCain was still running and seen as a danger by Trump, he would probably warm up the old ‘non-white love-child’ stories to discredit him in the eyes of the (undoubtedly racist) base.
Personally I think Trump is a general despiser of others and considers the very base he is pandering to as just more rubes to deceive for gain. He just lacks the intellectual underpinnings of some of the great demagogues of the past (like Dr. Joseph Goebbels who noted in his diary after his most famous speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportpalast_speech how he totally despised his audience that fell for his cheap tricks and added ‘if I had asked them to jump out the window, many would have done so’).
Imo Trump has no ideology and is in it just for himself (btw I see Cruz similarly as mainly a user of but not believer in his own ideology unlike his father).
I think I have to agree with Marty’s initial point (not with the later ones). It does not matter whether Trump is actually racist. His racially tinged attack on Cruz is just tactical since he knows that stuff like this works and he will always use the crudest way of attack possible since that is part of his persona (and shtick). If McCain was still running and seen as a danger by Trump, he would probably warm up the old ‘non-white love-child’ stories to discredit him in the eyes of the (undoubtedly racist) base.
Personally I think Trump is a general despiser of others and considers the very base he is pandering to as just more rubes to deceive for gain. He just lacks the intellectual underpinnings of some of the great demagogues of the past (like Dr. Joseph Goebbels who noted in his diary after his most famous speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportpalast_speech how he totally despised his audience that fell for his cheap tricks and added ‘if I had asked them to jump out the window, many would have done so’).
Imo Trump has no ideology and is in it just for himself (btw I see Cruz similarly as mainly a user of but not believer in his own ideology unlike his father).
I think I have to agree with Marty’s initial point (not with the later ones). It does not matter whether Trump is actually racist. His racially tinged attack on Cruz is just tactical since he knows that stuff like this works and he will always use the crudest way of attack possible since that is part of his persona (and shtick). If McCain was still running and seen as a danger by Trump, he would probably warm up the old ‘non-white love-child’ stories to discredit him in the eyes of the (undoubtedly racist) base.
Personally I think Trump is a general despiser of others and considers the very base he is pandering to as just more rubes to deceive for gain. He just lacks the intellectual underpinnings of some of the great demagogues of the past (like Dr. Joseph Goebbels who noted in his diary after his most famous speech https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sportpalast_speech how he totally despised his audience that fell for his cheap tricks and added ‘if I had asked them to jump out the window, many would have done so’).
Imo Trump has no ideology and is in it just for himself (btw I see Cruz similarly as mainly a user of but not believer in his own ideology unlike his father).
“So who will ever be the candidate that candidly says s/he will represent all, or most, of the people and convinces people s/he means it?”
First off, you just lost a good @40% of the conservative electorate with this politically correct s/he stuff.
For them, candidly, a big swinging dick is required to deal with Putin, at the very least. In fact, Putin could run for the Republican nomination in this cycle and be second of third in the primary polls right now, given his strong, erect leadership in showing Ukraine what for.
Trump, Putin’s admirer, (we know this from the former’s rhetorical resonance: “I know da guy. Me and him, we’re like two peas in the a whatchamacallit, the pod. We did a satellite feed together, well, separately, but never actually spoke cause he tawlks funny. Whatissat, Russkie? Anyways, I look at Vlad as Vice Presidential material in my administration.”
Soaring rhetoric. Like the Gettysburg Address. Return to sender.
Second, name one of the 44 American Presidents who has met your criteria.
If you name George Washington, think about it. Who’d he run against?
I was going to say Abe Lincoln, but then that wouldn’t account for the belligerent conservative Democrats who shot him in the head, and who then switched sides at a later date, but with more guns.
I tell ya what, you want “candid” and a guy who “convinces most of the people he means it.”
He shot himself in a bunker in Germany circa 1945.
So, as the now deceased and sometimes misogynist, but very likable uncle (this was in the 1960s, I think) in a family I was once part of told his wife after she tried to give him directions from the back seat of the car when he was obviously lost:
“Batsh*t, Betty. Batsh*t!
“So who will ever be the candidate that candidly says s/he will represent all, or most, of the people and convinces people s/he means it?”
First off, you just lost a good @40% of the conservative electorate with this politically correct s/he stuff.
For them, candidly, a big swinging dick is required to deal with Putin, at the very least. In fact, Putin could run for the Republican nomination in this cycle and be second of third in the primary polls right now, given his strong, erect leadership in showing Ukraine what for.
Trump, Putin’s admirer, (we know this from the former’s rhetorical resonance: “I know da guy. Me and him, we’re like two peas in the a whatchamacallit, the pod. We did a satellite feed together, well, separately, but never actually spoke cause he tawlks funny. Whatissat, Russkie? Anyways, I look at Vlad as Vice Presidential material in my administration.”
Soaring rhetoric. Like the Gettysburg Address. Return to sender.
Second, name one of the 44 American Presidents who has met your criteria.
If you name George Washington, think about it. Who’d he run against?
I was going to say Abe Lincoln, but then that wouldn’t account for the belligerent conservative Democrats who shot him in the head, and who then switched sides at a later date, but with more guns.
I tell ya what, you want “candid” and a guy who “convinces most of the people he means it.”
He shot himself in a bunker in Germany circa 1945.
So, as the now deceased and sometimes misogynist, but very likable uncle (this was in the 1960s, I think) in a family I was once part of told his wife after she tried to give him directions from the back seat of the car when he was obviously lost:
“Batsh*t, Betty. Batsh*t!
“So who will ever be the candidate that candidly says s/he will represent all, or most, of the people and convinces people s/he means it?”
First off, you just lost a good @40% of the conservative electorate with this politically correct s/he stuff.
For them, candidly, a big swinging dick is required to deal with Putin, at the very least. In fact, Putin could run for the Republican nomination in this cycle and be second of third in the primary polls right now, given his strong, erect leadership in showing Ukraine what for.
Trump, Putin’s admirer, (we know this from the former’s rhetorical resonance: “I know da guy. Me and him, we’re like two peas in the a whatchamacallit, the pod. We did a satellite feed together, well, separately, but never actually spoke cause he tawlks funny. Whatissat, Russkie? Anyways, I look at Vlad as Vice Presidential material in my administration.”
Soaring rhetoric. Like the Gettysburg Address. Return to sender.
Second, name one of the 44 American Presidents who has met your criteria.
If you name George Washington, think about it. Who’d he run against?
I was going to say Abe Lincoln, but then that wouldn’t account for the belligerent conservative Democrats who shot him in the head, and who then switched sides at a later date, but with more guns.
I tell ya what, you want “candid” and a guy who “convinces most of the people he means it.”
He shot himself in a bunker in Germany circa 1945.
So, as the now deceased and sometimes misogynist, but very likable uncle (this was in the 1960s, I think) in a family I was once part of told his wife after she tried to give him directions from the back seat of the car when he was obviously lost:
“Batsh*t, Betty. Batsh*t!
Just curious which fantasy he is embracing.
the context was ‘what happens if liberals get 5 judges on SCOTUS’.
http://abovethelaw.com/2016/01/supreme-court-to-desecrate-soldier-graves-just-another-day-in-ted-cruzs-crazy-machine/
because, you know, all liberals are militant, scorched-earth, atheists who desperately want to desecrate the graves of American soldiers. after they dig up the bones and turn them into bongs, of course.
Just curious which fantasy he is embracing.
the context was ‘what happens if liberals get 5 judges on SCOTUS’.
http://abovethelaw.com/2016/01/supreme-court-to-desecrate-soldier-graves-just-another-day-in-ted-cruzs-crazy-machine/
because, you know, all liberals are militant, scorched-earth, atheists who desperately want to desecrate the graves of American soldiers. after they dig up the bones and turn them into bongs, of course.
Just curious which fantasy he is embracing.
the context was ‘what happens if liberals get 5 judges on SCOTUS’.
http://abovethelaw.com/2016/01/supreme-court-to-desecrate-soldier-graves-just-another-day-in-ted-cruzs-crazy-machine/
because, you know, all liberals are militant, scorched-earth, atheists who desperately want to desecrate the graves of American soldiers. after they dig up the bones and turn them into bongs, of course.
though i suppose the bong thing would be the desecration and the headstone thing would be vandalism.
but, whatddaya want from me… i’m just a liberal and got all excited at the thought of being an anti-American ghoul.
though i suppose the bong thing would be the desecration and the headstone thing would be vandalism.
but, whatddaya want from me… i’m just a liberal and got all excited at the thought of being an anti-American ghoul.
though i suppose the bong thing would be the desecration and the headstone thing would be vandalism.
but, whatddaya want from me… i’m just a liberal and got all excited at the thought of being an anti-American ghoul.
Trump already called McCain a loser and not a war hero. The DC press corps thought that was the end of Trump’s campaign. His supporters ate it up.
That was almost 6 months ago.
Trump already called McCain a loser and not a war hero. The DC press corps thought that was the end of Trump’s campaign. His supporters ate it up.
That was almost 6 months ago.
Trump already called McCain a loser and not a war hero. The DC press corps thought that was the end of Trump’s campaign. His supporters ate it up.
That was almost 6 months ago.
Meanwhile, Cruz takes on Rubio’s Cuban heels:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/ted-cruz-marco-rubio-boots-tweet-217388#ixzz3wTLS2kEw
It’s like Tony Montana threatening Desi Arnaz.
Say hello to my liddle frweind!
The entire party is a load of disgraceful sh*t. Just a bunch of killers.
Meanwhile, Cruz takes on Rubio’s Cuban heels:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/ted-cruz-marco-rubio-boots-tweet-217388#ixzz3wTLS2kEw
It’s like Tony Montana threatening Desi Arnaz.
Say hello to my liddle frweind!
The entire party is a load of disgraceful sh*t. Just a bunch of killers.
Meanwhile, Cruz takes on Rubio’s Cuban heels:
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/ted-cruz-marco-rubio-boots-tweet-217388#ixzz3wTLS2kEw
It’s like Tony Montana threatening Desi Arnaz.
Say hello to my liddle frweind!
The entire party is a load of disgraceful sh*t. Just a bunch of killers.
I can’t recall a time in my life when I wasn’t bored by Donald Trump. My best guess is it was sometime around when I first was aware of his existence. Certainly, before 1987.
It’s enough to make me go full libertarian, even though I know full well the futility of doing so.
I can’t recall a time in my life when I wasn’t bored by Donald Trump. My best guess is it was sometime around when I first was aware of his existence. Certainly, before 1987.
It’s enough to make me go full libertarian, even though I know full well the futility of doing so.
I can’t recall a time in my life when I wasn’t bored by Donald Trump. My best guess is it was sometime around when I first was aware of his existence. Certainly, before 1987.
It’s enough to make me go full libertarian, even though I know full well the futility of doing so.
Why not go fot the libertine party? 😉
Why not go fot the libertine party? 😉
Why not go fot the libertine party? 😉
Maybe Jerry Lewis will enter the race.
The Republican Party could use more contemptuous schtick:
https://www.vice.com/print/jerry-lewis-is-still-alive
The only person who ever believed Trump when he told her that her thoughts and feelings, and her fears and hopes mattered was Marla Maples:
http://www.accesshollywood.com/articles/marla-maples-speaks-out-on-sex-with-the-donald-the-best-shes-ever-had-94989/
As it happens, that was a load of crap too, but there are a substantial numbers of voters right now who are loving the rogering he’s giving them.
Maybe Jerry Lewis will enter the race.
The Republican Party could use more contemptuous schtick:
https://www.vice.com/print/jerry-lewis-is-still-alive
The only person who ever believed Trump when he told her that her thoughts and feelings, and her fears and hopes mattered was Marla Maples:
http://www.accesshollywood.com/articles/marla-maples-speaks-out-on-sex-with-the-donald-the-best-shes-ever-had-94989/
As it happens, that was a load of crap too, but there are a substantial numbers of voters right now who are loving the rogering he’s giving them.
Maybe Jerry Lewis will enter the race.
The Republican Party could use more contemptuous schtick:
https://www.vice.com/print/jerry-lewis-is-still-alive
The only person who ever believed Trump when he told her that her thoughts and feelings, and her fears and hopes mattered was Marla Maples:
http://www.accesshollywood.com/articles/marla-maples-speaks-out-on-sex-with-the-donald-the-best-shes-ever-had-94989/
As it happens, that was a load of crap too, but there are a substantial numbers of voters right now who are loving the rogering he’s giving them.
By the way, McCain has said several times he will vote for Trump if the chump is the nominee.
But then McCain would vote for the Vietcong who dislocated his shoulders and beat the crap out of him if they were the Republican nominee.
Anyone besides a Democrat.
By the way, McCain has said several times he will vote for Trump if the chump is the nominee.
But then McCain would vote for the Vietcong who dislocated his shoulders and beat the crap out of him if they were the Republican nominee.
Anyone besides a Democrat.
By the way, McCain has said several times he will vote for Trump if the chump is the nominee.
But then McCain would vote for the Vietcong who dislocated his shoulders and beat the crap out of him if they were the Republican nominee.
Anyone besides a Democrat.
Please FSM, let The Donald be the GOP nominee. Pretty please …
Being a pessimist, I cannot bring myself to believe that my prayer will be answered. So I worry that He, Trump will fizzle out somehow. Has anybody got a guess how?
–TP
Please FSM, let The Donald be the GOP nominee. Pretty please …
Being a pessimist, I cannot bring myself to believe that my prayer will be answered. So I worry that He, Trump will fizzle out somehow. Has anybody got a guess how?
–TP
Please FSM, let The Donald be the GOP nominee. Pretty please …
Being a pessimist, I cannot bring myself to believe that my prayer will be answered. So I worry that He, Trump will fizzle out somehow. Has anybody got a guess how?
–TP
Anyone besides a Democrat.
This. Yes. More every day.
Anyone besides a Democrat.
This. Yes. More every day.
Anyone besides a Democrat.
This. Yes. More every day.
Just for fun, how about an alternative reading of “natural-born citizen.” Do you suppose that it could mean that anyone born via cesarean section is not eligible. After all, they weren’t born naturally. 😉
I wonder if birth certificates track that….
Just for fun, how about an alternative reading of “natural-born citizen.” Do you suppose that it could mean that anyone born via cesarean section is not eligible. After all, they weren’t born naturally. 😉
I wonder if birth certificates track that….
Just for fun, how about an alternative reading of “natural-born citizen.” Do you suppose that it could mean that anyone born via cesarean section is not eligible. After all, they weren’t born naturally. 😉
I wonder if birth certificates track that….
Just for fun, how about an alternative reading of “natural-born citizen.” Do you suppose that it could mean that anyone born via cesarean section is not eligible. After all, they weren’t born naturally…
Wasn’t there something in Macbeth about that ?
🙂
Of course, ‘untimely ripped’ could have a quite different meaning these days…
Just for fun, how about an alternative reading of “natural-born citizen.” Do you suppose that it could mean that anyone born via cesarean section is not eligible. After all, they weren’t born naturally…
Wasn’t there something in Macbeth about that ?
🙂
Of course, ‘untimely ripped’ could have a quite different meaning these days…
Just for fun, how about an alternative reading of “natural-born citizen.” Do you suppose that it could mean that anyone born via cesarean section is not eligible. After all, they weren’t born naturally…
Wasn’t there something in Macbeth about that ?
🙂
Of course, ‘untimely ripped’ could have a quite different meaning these days…
“This. Yes. More every day.”
Candid and convincing.
You are obviously just the man to represent all of us and bring us together.
“This. Yes. More every day.”
Candid and convincing.
You are obviously just the man to represent all of us and bring us together.
“This. Yes. More every day.”
Candid and convincing.
You are obviously just the man to represent all of us and bring us together.
You are obviously just the man to represent all of us and bring us together.
I couldn’t win last time….
You are obviously just the man to represent all of us and bring us together.
I couldn’t win last time….
You are obviously just the man to represent all of us and bring us together.
I couldn’t win last time….
Hate to go all Reaganesque on the conservative sad sacks, but cheer the f*ck up:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/everything-is-even-more-awesome-213505
I have no doubt though that conservatives may well talk us into an economic collapse, World War III, and the first real nationwide disruption of domestic tranquility since Fort Sumter.
Because it serves their purposes.
Ebola is sweeping the American countryside.
There, feel better now?
Hate to go all Reaganesque on the conservative sad sacks, but cheer the f*ck up:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/everything-is-even-more-awesome-213505
I have no doubt though that conservatives may well talk us into an economic collapse, World War III, and the first real nationwide disruption of domestic tranquility since Fort Sumter.
Because it serves their purposes.
Ebola is sweeping the American countryside.
There, feel better now?
Hate to go all Reaganesque on the conservative sad sacks, but cheer the f*ck up:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/everything-is-even-more-awesome-213505
I have no doubt though that conservatives may well talk us into an economic collapse, World War III, and the first real nationwide disruption of domestic tranquility since Fort Sumter.
Because it serves their purposes.
Ebola is sweeping the American countryside.
There, feel better now?
Just in time for Slart’s already abandoned conversion to pure Libertarian, one of them opens his mouth. 😉
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rand-paul-ted-cruz-prime-minister-qualifications
Just in time for Slart’s already abandoned conversion to pure Libertarian, one of them opens his mouth. 😉
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rand-paul-ted-cruz-prime-minister-qualifications
Just in time for Slart’s already abandoned conversion to pure Libertarian, one of them opens his mouth. 😉
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rand-paul-ted-cruz-prime-minister-qualifications
The problem with Cruz is not that he was born in Canada to a Cuban father, the problem is that this sick, cynical, arrogant, belligerent, dangerous demagogue IS in fact an American citizen and eligible to take the reins of the Presidency and murder Americans.
We’d be safer if he lived in Ottawa or was the long-lost third Castro brother inviting Russian missiles into Cuba.
The problem with Cruz is not that he was born in Canada to a Cuban father, the problem is that this sick, cynical, arrogant, belligerent, dangerous demagogue IS in fact an American citizen and eligible to take the reins of the Presidency and murder Americans.
We’d be safer if he lived in Ottawa or was the long-lost third Castro brother inviting Russian missiles into Cuba.
The problem with Cruz is not that he was born in Canada to a Cuban father, the problem is that this sick, cynical, arrogant, belligerent, dangerous demagogue IS in fact an American citizen and eligible to take the reins of the Presidency and murder Americans.
We’d be safer if he lived in Ottawa or was the long-lost third Castro brother inviting Russian missiles into Cuba.
You don’t need a BC for that, it can be seen just by looking at the shape of their head. “Normal” birth squeezes the skull into a more oblong shape, cesarean is much more obviously rounded.
Once you know it, you can get TMI just by looking at someone.
In the case of GOP candidates, you can also discern brain damage within about 5 seconds of them opening their yap.
You don’t need a BC for that, it can be seen just by looking at the shape of their head. “Normal” birth squeezes the skull into a more oblong shape, cesarean is much more obviously rounded.
Once you know it, you can get TMI just by looking at someone.
In the case of GOP candidates, you can also discern brain damage within about 5 seconds of them opening their yap.
You don’t need a BC for that, it can be seen just by looking at the shape of their head. “Normal” birth squeezes the skull into a more oblong shape, cesarean is much more obviously rounded.
Once you know it, you can get TMI just by looking at someone.
In the case of GOP candidates, you can also discern brain damage within about 5 seconds of them opening their yap.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/opinion/anyone-but-ted-cruz.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/opinion/anyone-but-ted-cruz.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/opinion/anyone-but-ted-cruz.html
@Snarki: You don’t need a BC for that, it can be seen just by looking at the shape of their head. “Normal” birth squeezes the skull into a more oblong shape, cesarean is much more obviously rounded.
Once you know it, you can get TMI just by looking at someone.
Can you give a reputable cite (i.e. not just anecdata from discussion boards) for differences in head shape because of vaginal vs cesarean birth lasting beyond the first few months of life? Or were you just being snarki?
@Snarki: You don’t need a BC for that, it can be seen just by looking at the shape of their head. “Normal” birth squeezes the skull into a more oblong shape, cesarean is much more obviously rounded.
Once you know it, you can get TMI just by looking at someone.
Can you give a reputable cite (i.e. not just anecdata from discussion boards) for differences in head shape because of vaginal vs cesarean birth lasting beyond the first few months of life? Or were you just being snarki?
@Snarki: You don’t need a BC for that, it can be seen just by looking at the shape of their head. “Normal” birth squeezes the skull into a more oblong shape, cesarean is much more obviously rounded.
Once you know it, you can get TMI just by looking at someone.
Can you give a reputable cite (i.e. not just anecdata from discussion boards) for differences in head shape because of vaginal vs cesarean birth lasting beyond the first few months of life? Or were you just being snarki?
@ marty–“As Obama ran on hope and change as a marginally qualified candidate almost 8 years ago, Trump is employing the same tactics to attract another demographic. ”
i told myself i would not get sucked into another discussion with you over race because you and i have too many differences in our worldviews to be even agree as much as my limbaugh-loving ex-brother-in-law do but this, really? what about trump speaks to you the thought “hope and change.” i mean, change, sure, in the sense that cholera represents a change from good health, but hope? what part of the trump message bespeaks hope to you? i’m not being rhetorical here, i really want to know what it is about his message that calls to you to fill you with hope?
@ marty–“As Obama ran on hope and change as a marginally qualified candidate almost 8 years ago, Trump is employing the same tactics to attract another demographic. ”
i told myself i would not get sucked into another discussion with you over race because you and i have too many differences in our worldviews to be even agree as much as my limbaugh-loving ex-brother-in-law do but this, really? what about trump speaks to you the thought “hope and change.” i mean, change, sure, in the sense that cholera represents a change from good health, but hope? what part of the trump message bespeaks hope to you? i’m not being rhetorical here, i really want to know what it is about his message that calls to you to fill you with hope?
@ marty–“As Obama ran on hope and change as a marginally qualified candidate almost 8 years ago, Trump is employing the same tactics to attract another demographic. ”
i told myself i would not get sucked into another discussion with you over race because you and i have too many differences in our worldviews to be even agree as much as my limbaugh-loving ex-brother-in-law do but this, really? what about trump speaks to you the thought “hope and change.” i mean, change, sure, in the sense that cholera represents a change from good health, but hope? what part of the trump message bespeaks hope to you? i’m not being rhetorical here, i really want to know what it is about his message that calls to you to fill you with hope?
marty is mistaken, they’re not the same.
trump is huge. obama is not huge.
marty is mistaken, they’re not the same.
trump is huge. obama is not huge.
marty is mistaken, they’re not the same.
trump is huge. obama is not huge.
Obama was HUGE. Hundreds of thousands of people came to hear him speak.
Obama was HUGE. Hundreds of thousands of people came to hear him speak.
Obama was HUGE. Hundreds of thousands of people came to hear him speak.
“i mean, change, sure, in the sense that cholera represents a change from good health,”
Yes,sure, I now want to discuss this further…….
“i mean, change, sure, in the sense that cholera represents a change from good health,”
Yes,sure, I now want to discuss this further…….
“i mean, change, sure, in the sense that cholera represents a change from good health,”
Yes,sure, I now want to discuss this further…….
oh, it’s simple. Obama is a wily trickster who used his evil sorcery to brainwash tens of millions of people into thinking he was awesome and then into voting for him. and “conservative” graybeards think Trump is using his own kind of evil sorcery to trick the GOP base into thinking he’s just as awesome as Obama was. sure, they stand for different things, but they’re possess the same kind of evil.
they’re both evil sorcerers who have fooled the ignorant and easily-led masses. only the wise anti-Trump “conservatives” can see this, however. i’m just repeating what i’ve read, because it sounds like horseshit to me.
alternately, Trump’s rise is Obama’s fault.
whatever it takes to absolve “conservatives” of having to admit that Trump has found their party’s sweet spot.
oh, it’s simple. Obama is a wily trickster who used his evil sorcery to brainwash tens of millions of people into thinking he was awesome and then into voting for him. and “conservative” graybeards think Trump is using his own kind of evil sorcery to trick the GOP base into thinking he’s just as awesome as Obama was. sure, they stand for different things, but they’re possess the same kind of evil.
they’re both evil sorcerers who have fooled the ignorant and easily-led masses. only the wise anti-Trump “conservatives” can see this, however. i’m just repeating what i’ve read, because it sounds like horseshit to me.
alternately, Trump’s rise is Obama’s fault.
whatever it takes to absolve “conservatives” of having to admit that Trump has found their party’s sweet spot.
oh, it’s simple. Obama is a wily trickster who used his evil sorcery to brainwash tens of millions of people into thinking he was awesome and then into voting for him. and “conservative” graybeards think Trump is using his own kind of evil sorcery to trick the GOP base into thinking he’s just as awesome as Obama was. sure, they stand for different things, but they’re possess the same kind of evil.
they’re both evil sorcerers who have fooled the ignorant and easily-led masses. only the wise anti-Trump “conservatives” can see this, however. i’m just repeating what i’ve read, because it sounds like horseshit to me.
alternately, Trump’s rise is Obama’s fault.
whatever it takes to absolve “conservatives” of having to admit that Trump has found their party’s sweet spot.
McCain, for his part, ignores Marty’s advice upthread that we not go all birther around here, like WE’RE the ones checking people’s papers and building walls:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/john-mccain-ted-cruz-citizen-president
McCain then went on to point out that his suspicions of Cruz’s origins started when he figured out that the man’s IQ was some 100 points above Sarah Palin’s, who can see Cruz’s Canadian manger from her back deck, and who’s native American stupidity was the main qualification for McCain’s elevation of her to within a heartbeat of the Presidency, because you don’t want too much brainpower in government, especially Canadian, because then you get things like too many Americans having health insurance and once you do that, that’s millions of fewer American necks for conservatives to keep their jackboots firmly pinned on for sadistic purposes.
When reminded that Cruz’s IQ was roughly that of the later advanced velociraptors (Palin’s being roughly equal to early cephalopods) and THAT might come in handy for the legions of domestic enemies the Republican Party plans to eviscerate when it gets its way, he joshingly chuckled the chuckle of a man who has literally bullsh*t his way to success, save for the fortuitous accident of the Tiger cage torture in Vietnam, which set him up for life, and then commenced a little soft shoe off camera while muttering something along the lines of “this gander can handle any kind of sauce as long it f*cks the enemies of Republicans” and “call Meghan and have her correct my diction”.
Trump gives hope to the hairless and succor to the suckers.
Meanwhile, there’s a section of Rocky Mountain National Park that I’ve had my eye on as a homesteader sanctuary for just me, so I thought I’d gather up the Glocks, the Uzis, the AR-15s, the Kalishnikovs, the Claymores, the nunchucks, the Swiss Army couches, the magic bullet-repelling creams, and don’t forget the Oath Keepers branded hands-free masturbation and onanism devices they distribute to their lucky cadres — some rightwing members of the Freedom Causcus in the House favor the “Auto-Blow” for the good Christian boys who want to keep their hands free for plugging park rangers between the eyes if the latter go all Smokey the Bear Commie Muslim on a patriot — and head up there and stake my claim before the conservative riffraff get it all, seeing as how the Federal government has wussed out on the Rule of Law so egregiously in Oregon and Nevada by letting the Bundys and company off the hook for their f8cking armed criminal rampages.
Bonnie and Clyde wish they’d lived long enough to enjoy the freedoms sh*theads have today in this here Love In The Ruins we’re careening towards.
And, I don’t expect to be trifled with on my provisioning trips into Estes Park and into town for the weekly Cheetos, Slim Jims, and Jim Beam roundup, as much as I’m really looking forward to a Republican trifling with me in any way, shape, or form.
The stock market is crashing again. Trump, Cruz, and Carson polls will elevate, along with the rest of the filth running in that Party because if there is anything fascists hate it’s when their shares decline in value because too many of the poor find employment and get a leg up.
McCain, for his part, ignores Marty’s advice upthread that we not go all birther around here, like WE’RE the ones checking people’s papers and building walls:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/john-mccain-ted-cruz-citizen-president
McCain then went on to point out that his suspicions of Cruz’s origins started when he figured out that the man’s IQ was some 100 points above Sarah Palin’s, who can see Cruz’s Canadian manger from her back deck, and who’s native American stupidity was the main qualification for McCain’s elevation of her to within a heartbeat of the Presidency, because you don’t want too much brainpower in government, especially Canadian, because then you get things like too many Americans having health insurance and once you do that, that’s millions of fewer American necks for conservatives to keep their jackboots firmly pinned on for sadistic purposes.
When reminded that Cruz’s IQ was roughly that of the later advanced velociraptors (Palin’s being roughly equal to early cephalopods) and THAT might come in handy for the legions of domestic enemies the Republican Party plans to eviscerate when it gets its way, he joshingly chuckled the chuckle of a man who has literally bullsh*t his way to success, save for the fortuitous accident of the Tiger cage torture in Vietnam, which set him up for life, and then commenced a little soft shoe off camera while muttering something along the lines of “this gander can handle any kind of sauce as long it f*cks the enemies of Republicans” and “call Meghan and have her correct my diction”.
Trump gives hope to the hairless and succor to the suckers.
Meanwhile, there’s a section of Rocky Mountain National Park that I’ve had my eye on as a homesteader sanctuary for just me, so I thought I’d gather up the Glocks, the Uzis, the AR-15s, the Kalishnikovs, the Claymores, the nunchucks, the Swiss Army couches, the magic bullet-repelling creams, and don’t forget the Oath Keepers branded hands-free masturbation and onanism devices they distribute to their lucky cadres — some rightwing members of the Freedom Causcus in the House favor the “Auto-Blow” for the good Christian boys who want to keep their hands free for plugging park rangers between the eyes if the latter go all Smokey the Bear Commie Muslim on a patriot — and head up there and stake my claim before the conservative riffraff get it all, seeing as how the Federal government has wussed out on the Rule of Law so egregiously in Oregon and Nevada by letting the Bundys and company off the hook for their f8cking armed criminal rampages.
Bonnie and Clyde wish they’d lived long enough to enjoy the freedoms sh*theads have today in this here Love In The Ruins we’re careening towards.
And, I don’t expect to be trifled with on my provisioning trips into Estes Park and into town for the weekly Cheetos, Slim Jims, and Jim Beam roundup, as much as I’m really looking forward to a Republican trifling with me in any way, shape, or form.
The stock market is crashing again. Trump, Cruz, and Carson polls will elevate, along with the rest of the filth running in that Party because if there is anything fascists hate it’s when their shares decline in value because too many of the poor find employment and get a leg up.
McCain, for his part, ignores Marty’s advice upthread that we not go all birther around here, like WE’RE the ones checking people’s papers and building walls:
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/john-mccain-ted-cruz-citizen-president
McCain then went on to point out that his suspicions of Cruz’s origins started when he figured out that the man’s IQ was some 100 points above Sarah Palin’s, who can see Cruz’s Canadian manger from her back deck, and who’s native American stupidity was the main qualification for McCain’s elevation of her to within a heartbeat of the Presidency, because you don’t want too much brainpower in government, especially Canadian, because then you get things like too many Americans having health insurance and once you do that, that’s millions of fewer American necks for conservatives to keep their jackboots firmly pinned on for sadistic purposes.
When reminded that Cruz’s IQ was roughly that of the later advanced velociraptors (Palin’s being roughly equal to early cephalopods) and THAT might come in handy for the legions of domestic enemies the Republican Party plans to eviscerate when it gets its way, he joshingly chuckled the chuckle of a man who has literally bullsh*t his way to success, save for the fortuitous accident of the Tiger cage torture in Vietnam, which set him up for life, and then commenced a little soft shoe off camera while muttering something along the lines of “this gander can handle any kind of sauce as long it f*cks the enemies of Republicans” and “call Meghan and have her correct my diction”.
Trump gives hope to the hairless and succor to the suckers.
Meanwhile, there’s a section of Rocky Mountain National Park that I’ve had my eye on as a homesteader sanctuary for just me, so I thought I’d gather up the Glocks, the Uzis, the AR-15s, the Kalishnikovs, the Claymores, the nunchucks, the Swiss Army couches, the magic bullet-repelling creams, and don’t forget the Oath Keepers branded hands-free masturbation and onanism devices they distribute to their lucky cadres — some rightwing members of the Freedom Causcus in the House favor the “Auto-Blow” for the good Christian boys who want to keep their hands free for plugging park rangers between the eyes if the latter go all Smokey the Bear Commie Muslim on a patriot — and head up there and stake my claim before the conservative riffraff get it all, seeing as how the Federal government has wussed out on the Rule of Law so egregiously in Oregon and Nevada by letting the Bundys and company off the hook for their f8cking armed criminal rampages.
Bonnie and Clyde wish they’d lived long enough to enjoy the freedoms sh*theads have today in this here Love In The Ruins we’re careening towards.
And, I don’t expect to be trifled with on my provisioning trips into Estes Park and into town for the weekly Cheetos, Slim Jims, and Jim Beam roundup, as much as I’m really looking forward to a Republican trifling with me in any way, shape, or form.
The stock market is crashing again. Trump, Cruz, and Carson polls will elevate, along with the rest of the filth running in that Party because if there is anything fascists hate it’s when their shares decline in value because too many of the poor find employment and get a leg up.
JanieM: Of course I’m Snarki, I’m always Snarki.
My anecdata is based on personal observation of people where I know their birth circumstances, resulting in just about the worst form of “looks-ism” imaginable, I know.
Well, except for not implying any sort of mental/physical consequence to the differences, I guess.
JanieM: Of course I’m Snarki, I’m always Snarki.
My anecdata is based on personal observation of people where I know their birth circumstances, resulting in just about the worst form of “looks-ism” imaginable, I know.
Well, except for not implying any sort of mental/physical consequence to the differences, I guess.
JanieM: Of course I’m Snarki, I’m always Snarki.
My anecdata is based on personal observation of people where I know their birth circumstances, resulting in just about the worst form of “looks-ism” imaginable, I know.
Well, except for not implying any sort of mental/physical consequence to the differences, I guess.
cleek: But Obama is a Kenyan witch-doctor. Marty has photographic proof! Can you say the same about Trump?
cleek: But Obama is a Kenyan witch-doctor. Marty has photographic proof! Can you say the same about Trump?
cleek: But Obama is a Kenyan witch-doctor. Marty has photographic proof! Can you say the same about Trump?
Obama was HUGE.
OK, Obama was HUGE, but he wasn’t and isn’t YUUUUUGGGEEE!!
Where’s his hotel?
Obama was HUGE.
OK, Obama was HUGE, but he wasn’t and isn’t YUUUUUGGGEEE!!
Where’s his hotel?
Obama was HUGE.
OK, Obama was HUGE, but he wasn’t and isn’t YUUUUUGGGEEE!!
Where’s his hotel?
I’d prefer that he not touch me there.
I’d prefer that he not touch me there.
I’d prefer that he not touch me there.
Here’s more of Trump’s rhetorical resonance:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/petty-is-new-manly-by-bloggersrus.html
Insulting Samuel L. Jackson’s gay golf swing, while denying in the face of all the facts that he witnessed Jackson’s swing up close and personal.
Thrilling, uplifting rhetoric. Presidential, say, in Guatemala or Idi Amin’s Uganda, but we in America aspire, we do.
This resonates with Trump’s white trash, bed-sh*ting enthusiasts because they’ve never forgiven Jackson for subduing the young Republican honey-bunnies in the restaurant scene in “Pulp Fiction” in the manner that it should be accomplished:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ydhXAImrro
Kids and workmates should wear earmuffs.
Still, I consider Jeb Bush much more dangerous than Trump, because Jeb is a professional.
Here’s more of Trump’s rhetorical resonance:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/petty-is-new-manly-by-bloggersrus.html
Insulting Samuel L. Jackson’s gay golf swing, while denying in the face of all the facts that he witnessed Jackson’s swing up close and personal.
Thrilling, uplifting rhetoric. Presidential, say, in Guatemala or Idi Amin’s Uganda, but we in America aspire, we do.
This resonates with Trump’s white trash, bed-sh*ting enthusiasts because they’ve never forgiven Jackson for subduing the young Republican honey-bunnies in the restaurant scene in “Pulp Fiction” in the manner that it should be accomplished:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ydhXAImrro
Kids and workmates should wear earmuffs.
Still, I consider Jeb Bush much more dangerous than Trump, because Jeb is a professional.
Here’s more of Trump’s rhetorical resonance:
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/petty-is-new-manly-by-bloggersrus.html
Insulting Samuel L. Jackson’s gay golf swing, while denying in the face of all the facts that he witnessed Jackson’s swing up close and personal.
Thrilling, uplifting rhetoric. Presidential, say, in Guatemala or Idi Amin’s Uganda, but we in America aspire, we do.
This resonates with Trump’s white trash, bed-sh*ting enthusiasts because they’ve never forgiven Jackson for subduing the young Republican honey-bunnies in the restaurant scene in “Pulp Fiction” in the manner that it should be accomplished:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ydhXAImrro
Kids and workmates should wear earmuffs.
Still, I consider Jeb Bush much more dangerous than Trump, because Jeb is a professional.
I recommend President Obama sign the Republican bill that repeals Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion and defunds Parenthood and then order the disbursement of surplus American military weaponry and ammo into the ready and willing hands of the tens of millions of Americans who will be without healthcare and consigned to early penury and death in this loosely arranged confederation of pigf*ckers we call a country.
Indeed, let’s draw a sharp contrast between them and us, as Ryan and McConnell and the Republican Presidential candidates (also remove their Secret Service protection…. the Oaf Keepers can supply that muscle) so desire and get down to the inevitable business this country needs to attend to.
I recommend President Obama sign the Republican bill that repeals Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion and defunds Parenthood and then order the disbursement of surplus American military weaponry and ammo into the ready and willing hands of the tens of millions of Americans who will be without healthcare and consigned to early penury and death in this loosely arranged confederation of pigf*ckers we call a country.
Indeed, let’s draw a sharp contrast between them and us, as Ryan and McConnell and the Republican Presidential candidates (also remove their Secret Service protection…. the Oaf Keepers can supply that muscle) so desire and get down to the inevitable business this country needs to attend to.
I recommend President Obama sign the Republican bill that repeals Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion and defunds Parenthood and then order the disbursement of surplus American military weaponry and ammo into the ready and willing hands of the tens of millions of Americans who will be without healthcare and consigned to early penury and death in this loosely arranged confederation of pigf*ckers we call a country.
Indeed, let’s draw a sharp contrast between them and us, as Ryan and McConnell and the Republican Presidential candidates (also remove their Secret Service protection…. the Oaf Keepers can supply that muscle) so desire and get down to the inevitable business this country needs to attend to.
Jeb is much more dangerous, because just look what he did to Florida.
Just look!
Ok, I can’t find anything all that objectionable, but maybe someone else can.
Jeb is a center-right Republican. Some people here moan how more center-right Republicans can’t get into office, as opposed to the fringe right.
Jeb is much more dangerous, because just look what he did to Florida.
Just look!
Ok, I can’t find anything all that objectionable, but maybe someone else can.
Jeb is a center-right Republican. Some people here moan how more center-right Republicans can’t get into office, as opposed to the fringe right.
Jeb is much more dangerous, because just look what he did to Florida.
Just look!
Ok, I can’t find anything all that objectionable, but maybe someone else can.
Jeb is a center-right Republican. Some people here moan how more center-right Republicans can’t get into office, as opposed to the fringe right.
if i absolutely had to vote R, Jèb↓ would be near the top of my list, just because he doesn’t seem insane. Trump is a buffoon; Cruz has the charm and slime production abilities of a hagfish; Carson is deranged and doesn’t want the job anyway. in the green room, producers come and go, talking of Marco Rubio; but i think there’s something strange about him.
if i absolutely had to vote R, Jèb↓ would be near the top of my list, just because he doesn’t seem insane. Trump is a buffoon; Cruz has the charm and slime production abilities of a hagfish; Carson is deranged and doesn’t want the job anyway. in the green room, producers come and go, talking of Marco Rubio; but i think there’s something strange about him.
if i absolutely had to vote R, Jèb↓ would be near the top of my list, just because he doesn’t seem insane. Trump is a buffoon; Cruz has the charm and slime production abilities of a hagfish; Carson is deranged and doesn’t want the job anyway. in the green room, producers come and go, talking of Marco Rubio; but i think there’s something strange about him.
I’ve never so moaned.
I’ve ask that more “decent” Republicans not get RINOed into obscurity, but by “decent” I mean “liberal”.
😉
I’ve never so moaned.
I’ve ask that more “decent” Republicans not get RINOed into obscurity, but by “decent” I mean “liberal”.
😉
I’ve never so moaned.
I’ve ask that more “decent” Republicans not get RINOed into obscurity, but by “decent” I mean “liberal”.
😉
Personally, I don’t think it’s important that I like the President, so my list goes Cruz, Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Sanders.
Yes, I know 😉
I don’t like Cruz, either. But he’s absolutely the most knowledgeable, and the best equipped to run the Executive of the whole gang. If we hadn’t had two previous Bushes in the WH, Jeb would be on top of my list. He’s the most experienced at actually running a government, and he did a good job. The teachers’ unions didn’t like him, but part of the point was to get teachers’ unions to permit dismissal of teachers for cause.
IMO, the worst part of the Bush governorship was what he did along the lines of education. Kids got a better education, but they also got near yearly pass/fail testing (in addition to their normal school work) rather than periodic aptitude testing to monitor the performance of the school systems and individual schools. Some teachers decided to terrozie their classes with the FCAT test, which just utterly failed, with me, to accomplish the desired end. If you’re stressing out my kid, I don’t blame Governor Bush. Just teach them what they need to know. If you tell anyone about the pass/fail nature of the test, tell the parents.
Unfortunately, a lot of schools were run by people whose entire end-goal was administration, and not administration of an effective educational system. We were fortunate to have one of the latter for a principal. If there is any justice at all, she should be promoted to where she can affect things on a wider scale. Unfortunately, the I-don’t-like-her mentality (as if _liking_ someone is relevant to the job that they do) had a lot of parents forming cabals to try and get her fired. Didn’t work, but it didn’t make for cooperative PTA meetings.
Personally, I don’t think it’s important that I like the President, so my list goes Cruz, Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Sanders.
Yes, I know 😉
I don’t like Cruz, either. But he’s absolutely the most knowledgeable, and the best equipped to run the Executive of the whole gang. If we hadn’t had two previous Bushes in the WH, Jeb would be on top of my list. He’s the most experienced at actually running a government, and he did a good job. The teachers’ unions didn’t like him, but part of the point was to get teachers’ unions to permit dismissal of teachers for cause.
IMO, the worst part of the Bush governorship was what he did along the lines of education. Kids got a better education, but they also got near yearly pass/fail testing (in addition to their normal school work) rather than periodic aptitude testing to monitor the performance of the school systems and individual schools. Some teachers decided to terrozie their classes with the FCAT test, which just utterly failed, with me, to accomplish the desired end. If you’re stressing out my kid, I don’t blame Governor Bush. Just teach them what they need to know. If you tell anyone about the pass/fail nature of the test, tell the parents.
Unfortunately, a lot of schools were run by people whose entire end-goal was administration, and not administration of an effective educational system. We were fortunate to have one of the latter for a principal. If there is any justice at all, she should be promoted to where she can affect things on a wider scale. Unfortunately, the I-don’t-like-her mentality (as if _liking_ someone is relevant to the job that they do) had a lot of parents forming cabals to try and get her fired. Didn’t work, but it didn’t make for cooperative PTA meetings.
Personally, I don’t think it’s important that I like the President, so my list goes Cruz, Rubio, Bush, Fiorina, Sanders.
Yes, I know 😉
I don’t like Cruz, either. But he’s absolutely the most knowledgeable, and the best equipped to run the Executive of the whole gang. If we hadn’t had two previous Bushes in the WH, Jeb would be on top of my list. He’s the most experienced at actually running a government, and he did a good job. The teachers’ unions didn’t like him, but part of the point was to get teachers’ unions to permit dismissal of teachers for cause.
IMO, the worst part of the Bush governorship was what he did along the lines of education. Kids got a better education, but they also got near yearly pass/fail testing (in addition to their normal school work) rather than periodic aptitude testing to monitor the performance of the school systems and individual schools. Some teachers decided to terrozie their classes with the FCAT test, which just utterly failed, with me, to accomplish the desired end. If you’re stressing out my kid, I don’t blame Governor Bush. Just teach them what they need to know. If you tell anyone about the pass/fail nature of the test, tell the parents.
Unfortunately, a lot of schools were run by people whose entire end-goal was administration, and not administration of an effective educational system. We were fortunate to have one of the latter for a principal. If there is any justice at all, she should be promoted to where she can affect things on a wider scale. Unfortunately, the I-don’t-like-her mentality (as if _liking_ someone is relevant to the job that they do) had a lot of parents forming cabals to try and get her fired. Didn’t work, but it didn’t make for cooperative PTA meetings.
Rubio and Bush are the only real choices for me, everyone else would get a vote against the Democrats. Fiorina might get me to vote for Hilary, she is simply dense. Cruz, see what Slart said, Trump would hire his daughter who I believe is competent, the rest are ideologically impaired.
Except I saved Kasich for last. He is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
Rubio and Bush are the only real choices for me, everyone else would get a vote against the Democrats. Fiorina might get me to vote for Hilary, she is simply dense. Cruz, see what Slart said, Trump would hire his daughter who I believe is competent, the rest are ideologically impaired.
Except I saved Kasich for last. He is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
Rubio and Bush are the only real choices for me, everyone else would get a vote against the Democrats. Fiorina might get me to vote for Hilary, she is simply dense. Cruz, see what Slart said, Trump would hire his daughter who I believe is competent, the rest are ideologically impaired.
Except I saved Kasich for last. He is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
I don’t like Cruz, either.
It seems that hardly anybody does.
I see Cruz as potentially the most harmful of all possible candidates. It’s one thing for someone to be unlikable, and another for someone’s personal issues to make it impossible for them to be effective as a leader or an executive.
IMO, Cruz is an example of the latter. Even folks who agree with his positions don’t like dealing with him or working with him.
Bush and Kasich are, IMO, not insane and not obvious panders. Plus, they both have relevant executive experience, which is to say, experience as the executive of a polity rather than a business. I would not look forward to either being POTUS, but I would not immediately fear for the fate of the Republic if either was elected.
Rubio seems like an OK guy, he just seems, to me, like he needs more experience before stepping into a role like POTUS.
And yes, the same thing could have been said about Obama, and I think Obama’s lack of experience was an issue for him as POTUS.
Of the (D)’s, Sanders is closest to my point of view, Clinton is probably most qualified in terms of sheer political savvy, O’Malley appears to be a very good guy but is basically getting buried by the theater associated with Another Clinton and The Socialist.
I have no idea how all of this is going to turn out. My best guess is that we are looking at Madame President Clinton, which will make lots of people’s heads explode, but, this year, people’s heads are going to explode no matter what.
I don’t like Cruz, either.
It seems that hardly anybody does.
I see Cruz as potentially the most harmful of all possible candidates. It’s one thing for someone to be unlikable, and another for someone’s personal issues to make it impossible for them to be effective as a leader or an executive.
IMO, Cruz is an example of the latter. Even folks who agree with his positions don’t like dealing with him or working with him.
Bush and Kasich are, IMO, not insane and not obvious panders. Plus, they both have relevant executive experience, which is to say, experience as the executive of a polity rather than a business. I would not look forward to either being POTUS, but I would not immediately fear for the fate of the Republic if either was elected.
Rubio seems like an OK guy, he just seems, to me, like he needs more experience before stepping into a role like POTUS.
And yes, the same thing could have been said about Obama, and I think Obama’s lack of experience was an issue for him as POTUS.
Of the (D)’s, Sanders is closest to my point of view, Clinton is probably most qualified in terms of sheer political savvy, O’Malley appears to be a very good guy but is basically getting buried by the theater associated with Another Clinton and The Socialist.
I have no idea how all of this is going to turn out. My best guess is that we are looking at Madame President Clinton, which will make lots of people’s heads explode, but, this year, people’s heads are going to explode no matter what.
I don’t like Cruz, either.
It seems that hardly anybody does.
I see Cruz as potentially the most harmful of all possible candidates. It’s one thing for someone to be unlikable, and another for someone’s personal issues to make it impossible for them to be effective as a leader or an executive.
IMO, Cruz is an example of the latter. Even folks who agree with his positions don’t like dealing with him or working with him.
Bush and Kasich are, IMO, not insane and not obvious panders. Plus, they both have relevant executive experience, which is to say, experience as the executive of a polity rather than a business. I would not look forward to either being POTUS, but I would not immediately fear for the fate of the Republic if either was elected.
Rubio seems like an OK guy, he just seems, to me, like he needs more experience before stepping into a role like POTUS.
And yes, the same thing could have been said about Obama, and I think Obama’s lack of experience was an issue for him as POTUS.
Of the (D)’s, Sanders is closest to my point of view, Clinton is probably most qualified in terms of sheer political savvy, O’Malley appears to be a very good guy but is basically getting buried by the theater associated with Another Clinton and The Socialist.
I have no idea how all of this is going to turn out. My best guess is that we are looking at Madame President Clinton, which will make lots of people’s heads explode, but, this year, people’s heads are going to explode no matter what.
If you think you have an obstinate Congress now, just wait until Madame Clinton swears in.
Not hoping for that, just noting what is almost certainly the truth. Congressional Republicans didn’t see things her way when she was First Lady; they’re unlikely to have changed, other than the names.
Jeb is actually the most qualified and (as far as I can see) most personable, reasonable, decent member of the Bush family to throw his hat in the ring. IMO, of course. I can’t say that his politics and mine are entirely parallel, but he has respect for the opinions of others that I think is mostly lacking in the rest of the candidates in either party.
Therefore, he’ll wash out. My prediction. There are other reasons for him washing out, but I think it’d happen anyway.
If you think you have an obstinate Congress now, just wait until Madame Clinton swears in.
Not hoping for that, just noting what is almost certainly the truth. Congressional Republicans didn’t see things her way when she was First Lady; they’re unlikely to have changed, other than the names.
Jeb is actually the most qualified and (as far as I can see) most personable, reasonable, decent member of the Bush family to throw his hat in the ring. IMO, of course. I can’t say that his politics and mine are entirely parallel, but he has respect for the opinions of others that I think is mostly lacking in the rest of the candidates in either party.
Therefore, he’ll wash out. My prediction. There are other reasons for him washing out, but I think it’d happen anyway.
If you think you have an obstinate Congress now, just wait until Madame Clinton swears in.
Not hoping for that, just noting what is almost certainly the truth. Congressional Republicans didn’t see things her way when she was First Lady; they’re unlikely to have changed, other than the names.
Jeb is actually the most qualified and (as far as I can see) most personable, reasonable, decent member of the Bush family to throw his hat in the ring. IMO, of course. I can’t say that his politics and mine are entirely parallel, but he has respect for the opinions of others that I think is mostly lacking in the rest of the candidates in either party.
Therefore, he’ll wash out. My prediction. There are other reasons for him washing out, but I think it’d happen anyway.
Kasich might actually be a decent guy as well, but I frankly am not familiar enough with him to make any kind of comment.
Given my propensity for opining from practically nothing, that’s saying a lot.
Kasich might actually be a decent guy as well, but I frankly am not familiar enough with him to make any kind of comment.
Given my propensity for opining from practically nothing, that’s saying a lot.
Kasich might actually be a decent guy as well, but I frankly am not familiar enough with him to make any kind of comment.
Given my propensity for opining from practically nothing, that’s saying a lot.
“but he has respect for the opinions of others that I think is mostly lacking in the rest of the candidates in either party.”
No, he doesn’t. He’s an entitled plutocrat. Members of his own party can’t even deal with him:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/swamped-the-political-scene-dexter-filkins
I’m not a great Clinton fan, but this reasoning that she shouldn’t be President because obstinate, contemptuous, belligerents in Congress and the media will just have to obstinately, contemptuously, and belligerently shut the business of government down and then blame her for their behavior sounds ….. exactly …. like the Obama chronicles.
Not saying it won’t happen. It most certainly will.
For any Democrat who wins the Presidency.
There is no talking to these people.
“but he has respect for the opinions of others that I think is mostly lacking in the rest of the candidates in either party.”
No, he doesn’t. He’s an entitled plutocrat. Members of his own party can’t even deal with him:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/swamped-the-political-scene-dexter-filkins
I’m not a great Clinton fan, but this reasoning that she shouldn’t be President because obstinate, contemptuous, belligerents in Congress and the media will just have to obstinately, contemptuously, and belligerently shut the business of government down and then blame her for their behavior sounds ….. exactly …. like the Obama chronicles.
Not saying it won’t happen. It most certainly will.
For any Democrat who wins the Presidency.
There is no talking to these people.
“but he has respect for the opinions of others that I think is mostly lacking in the rest of the candidates in either party.”
No, he doesn’t. He’s an entitled plutocrat. Members of his own party can’t even deal with him:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/04/swamped-the-political-scene-dexter-filkins
I’m not a great Clinton fan, but this reasoning that she shouldn’t be President because obstinate, contemptuous, belligerents in Congress and the media will just have to obstinately, contemptuously, and belligerently shut the business of government down and then blame her for their behavior sounds ….. exactly …. like the Obama chronicles.
Not saying it won’t happen. It most certainly will.
For any Democrat who wins the Presidency.
There is no talking to these people.
seriously. there is no Democrat in the country that would get the GOP to cooperate. the Movement wouldn’t allow such treason.
seriously. there is no Democrat in the country that would get the GOP to cooperate. the Movement wouldn’t allow such treason.
seriously. there is no Democrat in the country that would get the GOP to cooperate. the Movement wouldn’t allow such treason.
Given my propensity for opining from practically nothing…
Blog regular!
Given my propensity for opining from practically nothing…
Blog regular!
Given my propensity for opining from practically nothing…
Blog regular!
Kasich . . . is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
Gotta go with Marty on this one. Except that I’m not sure Kasich really qualifies as a “far right ideologue.” I mean, the man implemented the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare in Ohio. What far right ideologue would even consider that???
Of course, not being a far right ideologue is pretty much a disqualification again this year — unless you count the Trump Theatrical Troupe. (Which is why Rubio is running so hard to the right.) So Kasich doesn’t really have a chance at the top slot. At best, he gets a VP nod, in an effort to make the nominee seem less extreme to the general election voters.
Kasich . . . is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
Gotta go with Marty on this one. Except that I’m not sure Kasich really qualifies as a “far right ideologue.” I mean, the man implemented the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare in Ohio. What far right ideologue would even consider that???
Of course, not being a far right ideologue is pretty much a disqualification again this year — unless you count the Trump Theatrical Troupe. (Which is why Rubio is running so hard to the right.) So Kasich doesn’t really have a chance at the top slot. At best, he gets a VP nod, in an effort to make the nominee seem less extreme to the general election voters.
Kasich . . . is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
Gotta go with Marty on this one. Except that I’m not sure Kasich really qualifies as a “far right ideologue.” I mean, the man implemented the Medicaid expansion under Obamacare in Ohio. What far right ideologue would even consider that???
Of course, not being a far right ideologue is pretty much a disqualification again this year — unless you count the Trump Theatrical Troupe. (Which is why Rubio is running so hard to the right.) So Kasich doesn’t really have a chance at the top slot. At best, he gets a VP nod, in an effort to make the nominee seem less extreme to the general election voters.
It’s somewhat of a hit piece. I’ll accept that Bush was entirely too cozy with the sugar lobby. I have been openly against sugar price supports for years and years and years; that is the sort of thing that your (and my) tax dollars are propping up.
But it’s entirely untrue that Bush impeded Everglades restoration in any significant way.
This business about the sugar industry being responsible for the delay in reducing phosphorus levels, though, is pure bunk. Such obviously partisan organizations as the American Geosciences Institute notes that phosphorus levels in the Everglades have reduced from 150ppb 25 years ago to 30 ppb today, toward an eventual target level of 10ppb, which: who knows if that is even achievable, considering that Florida is host to a number of phosphorus mines. Even people who persistently sue the State of Florida (Friends of the Everglades) for failing to adhere to the 10ppb requirement, acknowledge that it may take decades to hit that requirement, on account of phosphorus accumulation.
So, some good points. But it’s also, to a large degree, a hit piece. Accidentally or deliberately.
That Bush was brusque with some unnamed aide is, well, not really surprising. I imagine I’ve pissed on some people here and there. Sometimes they even deserved it.
It’s somewhat of a hit piece. I’ll accept that Bush was entirely too cozy with the sugar lobby. I have been openly against sugar price supports for years and years and years; that is the sort of thing that your (and my) tax dollars are propping up.
But it’s entirely untrue that Bush impeded Everglades restoration in any significant way.
This business about the sugar industry being responsible for the delay in reducing phosphorus levels, though, is pure bunk. Such obviously partisan organizations as the American Geosciences Institute notes that phosphorus levels in the Everglades have reduced from 150ppb 25 years ago to 30 ppb today, toward an eventual target level of 10ppb, which: who knows if that is even achievable, considering that Florida is host to a number of phosphorus mines. Even people who persistently sue the State of Florida (Friends of the Everglades) for failing to adhere to the 10ppb requirement, acknowledge that it may take decades to hit that requirement, on account of phosphorus accumulation.
So, some good points. But it’s also, to a large degree, a hit piece. Accidentally or deliberately.
That Bush was brusque with some unnamed aide is, well, not really surprising. I imagine I’ve pissed on some people here and there. Sometimes they even deserved it.
It’s somewhat of a hit piece. I’ll accept that Bush was entirely too cozy with the sugar lobby. I have been openly against sugar price supports for years and years and years; that is the sort of thing that your (and my) tax dollars are propping up.
But it’s entirely untrue that Bush impeded Everglades restoration in any significant way.
This business about the sugar industry being responsible for the delay in reducing phosphorus levels, though, is pure bunk. Such obviously partisan organizations as the American Geosciences Institute notes that phosphorus levels in the Everglades have reduced from 150ppb 25 years ago to 30 ppb today, toward an eventual target level of 10ppb, which: who knows if that is even achievable, considering that Florida is host to a number of phosphorus mines. Even people who persistently sue the State of Florida (Friends of the Everglades) for failing to adhere to the 10ppb requirement, acknowledge that it may take decades to hit that requirement, on account of phosphorus accumulation.
So, some good points. But it’s also, to a large degree, a hit piece. Accidentally or deliberately.
That Bush was brusque with some unnamed aide is, well, not really surprising. I imagine I’ve pissed on some people here and there. Sometimes they even deserved it.
None of which is to say that the sugar industry isn’t lobbying like crazy to get the requirements lifted, delayed, or any other thing that will make them more money. Just that a lot of progress has been made, and continues to be made.
The Kissimmee River restoration, for instance, is very close to completion, and that’s a very big thing. Not that Jeb invented that, or helped it along, but he didn’t exactly put the brakes on it either.
None of which is to say that the sugar industry isn’t lobbying like crazy to get the requirements lifted, delayed, or any other thing that will make them more money. Just that a lot of progress has been made, and continues to be made.
The Kissimmee River restoration, for instance, is very close to completion, and that’s a very big thing. Not that Jeb invented that, or helped it along, but he didn’t exactly put the brakes on it either.
None of which is to say that the sugar industry isn’t lobbying like crazy to get the requirements lifted, delayed, or any other thing that will make them more money. Just that a lot of progress has been made, and continues to be made.
The Kissimmee River restoration, for instance, is very close to completion, and that’s a very big thing. Not that Jeb invented that, or helped it along, but he didn’t exactly put the brakes on it either.
538 had an interesting item yesterday on whether the GOP Establishment is Blowing Its Anti-Trumnp Campaign. But I’m wondering if that isn’t a misreading of their intent.
Certainly the GOP establishment (to the extent that such a thing exists in any coherent form) sees Trump as an electoral disaster in the making. But is that a bad thing for them? They realize, if they hadn’t figured it out before, that they made a deal with the devil when they embraced the arch-conservatives. But how to get out of the deal?
The only apparent option is to let someone like Trump (although Cruz might be sufficient) win the nomination and then get trashed in the general election. That is, let the Democrats do the heavy lifting. And then they can take control of the party back, in the name of “electability.” Maybe even get rid of the far right, and move the GOP back to the center.
I have my doubts whether that would actually work. But it doesn’t seem like an impossible dream for those who otherwise are stuck with a monster of their own creation.
538 had an interesting item yesterday on whether the GOP Establishment is Blowing Its Anti-Trumnp Campaign. But I’m wondering if that isn’t a misreading of their intent.
Certainly the GOP establishment (to the extent that such a thing exists in any coherent form) sees Trump as an electoral disaster in the making. But is that a bad thing for them? They realize, if they hadn’t figured it out before, that they made a deal with the devil when they embraced the arch-conservatives. But how to get out of the deal?
The only apparent option is to let someone like Trump (although Cruz might be sufficient) win the nomination and then get trashed in the general election. That is, let the Democrats do the heavy lifting. And then they can take control of the party back, in the name of “electability.” Maybe even get rid of the far right, and move the GOP back to the center.
I have my doubts whether that would actually work. But it doesn’t seem like an impossible dream for those who otherwise are stuck with a monster of their own creation.
538 had an interesting item yesterday on whether the GOP Establishment is Blowing Its Anti-Trumnp Campaign. But I’m wondering if that isn’t a misreading of their intent.
Certainly the GOP establishment (to the extent that such a thing exists in any coherent form) sees Trump as an electoral disaster in the making. But is that a bad thing for them? They realize, if they hadn’t figured it out before, that they made a deal with the devil when they embraced the arch-conservatives. But how to get out of the deal?
The only apparent option is to let someone like Trump (although Cruz might be sufficient) win the nomination and then get trashed in the general election. That is, let the Democrats do the heavy lifting. And then they can take control of the party back, in the name of “electability.” Maybe even get rid of the far right, and move the GOP back to the center.
I have my doubts whether that would actually work. But it doesn’t seem like an impossible dream for those who otherwise are stuck with a monster of their own creation.
Larison thinks the establishment candidates themselves are pretty much helping Trump by beating up on the other establishment candidates.
The comments there are pretty interesting too.
Larison thinks the establishment candidates themselves are pretty much helping Trump by beating up on the other establishment candidates.
The comments there are pretty interesting too.
Larison thinks the establishment candidates themselves are pretty much helping Trump by beating up on the other establishment candidates.
The comments there are pretty interesting too.
I’m no expert on ethanol mandates, but I did find this regarding their impact on corn prices.
Submitted for consideration.*
*hey, it’s the web dotcha’ know!
I’m no expert on ethanol mandates, but I did find this regarding their impact on corn prices.
Submitted for consideration.*
*hey, it’s the web dotcha’ know!
I’m no expert on ethanol mandates, but I did find this regarding their impact on corn prices.
Submitted for consideration.*
*hey, it’s the web dotcha’ know!
2nd try:
I’m no expert on ethanol mandates, but I did find this regarding the impact of the mandates on corn prices.
submitted for your consideration.
2nd try:
I’m no expert on ethanol mandates, but I did find this regarding the impact of the mandates on corn prices.
submitted for your consideration.
2nd try:
I’m no expert on ethanol mandates, but I did find this regarding the impact of the mandates on corn prices.
submitted for your consideration.
Just how moderate is John Kasich?
Just how moderate is John Kasich?
Just how moderate is John Kasich?
Just how moderate is John Kasich?
Everything is relative.
Just how moderate is John Kasich?
Everything is relative.
Just how moderate is John Kasich?
Everything is relative.
Thanks for reading the link, Slart.
Thanks for reading the link, Slart.
Thanks for reading the link, Slart.
i think there’s something strange about him.
I would agree…he seems emotionally shallow, inattentive, and not really deeply wedded to any particular public policies beyond his own personal advancement(cf immigration reform about face).
Combined with his youth and lack of experience, he is practically oozing out-of-control opportunism that gives off a real aura of, well, desperation (for lack of a better term), in his public demeanor. It is an attribute I find not at all equivalent to “earnestness”, and it leaves me cold when assessing his effort on an emotional level, aside from the execrable policies me mouths.
Either that, or he just needs a good speech coach.
But then again, everyone knows I am a totally unbiased observer.
i think there’s something strange about him.
I would agree…he seems emotionally shallow, inattentive, and not really deeply wedded to any particular public policies beyond his own personal advancement(cf immigration reform about face).
Combined with his youth and lack of experience, he is practically oozing out-of-control opportunism that gives off a real aura of, well, desperation (for lack of a better term), in his public demeanor. It is an attribute I find not at all equivalent to “earnestness”, and it leaves me cold when assessing his effort on an emotional level, aside from the execrable policies me mouths.
Either that, or he just needs a good speech coach.
But then again, everyone knows I am a totally unbiased observer.
i think there’s something strange about him.
I would agree…he seems emotionally shallow, inattentive, and not really deeply wedded to any particular public policies beyond his own personal advancement(cf immigration reform about face).
Combined with his youth and lack of experience, he is practically oozing out-of-control opportunism that gives off a real aura of, well, desperation (for lack of a better term), in his public demeanor. It is an attribute I find not at all equivalent to “earnestness”, and it leaves me cold when assessing his effort on an emotional level, aside from the execrable policies me mouths.
Either that, or he just needs a good speech coach.
But then again, everyone knows I am a totally unbiased observer.
Everything is relative.
that is approximately true, and there are exasperating measurement issues as well.
we’ll never know nothin’.
Everything is relative.
that is approximately true, and there are exasperating measurement issues as well.
we’ll never know nothin’.
Everything is relative.
that is approximately true, and there are exasperating measurement issues as well.
we’ll never know nothin’.
Bobby, could it be that Rubio feels desperate because he has bet the ranch on this Presidential run? He has already said that he is not running for re-election to the Senate. So if (when) he blows this run, his career in politics is probably over.**
And it isn’t obvious that he hankers for a second career as a Fox News commentator. Or to settle for being a law professor or something.
** Yes, Nixon managed to make a comeback after a similar disaster. But that was closer to unique than merely exceptional.
Bobby, could it be that Rubio feels desperate because he has bet the ranch on this Presidential run? He has already said that he is not running for re-election to the Senate. So if (when) he blows this run, his career in politics is probably over.**
And it isn’t obvious that he hankers for a second career as a Fox News commentator. Or to settle for being a law professor or something.
** Yes, Nixon managed to make a comeback after a similar disaster. But that was closer to unique than merely exceptional.
Bobby, could it be that Rubio feels desperate because he has bet the ranch on this Presidential run? He has already said that he is not running for re-election to the Senate. So if (when) he blows this run, his career in politics is probably over.**
And it isn’t obvious that he hankers for a second career as a Fox News commentator. Or to settle for being a law professor or something.
** Yes, Nixon managed to make a comeback after a similar disaster. But that was closer to unique than merely exceptional.
“FOX News commentator”, “law professor or something”
Could Rubio bring himself to show up for work at those jobs?
I doubt it.
“FOX News commentator”, “law professor or something”
Could Rubio bring himself to show up for work at those jobs?
I doubt it.
“FOX News commentator”, “law professor or something”
Could Rubio bring himself to show up for work at those jobs?
I doubt it.
Well, it’s not like he would have to vote or anything….
Well, it’s not like he would have to vote or anything….
Well, it’s not like he would have to vote or anything….
Except I saved Kasich for last. He is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
I’m torn. Speaking as an Ohioan, there’s a part of me that would love to see Kasich elected just to get him out of Columbus. However, I’m honest enough that I’d feel bad seeing our problem become everyone’s problem, and I also have faith that the awful track record of the Ohio Republican Party’s gubernatorial selections would not waver when it came time to fill the void.
The nicest thing I can say about Kasich is that he seems like an old-school systematically corrupt crony capitalist rather than a nationalistic demagogue like a number of his rivals. But he’s awful. He really, truly is. He may seem comparatively bland and unobjectionable because he’s more tactful than a lot of the hopefuls, but policy-wise, he’s just awful. If he’s the least objectionable candidate the GOP can muster up, I weep for it, and I’d not think I had any tears to spare for the likes of them…
Except I saved Kasich for last. He is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
I’m torn. Speaking as an Ohioan, there’s a part of me that would love to see Kasich elected just to get him out of Columbus. However, I’m honest enough that I’d feel bad seeing our problem become everyone’s problem, and I also have faith that the awful track record of the Ohio Republican Party’s gubernatorial selections would not waver when it came time to fill the void.
The nicest thing I can say about Kasich is that he seems like an old-school systematically corrupt crony capitalist rather than a nationalistic demagogue like a number of his rivals. But he’s awful. He really, truly is. He may seem comparatively bland and unobjectionable because he’s more tactful than a lot of the hopefuls, but policy-wise, he’s just awful. If he’s the least objectionable candidate the GOP can muster up, I weep for it, and I’d not think I had any tears to spare for the likes of them…
Except I saved Kasich for last. He is the most qualified and least objectionable of the far right wing ideologues. I think he would step up to the office. I would vote for him almost gladly.
I’m torn. Speaking as an Ohioan, there’s a part of me that would love to see Kasich elected just to get him out of Columbus. However, I’m honest enough that I’d feel bad seeing our problem become everyone’s problem, and I also have faith that the awful track record of the Ohio Republican Party’s gubernatorial selections would not waver when it came time to fill the void.
The nicest thing I can say about Kasich is that he seems like an old-school systematically corrupt crony capitalist rather than a nationalistic demagogue like a number of his rivals. But he’s awful. He really, truly is. He may seem comparatively bland and unobjectionable because he’s more tactful than a lot of the hopefuls, but policy-wise, he’s just awful. If he’s the least objectionable candidate the GOP can muster up, I weep for it, and I’d not think I had any tears to spare for the likes of them…
And it isn’t obvious that he hankers for a second career as a Fox News commentator.
I am unsure of the relevance there, wj. I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition. Nixon knew what he wanted. Rubio doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp in that regard….or at least that is the way I read his body language and demeanor.
And it could just be me.
And it isn’t obvious that he hankers for a second career as a Fox News commentator.
I am unsure of the relevance there, wj. I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition. Nixon knew what he wanted. Rubio doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp in that regard….or at least that is the way I read his body language and demeanor.
And it could just be me.
And it isn’t obvious that he hankers for a second career as a Fox News commentator.
I am unsure of the relevance there, wj. I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition. Nixon knew what he wanted. Rubio doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp in that regard….or at least that is the way I read his body language and demeanor.
And it could just be me.
russell: Everything is relative.
Absolutely.
russell: Everything is relative.
Absolutely.
russell: Everything is relative.
Absolutely.
am unsure of the relevance there, wj. I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition. Nixon knew what he wanted. Rubio doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp in that regard
That’s because he is still young enough to believe in doing something good. He may be the one person in the race that thinks this is about making the country great again.
am unsure of the relevance there, wj. I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition. Nixon knew what he wanted. Rubio doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp in that regard
That’s because he is still young enough to believe in doing something good. He may be the one person in the race that thinks this is about making the country great again.
am unsure of the relevance there, wj. I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition. Nixon knew what he wanted. Rubio doesn’t seem to have a firm grasp in that regard
That’s because he is still young enough to believe in doing something good. He may be the one person in the race that thinks this is about making the country great again.
Oh yeah, NV, if your objections to Kasich are crony capitalism and policy issues then he is a shining star on the hill. There might be a policy discussion in one of the debates if he were nominated.
Oh yeah, NV, if your objections to Kasich are crony capitalism and policy issues then he is a shining star on the hill. There might be a policy discussion in one of the debates if he were nominated.
Oh yeah, NV, if your objections to Kasich are crony capitalism and policy issues then he is a shining star on the hill. There might be a policy discussion in one of the debates if he were nominated.
slarti,
I don’t like Cruz, either. But he’s absolutely the most knowledgeable, and the best equipped to run the Executive of the whole gang.
I don’t understand this at all. For all the standard disclaimers about how smart Cruz is supposed to be, he says an awful lot of incredibly stupid things.
Do you want a President who thinks we should go on the gold standard and seems not to have a clue how the economy works?
One who thinks climate change is a hoax? (He’s not just skeptical. He thinks it’s a big con. That’s paranoia.)
One who thinks we can carpet-bomb ISIS without killing civilians?
One who thinks that if there were five liberals on the Supreme Court the religious symbols on the tombstones at Arlington would soon be chiseled off?
Oh yeah. He also thinks pens have erasers.
Where does he get this stuff? My impression is that the man is a total nut case, no matter how good he is at formal argument in a courtroom or debate tournament. I’d vastly prefer Trump.
slarti,
I don’t like Cruz, either. But he’s absolutely the most knowledgeable, and the best equipped to run the Executive of the whole gang.
I don’t understand this at all. For all the standard disclaimers about how smart Cruz is supposed to be, he says an awful lot of incredibly stupid things.
Do you want a President who thinks we should go on the gold standard and seems not to have a clue how the economy works?
One who thinks climate change is a hoax? (He’s not just skeptical. He thinks it’s a big con. That’s paranoia.)
One who thinks we can carpet-bomb ISIS without killing civilians?
One who thinks that if there were five liberals on the Supreme Court the religious symbols on the tombstones at Arlington would soon be chiseled off?
Oh yeah. He also thinks pens have erasers.
Where does he get this stuff? My impression is that the man is a total nut case, no matter how good he is at formal argument in a courtroom or debate tournament. I’d vastly prefer Trump.
slarti,
I don’t like Cruz, either. But he’s absolutely the most knowledgeable, and the best equipped to run the Executive of the whole gang.
I don’t understand this at all. For all the standard disclaimers about how smart Cruz is supposed to be, he says an awful lot of incredibly stupid things.
Do you want a President who thinks we should go on the gold standard and seems not to have a clue how the economy works?
One who thinks climate change is a hoax? (He’s not just skeptical. He thinks it’s a big con. That’s paranoia.)
One who thinks we can carpet-bomb ISIS without killing civilians?
One who thinks that if there were five liberals on the Supreme Court the religious symbols on the tombstones at Arlington would soon be chiseled off?
Oh yeah. He also thinks pens have erasers.
Where does he get this stuff? My impression is that the man is a total nut case, no matter how good he is at formal argument in a courtroom or debate tournament. I’d vastly prefer Trump.
… this is about making the country great again.
Marty, correct me if I’m wrong:
The US once WAS a great country (otherwise “again” is superfluous), and it is NOT a great country right now (otherwise nobody would be campaigning on “making” it so), right?
So I’m curious: when did it STOP being a great country? Bonus question: is there some other country that’s great enough for the US to model itself on?
Don’t get me wrong: I’m sure you have reasons to consider the US not-great, and I’d love to know what they are. Just to compare them with my own, you understand.
–TP
… this is about making the country great again.
Marty, correct me if I’m wrong:
The US once WAS a great country (otherwise “again” is superfluous), and it is NOT a great country right now (otherwise nobody would be campaigning on “making” it so), right?
So I’m curious: when did it STOP being a great country? Bonus question: is there some other country that’s great enough for the US to model itself on?
Don’t get me wrong: I’m sure you have reasons to consider the US not-great, and I’d love to know what they are. Just to compare them with my own, you understand.
–TP
… this is about making the country great again.
Marty, correct me if I’m wrong:
The US once WAS a great country (otherwise “again” is superfluous), and it is NOT a great country right now (otherwise nobody would be campaigning on “making” it so), right?
So I’m curious: when did it STOP being a great country? Bonus question: is there some other country that’s great enough for the US to model itself on?
Don’t get me wrong: I’m sure you have reasons to consider the US not-great, and I’d love to know what they are. Just to compare them with my own, you understand.
–TP
byomtov, I personally think that Cruz does not himself believe most of the stuff he says in front of the rubes. There are claims that he already did a Romney behind closed doors, i.e. telling rich donors the opposite of what he says publicly (in his case that abortion will not matter to his administration). They guy is not just a digestive rear exit but also a fraud.
byomtov, I personally think that Cruz does not himself believe most of the stuff he says in front of the rubes. There are claims that he already did a Romney behind closed doors, i.e. telling rich donors the opposite of what he says publicly (in his case that abortion will not matter to his administration). They guy is not just a digestive rear exit but also a fraud.
byomtov, I personally think that Cruz does not himself believe most of the stuff he says in front of the rubes. There are claims that he already did a Romney behind closed doors, i.e. telling rich donors the opposite of what he says publicly (in his case that abortion will not matter to his administration). They guy is not just a digestive rear exit but also a fraud.
I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition.
I can see that. But, having failed at the top prize (at least as far as politics goes), where does he go? Maybe there is a company out there who would make him CEO. But unless it is a really big company, it’s going to look like a major comedown to an ambuitious man. (And a really big company is probably going to want a CEO who has at least spent some time doing something related to their line of business. Not sure Rubio has that.)
In short, even if it is just unfocused ambition, it isn’t clear to me how he focuses it beyond here. And I could see him getting desperate because it isn’t clear to him either.
I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition.
I can see that. But, having failed at the top prize (at least as far as politics goes), where does he go? Maybe there is a company out there who would make him CEO. But unless it is a really big company, it’s going to look like a major comedown to an ambuitious man. (And a really big company is probably going to want a CEO who has at least spent some time doing something related to their line of business. Not sure Rubio has that.)
In short, even if it is just unfocused ambition, it isn’t clear to me how he focuses it beyond here. And I could see him getting desperate because it isn’t clear to him either.
I get the feeling of unbridled, but unfocused ambition.
I can see that. But, having failed at the top prize (at least as far as politics goes), where does he go? Maybe there is a company out there who would make him CEO. But unless it is a really big company, it’s going to look like a major comedown to an ambuitious man. (And a really big company is probably going to want a CEO who has at least spent some time doing something related to their line of business. Not sure Rubio has that.)
In short, even if it is just unfocused ambition, it isn’t clear to me how he focuses it beyond here. And I could see him getting desperate because it isn’t clear to him either.
“this is about making the country great again”
TP, I was just paraphrasing Trump. But, in kind of an answer, there is no country to copy, IMO. Then, I am an ardent exceptionalist, what’s wrong here is trivial compared to what is right. King Obama aside.
“this is about making the country great again”
TP, I was just paraphrasing Trump. But, in kind of an answer, there is no country to copy, IMO. Then, I am an ardent exceptionalist, what’s wrong here is trivial compared to what is right. King Obama aside.
“this is about making the country great again”
TP, I was just paraphrasing Trump. But, in kind of an answer, there is no country to copy, IMO. Then, I am an ardent exceptionalist, what’s wrong here is trivial compared to what is right. King Obama aside.
Show me a Democratic candidate for President who hasn’t said anything verifiably incorrect, laughably disconnected with reality, or deliberately mendaceous, and I’ll give you a prize.
Show me a Democratic candidate for President who hasn’t said anything verifiably incorrect, laughably disconnected with reality, or deliberately mendaceous, and I’ll give you a prize.
Show me a Democratic candidate for President who hasn’t said anything verifiably incorrect, laughably disconnected with reality, or deliberately mendaceous, and I’ll give you a prize.
I’m willing to settle for a President who understands the limits of executive power. I think Cruz has that one locked up. I am not so sure about Trump, Clinton or Sanders. Bernie talks about $5/transaction ATM fees as if it’s an average, and as if it’s something the Government Must Do Something About. That’s a fairly harmless variety of stupid, but it’s just a sample.
Sure, there are things that Cruz talks about wanting to do, but he knows he cannot and must not do them without Congress. I am not so sure about Trump, Clinton, or Sanders.
Gold standard would be a disaster. I think Cruz is hankering for some economic sanity, and it’s expressing itself badly. Fortunately, I also understand the limits of Executive power, and know he’s not going to get that.
I’m willing to settle for a President who understands the limits of executive power. I think Cruz has that one locked up. I am not so sure about Trump, Clinton or Sanders. Bernie talks about $5/transaction ATM fees as if it’s an average, and as if it’s something the Government Must Do Something About. That’s a fairly harmless variety of stupid, but it’s just a sample.
Sure, there are things that Cruz talks about wanting to do, but he knows he cannot and must not do them without Congress. I am not so sure about Trump, Clinton, or Sanders.
Gold standard would be a disaster. I think Cruz is hankering for some economic sanity, and it’s expressing itself badly. Fortunately, I also understand the limits of Executive power, and know he’s not going to get that.
I’m willing to settle for a President who understands the limits of executive power. I think Cruz has that one locked up. I am not so sure about Trump, Clinton or Sanders. Bernie talks about $5/transaction ATM fees as if it’s an average, and as if it’s something the Government Must Do Something About. That’s a fairly harmless variety of stupid, but it’s just a sample.
Sure, there are things that Cruz talks about wanting to do, but he knows he cannot and must not do them without Congress. I am not so sure about Trump, Clinton, or Sanders.
Gold standard would be a disaster. I think Cruz is hankering for some economic sanity, and it’s expressing itself badly. Fortunately, I also understand the limits of Executive power, and know he’s not going to get that.
us-democrats-furious-over-obama-administration-deportations
us-democrats-furious-over-obama-administration-deportations
us-democrats-furious-over-obama-administration-deportations
I’m willing to settle for a President who understands the limits of executive power
what about him makes you willing to overlook the fact that he doesn’t seem to understand that carpet bombs don’t seek out enemy troops while leaving buildings and good people unharmed ?
I’m willing to settle for a President who understands the limits of executive power
what about him makes you willing to overlook the fact that he doesn’t seem to understand that carpet bombs don’t seek out enemy troops while leaving buildings and good people unharmed ?
I’m willing to settle for a President who understands the limits of executive power
what about him makes you willing to overlook the fact that he doesn’t seem to understand that carpet bombs don’t seek out enemy troops while leaving buildings and good people unharmed ?
“Bernie talks about $5/transaction ATM fees as if it’s an average, and as if it’s something the Government Must Do Something About.”
I agree. The banking industry should voluntarily scale back ATM transaction fees as a customer service. $3.50 is too much. Years ago, I was not charged to cash a check with an underpaid human teller at a bank not my own.
But the machines, supposedly more productive than their lesser human counterparts, seem to live high on the hog and must drive Ferraris.
It’s odd to be inconveniently charged for convenience. I mean, if I walk into the back to cash a check, it would be strange if the teller said “my salary is meager, so I’m keeping $3.50 of your withdrawal for grocery money.”
That I could see. But the announcement on the ATM that you can choose to pay the fee with no explanation of why or how the fee is arrived at is odd. If I decline the transaction, that’s yet another five minutes of my life I’ve wasted in the expectation of time-saving convenience.
If I decline, the machine should at least say: “Have it your way, cheapskate, and go f*ck yourself on your way back to the car.”
Honesty and convenience is my motto. For today. I’ll have another by tomorrow.
The banks won’t do this, of course. The market bears plenty of bullsh*t and is allowed to because … well …. because .. the market is religion.
Thus Sanders’ ill-advised remarks.
I won’t vote for Sanders because he’s unelectable and besides, I don’t want to see a self-proclaimed Socialist, since there are so few of them, gunned down by right-wingers, probably on camera while he curses like Larry David at an ATM.
“I think Cruz is hankering for some economic sanity, and it’s expressing itself badly”
His vaunted experience and soaring rhetorical attacks and parries on the debate teams at Princeton and Harvard must have failed him in a massive way.
Something is surprising about that, but we probably differ about the nature of the surprise.
It could be know-nothing glibness only gets a guy so far and sticking your chin into the wind and arrogantly declaring something seems to make it true for way too many people … not you, but it’s not you I’m worried about.
King Ted rings too many bells. I prefer Commandant Cruz.
“Bernie talks about $5/transaction ATM fees as if it’s an average, and as if it’s something the Government Must Do Something About.”
I agree. The banking industry should voluntarily scale back ATM transaction fees as a customer service. $3.50 is too much. Years ago, I was not charged to cash a check with an underpaid human teller at a bank not my own.
But the machines, supposedly more productive than their lesser human counterparts, seem to live high on the hog and must drive Ferraris.
It’s odd to be inconveniently charged for convenience. I mean, if I walk into the back to cash a check, it would be strange if the teller said “my salary is meager, so I’m keeping $3.50 of your withdrawal for grocery money.”
That I could see. But the announcement on the ATM that you can choose to pay the fee with no explanation of why or how the fee is arrived at is odd. If I decline the transaction, that’s yet another five minutes of my life I’ve wasted in the expectation of time-saving convenience.
If I decline, the machine should at least say: “Have it your way, cheapskate, and go f*ck yourself on your way back to the car.”
Honesty and convenience is my motto. For today. I’ll have another by tomorrow.
The banks won’t do this, of course. The market bears plenty of bullsh*t and is allowed to because … well …. because .. the market is religion.
Thus Sanders’ ill-advised remarks.
I won’t vote for Sanders because he’s unelectable and besides, I don’t want to see a self-proclaimed Socialist, since there are so few of them, gunned down by right-wingers, probably on camera while he curses like Larry David at an ATM.
“I think Cruz is hankering for some economic sanity, and it’s expressing itself badly”
His vaunted experience and soaring rhetorical attacks and parries on the debate teams at Princeton and Harvard must have failed him in a massive way.
Something is surprising about that, but we probably differ about the nature of the surprise.
It could be know-nothing glibness only gets a guy so far and sticking your chin into the wind and arrogantly declaring something seems to make it true for way too many people … not you, but it’s not you I’m worried about.
King Ted rings too many bells. I prefer Commandant Cruz.
“Bernie talks about $5/transaction ATM fees as if it’s an average, and as if it’s something the Government Must Do Something About.”
I agree. The banking industry should voluntarily scale back ATM transaction fees as a customer service. $3.50 is too much. Years ago, I was not charged to cash a check with an underpaid human teller at a bank not my own.
But the machines, supposedly more productive than their lesser human counterparts, seem to live high on the hog and must drive Ferraris.
It’s odd to be inconveniently charged for convenience. I mean, if I walk into the back to cash a check, it would be strange if the teller said “my salary is meager, so I’m keeping $3.50 of your withdrawal for grocery money.”
That I could see. But the announcement on the ATM that you can choose to pay the fee with no explanation of why or how the fee is arrived at is odd. If I decline the transaction, that’s yet another five minutes of my life I’ve wasted in the expectation of time-saving convenience.
If I decline, the machine should at least say: “Have it your way, cheapskate, and go f*ck yourself on your way back to the car.”
Honesty and convenience is my motto. For today. I’ll have another by tomorrow.
The banks won’t do this, of course. The market bears plenty of bullsh*t and is allowed to because … well …. because .. the market is religion.
Thus Sanders’ ill-advised remarks.
I won’t vote for Sanders because he’s unelectable and besides, I don’t want to see a self-proclaimed Socialist, since there are so few of them, gunned down by right-wingers, probably on camera while he curses like Larry David at an ATM.
“I think Cruz is hankering for some economic sanity, and it’s expressing itself badly”
His vaunted experience and soaring rhetorical attacks and parries on the debate teams at Princeton and Harvard must have failed him in a massive way.
Something is surprising about that, but we probably differ about the nature of the surprise.
It could be know-nothing glibness only gets a guy so far and sticking your chin into the wind and arrogantly declaring something seems to make it true for way too many people … not you, but it’s not you I’m worried about.
King Ted rings too many bells. I prefer Commandant Cruz.
Hartmut,
Maybe Cruz doesn’t believe all that, but I’m no mindreader. It’s what he’s said, and he was worse during his Senate campaign, where he expressed concern over “Agenda 21” – the UN black helicopter plan among other things. What evidence do we have, rumors aside, that he is not an utter crackpot?
It’s not like these are throwaway statements, made once in a speech or informal exchange, and then forgotten. They are views he has expressed consistently.
I am at a loss to understand why we should ignore them. What should we think about Cruz? That he made good grades in law school so he’d be a great president? Lots of people make good grades.
Slarti,
I don’t know what kind of “economic sanity” you are thinking of. As far as I can tell he thinks we are suffering from massive inflation – hence the gold standard nonsense – and thinks a Balanced Budget Amendment would be just the ticket. It wouldn’t be.
Further, he wants to “audit” the Fed, whatever he means by that. His statements on the economy, the role of the Fed, and other economic issues indicate to me massive ignorance. Put him in the White House with a Republican Congress and I think we would face an economic catastrophe.
And do you think that repealing Obamacare would be a wonderful thing?
Hartmut,
Maybe Cruz doesn’t believe all that, but I’m no mindreader. It’s what he’s said, and he was worse during his Senate campaign, where he expressed concern over “Agenda 21” – the UN black helicopter plan among other things. What evidence do we have, rumors aside, that he is not an utter crackpot?
It’s not like these are throwaway statements, made once in a speech or informal exchange, and then forgotten. They are views he has expressed consistently.
I am at a loss to understand why we should ignore them. What should we think about Cruz? That he made good grades in law school so he’d be a great president? Lots of people make good grades.
Slarti,
I don’t know what kind of “economic sanity” you are thinking of. As far as I can tell he thinks we are suffering from massive inflation – hence the gold standard nonsense – and thinks a Balanced Budget Amendment would be just the ticket. It wouldn’t be.
Further, he wants to “audit” the Fed, whatever he means by that. His statements on the economy, the role of the Fed, and other economic issues indicate to me massive ignorance. Put him in the White House with a Republican Congress and I think we would face an economic catastrophe.
And do you think that repealing Obamacare would be a wonderful thing?
Hartmut,
Maybe Cruz doesn’t believe all that, but I’m no mindreader. It’s what he’s said, and he was worse during his Senate campaign, where he expressed concern over “Agenda 21” – the UN black helicopter plan among other things. What evidence do we have, rumors aside, that he is not an utter crackpot?
It’s not like these are throwaway statements, made once in a speech or informal exchange, and then forgotten. They are views he has expressed consistently.
I am at a loss to understand why we should ignore them. What should we think about Cruz? That he made good grades in law school so he’d be a great president? Lots of people make good grades.
Slarti,
I don’t know what kind of “economic sanity” you are thinking of. As far as I can tell he thinks we are suffering from massive inflation – hence the gold standard nonsense – and thinks a Balanced Budget Amendment would be just the ticket. It wouldn’t be.
Further, he wants to “audit” the Fed, whatever he means by that. His statements on the economy, the role of the Fed, and other economic issues indicate to me massive ignorance. Put him in the White House with a Republican Congress and I think we would face an economic catastrophe.
And do you think that repealing Obamacare would be a wonderful thing?
Speaking of repealing Obamacare:
http://time.com/4171492/paul-ryan-barack-obama-tears-isis/
I didn’t expect Ryan to shed any tears when he announced the passage of the Bill to destroy Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion and murder, over time, 15 million or so Americans.
Why would I expect that from a cold-blooded sociopathic killer who has modeled his life on that of Dagny Taggart?
Oh, it’s just policy?
Stalin didn’t cry either when he announced his Ukraine policy.
Speaking of repealing Obamacare:
http://time.com/4171492/paul-ryan-barack-obama-tears-isis/
I didn’t expect Ryan to shed any tears when he announced the passage of the Bill to destroy Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion and murder, over time, 15 million or so Americans.
Why would I expect that from a cold-blooded sociopathic killer who has modeled his life on that of Dagny Taggart?
Oh, it’s just policy?
Stalin didn’t cry either when he announced his Ukraine policy.
Speaking of repealing Obamacare:
http://time.com/4171492/paul-ryan-barack-obama-tears-isis/
I didn’t expect Ryan to shed any tears when he announced the passage of the Bill to destroy Obamacare and the Medicaid expansion and murder, over time, 15 million or so Americans.
Why would I expect that from a cold-blooded sociopathic killer who has modeled his life on that of Dagny Taggart?
Oh, it’s just policy?
Stalin didn’t cry either when he announced his Ukraine policy.
I won’t vote for Sanders because he’s unelectable
Count, I can see that as a reason. But am I to assume that, if he got the nomination, your long-standing enthusiasm for the Republicans would have you helping him demonstrate that he is unelectable? 😉
Actually, I’m not so sure he would be unelectable. He would have a harder time than Clinton, I think. But depending on who the Republicans end up nominating, Sanders might win. Perhaps even substantially.
I won’t vote for Sanders because he’s unelectable
Count, I can see that as a reason. But am I to assume that, if he got the nomination, your long-standing enthusiasm for the Republicans would have you helping him demonstrate that he is unelectable? 😉
Actually, I’m not so sure he would be unelectable. He would have a harder time than Clinton, I think. But depending on who the Republicans end up nominating, Sanders might win. Perhaps even substantially.
I won’t vote for Sanders because he’s unelectable
Count, I can see that as a reason. But am I to assume that, if he got the nomination, your long-standing enthusiasm for the Republicans would have you helping him demonstrate that he is unelectable? 😉
Actually, I’m not so sure he would be unelectable. He would have a harder time than Clinton, I think. But depending on who the Republicans end up nominating, Sanders might win. Perhaps even substantially.
In the primary, I won’t vote for Sanders.
In the general, sure I would.
Is Daffy Duck his running mate? Then I’ll vote twice for the ticket in the general.
And I’m not believing the unelectability of any of the Republican candidates in the general, against any of the Democratic candidates.
Something malignant is afoot.
What do I look like? von Hindenberg in 1933?
In the primary, I won’t vote for Sanders.
In the general, sure I would.
Is Daffy Duck his running mate? Then I’ll vote twice for the ticket in the general.
And I’m not believing the unelectability of any of the Republican candidates in the general, against any of the Democratic candidates.
Something malignant is afoot.
What do I look like? von Hindenberg in 1933?
In the primary, I won’t vote for Sanders.
In the general, sure I would.
Is Daffy Duck his running mate? Then I’ll vote twice for the ticket in the general.
And I’m not believing the unelectability of any of the Republican candidates in the general, against any of the Democratic candidates.
Something malignant is afoot.
What do I look like? von Hindenberg in 1933?
Lots of people make good grades.
I heard once that 10% of Harvard Law grads are in the top 10% of their graduating class – every single year!
Lots of people make good grades.
I heard once that 10% of Harvard Law grads are in the top 10% of their graduating class – every single year!
Lots of people make good grades.
I heard once that 10% of Harvard Law grads are in the top 10% of their graduating class – every single year!
Yes indeedy. Asserting that ATM fees are about $5/transaction* is exactly the same as asserting we need to go back on the gold standard, have a balanced budget amendment, and give rich people massive tax breaks. Why, they are nearly equal on my mendacity meter, what about yours?
Give me a break.
*and yes, ATM fees at non-affiliated banks are nearing $5/transaction. Why now, that’s a real head scratcher, what with being able to get a cash advance “for free” just about everywhere. Kinda’ dumb you say? So how did those banks get all that money anyway?
Yes indeedy. Asserting that ATM fees are about $5/transaction* is exactly the same as asserting we need to go back on the gold standard, have a balanced budget amendment, and give rich people massive tax breaks. Why, they are nearly equal on my mendacity meter, what about yours?
Give me a break.
*and yes, ATM fees at non-affiliated banks are nearing $5/transaction. Why now, that’s a real head scratcher, what with being able to get a cash advance “for free” just about everywhere. Kinda’ dumb you say? So how did those banks get all that money anyway?
Yes indeedy. Asserting that ATM fees are about $5/transaction* is exactly the same as asserting we need to go back on the gold standard, have a balanced budget amendment, and give rich people massive tax breaks. Why, they are nearly equal on my mendacity meter, what about yours?
Give me a break.
*and yes, ATM fees at non-affiliated banks are nearing $5/transaction. Why now, that’s a real head scratcher, what with being able to get a cash advance “for free” just about everywhere. Kinda’ dumb you say? So how did those banks get all that money anyway?
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
Last year, my average ATM fee per transaction was about a nickel. That includes one time where I panicked and withdrew some cash at a nonaffiliated machine, and at least 50 times when I withdrew from affiliated machines.
Anyone can avoid ATM fees, with just a teeny bit of thought. In fact, you don’t have to use ATMs at all.
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
Last year, my average ATM fee per transaction was about a nickel. That includes one time where I panicked and withdrew some cash at a nonaffiliated machine, and at least 50 times when I withdrew from affiliated machines.
Anyone can avoid ATM fees, with just a teeny bit of thought. In fact, you don’t have to use ATMs at all.
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
Last year, my average ATM fee per transaction was about a nickel. That includes one time where I panicked and withdrew some cash at a nonaffiliated machine, and at least 50 times when I withdrew from affiliated machines.
Anyone can avoid ATM fees, with just a teeny bit of thought. In fact, you don’t have to use ATMs at all.
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
Sanders:
WaPo:
Ted Cruz just claimed we were going to be chiseling the crosses and stars of David off the gravestones at Arlington. but Sanders leaving out the word “unaffiliated” troubles you?
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
Sanders:
WaPo:
Ted Cruz just claimed we were going to be chiseling the crosses and stars of David off the gravestones at Arlington. but Sanders leaving out the word “unaffiliated” troubles you?
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
Sanders:
WaPo:
Ted Cruz just claimed we were going to be chiseling the crosses and stars of David off the gravestones at Arlington. but Sanders leaving out the word “unaffiliated” troubles you?
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
I did not state or imply that he had said otherwise. It’s just an example (w/cite) demonstrating that there are indeed ATM fees under circumstances that approach the number Sanders stated.
Nothing more. I’m pretty sure it will be acknowledged as a mistake, and walked back.
However, equating this boo-boo with consistently asserting a need for a public policy to return to the gold standard is simply silly.
When will Intelligent(sic) Ted take back his claim?
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
I did not state or imply that he had said otherwise. It’s just an example (w/cite) demonstrating that there are indeed ATM fees under circumstances that approach the number Sanders stated.
Nothing more. I’m pretty sure it will be acknowledged as a mistake, and walked back.
However, equating this boo-boo with consistently asserting a need for a public policy to return to the gold standard is simply silly.
When will Intelligent(sic) Ted take back his claim?
If only that is what Sanders had claimed.
I did not state or imply that he had said otherwise. It’s just an example (w/cite) demonstrating that there are indeed ATM fees under circumstances that approach the number Sanders stated.
Nothing more. I’m pretty sure it will be acknowledged as a mistake, and walked back.
However, equating this boo-boo with consistently asserting a need for a public policy to return to the gold standard is simply silly.
When will Intelligent(sic) Ted take back his claim?
But, having failed at the top prize (at least as far as politics goes), where does he go?
Couldn’t he just get, you know, a job?
Sanders
Here is the speech in which Sanders talks about the $5 ATM fees.
It’s probably a few thousand words. It discusses a very broad range of issues concerning the US financial industry.
The topic of ATM fees in its entirety gets three sentences, intermingled with a discussion of usurious consumer credit rates, which is to say, rates in excess of 15%.
I understand that lots of folks are, straight up, just not going to like Bernie Sanders.
But citing a proposed cap on ATM fees as an example of something that is ‘detached from reality’ seems, to me, like maybe the point he was making has been missed.
As far as the substance of the ATM fee issue, banks are in the somewhat privileged position of being allowed to handle other people’s money. There is almost no aspect of that that is not, rightly in my view, controlled by public regulation.
Capping ATM fees seems OK, to me.
It’s true that you can just go to the branch office and take out some cash, but that assumes (a) you’re conveniently near a branch office (b) during banking hours.
Which isn’t really true for everyone.
But, having failed at the top prize (at least as far as politics goes), where does he go?
Couldn’t he just get, you know, a job?
Sanders
Here is the speech in which Sanders talks about the $5 ATM fees.
It’s probably a few thousand words. It discusses a very broad range of issues concerning the US financial industry.
The topic of ATM fees in its entirety gets three sentences, intermingled with a discussion of usurious consumer credit rates, which is to say, rates in excess of 15%.
I understand that lots of folks are, straight up, just not going to like Bernie Sanders.
But citing a proposed cap on ATM fees as an example of something that is ‘detached from reality’ seems, to me, like maybe the point he was making has been missed.
As far as the substance of the ATM fee issue, banks are in the somewhat privileged position of being allowed to handle other people’s money. There is almost no aspect of that that is not, rightly in my view, controlled by public regulation.
Capping ATM fees seems OK, to me.
It’s true that you can just go to the branch office and take out some cash, but that assumes (a) you’re conveniently near a branch office (b) during banking hours.
Which isn’t really true for everyone.
But, having failed at the top prize (at least as far as politics goes), where does he go?
Couldn’t he just get, you know, a job?
Sanders
Here is the speech in which Sanders talks about the $5 ATM fees.
It’s probably a few thousand words. It discusses a very broad range of issues concerning the US financial industry.
The topic of ATM fees in its entirety gets three sentences, intermingled with a discussion of usurious consumer credit rates, which is to say, rates in excess of 15%.
I understand that lots of folks are, straight up, just not going to like Bernie Sanders.
But citing a proposed cap on ATM fees as an example of something that is ‘detached from reality’ seems, to me, like maybe the point he was making has been missed.
As far as the substance of the ATM fee issue, banks are in the somewhat privileged position of being allowed to handle other people’s money. There is almost no aspect of that that is not, rightly in my view, controlled by public regulation.
Capping ATM fees seems OK, to me.
It’s true that you can just go to the branch office and take out some cash, but that assumes (a) you’re conveniently near a branch office (b) during banking hours.
Which isn’t really true for everyone.
Ted Cruz just claimed we were going to be chiseling the crosses and stars of David off the gravestones at Arlington.
Oh yeah.
I forgot about that one, cleek. Thanks for the reminder.
Has there ever been a serious candidate for President who had more excuses made for his statements?
Why is it not obvious that Cruz is a crackpot?
Ted Cruz just claimed we were going to be chiseling the crosses and stars of David off the gravestones at Arlington.
Oh yeah.
I forgot about that one, cleek. Thanks for the reminder.
Has there ever been a serious candidate for President who had more excuses made for his statements?
Why is it not obvious that Cruz is a crackpot?
Ted Cruz just claimed we were going to be chiseling the crosses and stars of David off the gravestones at Arlington.
Oh yeah.
I forgot about that one, cleek. Thanks for the reminder.
Has there ever been a serious candidate for President who had more excuses made for his statements?
Why is it not obvious that Cruz is a crackpot?
This concludes the Sanders-ATM Meme of the Hour.
This concludes the Sanders-ATM Meme of the Hour.
This concludes the Sanders-ATM Meme of the Hour.
“In fact, you don’t have to use ATMs at all.”
This is very true.
On the other hand, there is nothing a capitalist likes more than a panicked consumer.
But, what explains the high fees at non-affiliated ATM locations, compared to the very same machines at affiliated ATM locations.
More letters in “nonaffiliated”?
If market forces truly are at work, how come the banks don’t do a WalMart and declare that every Friday morning, the first five ATM customers after 8:00 am will be waived the fee at nonaffiliated machines?
Is it just the fear of massive car crashes, or perhaps some waving around of concealed handguns, as cash-seekers fight for position?
And what explains (this not directed at Slart, but at free-floating stupidity loose in the land) why the cops will arrive quickly with weapons drawn if I’m prying open an ATM with a crow bar to get my feeless cash, but the decades-long delay in arresting Cliven Bundy for receiving unlawfully feeless grazing privileges for his cattle?
If the Oath Keepers took over by force of arms a collection of ATMs and cordoned them off and started to lay plans to distribute the money to the citizenry because “freedom”, what’s the problem, exactly?
If Black Lives Matter did it, we know the f*cking problem, don’t we?
I need to go back to the news reports about the Symbionese Liberation Army shooting up the place and see if any Democratic denizens in government sinecures were nodding and saying “well, let’s tone down the gunfire, but I think they have a legitimate grievance”.
People don’t have to go the hospital emergency room either and get charged $12 per aspirin tablet, which they MIGHT find out with a magnifying glass in the small print on the bill.
We don’t HAVE to do anything, really. Theoretically, we don’t have to eat. It’s been done, mostly by the Irish, but I kid.
But I don’t see what that has to do with the cost of anything.
I guess we just make sh*t up and call it market forces, or God’s Will, or democratically arrived-at government rules with only the last one ever being questioned and kicked in the head.
Only the first two have a sign that says “take it or leave it”.
While I’m at it, why is the sky blue?
Any painter worth his pigments will tell you it’s not really blue. In fact, there’s lots of yellow in there too, to mention one color.
But we say it’s blue for no reason whatsoever except that our cones and rods send that color to our brain and we just made up and agreed on a vocable somewhere along the line to express it verbally.
Carry on. Life has meaning I’m sure, but ATM fees have no meaning.
“In fact, you don’t have to use ATMs at all.”
This is very true.
On the other hand, there is nothing a capitalist likes more than a panicked consumer.
But, what explains the high fees at non-affiliated ATM locations, compared to the very same machines at affiliated ATM locations.
More letters in “nonaffiliated”?
If market forces truly are at work, how come the banks don’t do a WalMart and declare that every Friday morning, the first five ATM customers after 8:00 am will be waived the fee at nonaffiliated machines?
Is it just the fear of massive car crashes, or perhaps some waving around of concealed handguns, as cash-seekers fight for position?
And what explains (this not directed at Slart, but at free-floating stupidity loose in the land) why the cops will arrive quickly with weapons drawn if I’m prying open an ATM with a crow bar to get my feeless cash, but the decades-long delay in arresting Cliven Bundy for receiving unlawfully feeless grazing privileges for his cattle?
If the Oath Keepers took over by force of arms a collection of ATMs and cordoned them off and started to lay plans to distribute the money to the citizenry because “freedom”, what’s the problem, exactly?
If Black Lives Matter did it, we know the f*cking problem, don’t we?
I need to go back to the news reports about the Symbionese Liberation Army shooting up the place and see if any Democratic denizens in government sinecures were nodding and saying “well, let’s tone down the gunfire, but I think they have a legitimate grievance”.
People don’t have to go the hospital emergency room either and get charged $12 per aspirin tablet, which they MIGHT find out with a magnifying glass in the small print on the bill.
We don’t HAVE to do anything, really. Theoretically, we don’t have to eat. It’s been done, mostly by the Irish, but I kid.
But I don’t see what that has to do with the cost of anything.
I guess we just make sh*t up and call it market forces, or God’s Will, or democratically arrived-at government rules with only the last one ever being questioned and kicked in the head.
Only the first two have a sign that says “take it or leave it”.
While I’m at it, why is the sky blue?
Any painter worth his pigments will tell you it’s not really blue. In fact, there’s lots of yellow in there too, to mention one color.
But we say it’s blue for no reason whatsoever except that our cones and rods send that color to our brain and we just made up and agreed on a vocable somewhere along the line to express it verbally.
Carry on. Life has meaning I’m sure, but ATM fees have no meaning.
“In fact, you don’t have to use ATMs at all.”
This is very true.
On the other hand, there is nothing a capitalist likes more than a panicked consumer.
But, what explains the high fees at non-affiliated ATM locations, compared to the very same machines at affiliated ATM locations.
More letters in “nonaffiliated”?
If market forces truly are at work, how come the banks don’t do a WalMart and declare that every Friday morning, the first five ATM customers after 8:00 am will be waived the fee at nonaffiliated machines?
Is it just the fear of massive car crashes, or perhaps some waving around of concealed handguns, as cash-seekers fight for position?
And what explains (this not directed at Slart, but at free-floating stupidity loose in the land) why the cops will arrive quickly with weapons drawn if I’m prying open an ATM with a crow bar to get my feeless cash, but the decades-long delay in arresting Cliven Bundy for receiving unlawfully feeless grazing privileges for his cattle?
If the Oath Keepers took over by force of arms a collection of ATMs and cordoned them off and started to lay plans to distribute the money to the citizenry because “freedom”, what’s the problem, exactly?
If Black Lives Matter did it, we know the f*cking problem, don’t we?
I need to go back to the news reports about the Symbionese Liberation Army shooting up the place and see if any Democratic denizens in government sinecures were nodding and saying “well, let’s tone down the gunfire, but I think they have a legitimate grievance”.
People don’t have to go the hospital emergency room either and get charged $12 per aspirin tablet, which they MIGHT find out with a magnifying glass in the small print on the bill.
We don’t HAVE to do anything, really. Theoretically, we don’t have to eat. It’s been done, mostly by the Irish, but I kid.
But I don’t see what that has to do with the cost of anything.
I guess we just make sh*t up and call it market forces, or God’s Will, or democratically arrived-at government rules with only the last one ever being questioned and kicked in the head.
Only the first two have a sign that says “take it or leave it”.
While I’m at it, why is the sky blue?
Any painter worth his pigments will tell you it’s not really blue. In fact, there’s lots of yellow in there too, to mention one color.
But we say it’s blue for no reason whatsoever except that our cones and rods send that color to our brain and we just made up and agreed on a vocable somewhere along the line to express it verbally.
Carry on. Life has meaning I’m sure, but ATM fees have no meaning.
Capping ATM fees seems OK, to me.
As I read somewhere, federal caps have been placed on other fees, esp. overdraft fees, and the banks are raising ATM charges to try and get some of that lost revenue back.
To listen to the moaners and groaners about Sanders’ “out of touch with reality” gaff, you’d think the banks wouldn’t bother raising these charges because as EVERYBODY KNOWS you can get a cash advance on your card ‘for nothing’.
But, of course, we are not bankers, so what do we know?
And yes, Ted Cruz is a crackpot.
Capping ATM fees seems OK, to me.
As I read somewhere, federal caps have been placed on other fees, esp. overdraft fees, and the banks are raising ATM charges to try and get some of that lost revenue back.
To listen to the moaners and groaners about Sanders’ “out of touch with reality” gaff, you’d think the banks wouldn’t bother raising these charges because as EVERYBODY KNOWS you can get a cash advance on your card ‘for nothing’.
But, of course, we are not bankers, so what do we know?
And yes, Ted Cruz is a crackpot.
Capping ATM fees seems OK, to me.
As I read somewhere, federal caps have been placed on other fees, esp. overdraft fees, and the banks are raising ATM charges to try and get some of that lost revenue back.
To listen to the moaners and groaners about Sanders’ “out of touch with reality” gaff, you’d think the banks wouldn’t bother raising these charges because as EVERYBODY KNOWS you can get a cash advance on your card ‘for nothing’.
But, of course, we are not bankers, so what do we know?
And yes, Ted Cruz is a crackpot.
I’m trying to avoid going in full-brother, but in fact, Cruz is likely to be a Cuban citizen. Based on information on the Department of State site, children born to at least one Cuban parent get Cuban citizenship. Cuba does not recognize dual citizenship, just like the US. It means that for Cuba, a dual US-Cuban citizen is a Cuban citizen. The Department of State brings this up as a warning.
This, unless Cruz has applied for Cuban authorities to free him of his Cuban citizenship, he is likely a Cuban citizen under Cuban law.
None of this has any effect on his eligibility for US president. The US government does not recognize dual citizenship, either, so Cruz is a full natural-born US citizen. In theory, I think there is nothing that would prevent him from being elected both as US and Cuban president for concurrent terms.
I’m trying to avoid going in full-brother, but in fact, Cruz is likely to be a Cuban citizen. Based on information on the Department of State site, children born to at least one Cuban parent get Cuban citizenship. Cuba does not recognize dual citizenship, just like the US. It means that for Cuba, a dual US-Cuban citizen is a Cuban citizen. The Department of State brings this up as a warning.
This, unless Cruz has applied for Cuban authorities to free him of his Cuban citizenship, he is likely a Cuban citizen under Cuban law.
None of this has any effect on his eligibility for US president. The US government does not recognize dual citizenship, either, so Cruz is a full natural-born US citizen. In theory, I think there is nothing that would prevent him from being elected both as US and Cuban president for concurrent terms.
I’m trying to avoid going in full-brother, but in fact, Cruz is likely to be a Cuban citizen. Based on information on the Department of State site, children born to at least one Cuban parent get Cuban citizenship. Cuba does not recognize dual citizenship, just like the US. It means that for Cuba, a dual US-Cuban citizen is a Cuban citizen. The Department of State brings this up as a warning.
This, unless Cruz has applied for Cuban authorities to free him of his Cuban citizenship, he is likely a Cuban citizen under Cuban law.
None of this has any effect on his eligibility for US president. The US government does not recognize dual citizenship, either, so Cruz is a full natural-born US citizen. In theory, I think there is nothing that would prevent him from being elected both as US and Cuban president for concurrent terms.
Ted Cruz the top-notch lawyer, and Ben Carson the top-notch surgeon, are both top-notch crackpots.
Maybe they’re just pretending to be crackpots to win the crackpot vote. Maybe religious zealots are crackpots by nature. Who knows? One thing seems true: academic achievement and professional excellence are no guarantee of sanity.
If Cruz and Carson were both mild leftists instead of right-wing nutjobs, I’d bet money that they would be derided as pointy-headed intellectuals, in certain quarters, and cited as proofs that book learnin’ addles the brain.
–TP
Ted Cruz the top-notch lawyer, and Ben Carson the top-notch surgeon, are both top-notch crackpots.
Maybe they’re just pretending to be crackpots to win the crackpot vote. Maybe religious zealots are crackpots by nature. Who knows? One thing seems true: academic achievement and professional excellence are no guarantee of sanity.
If Cruz and Carson were both mild leftists instead of right-wing nutjobs, I’d bet money that they would be derided as pointy-headed intellectuals, in certain quarters, and cited as proofs that book learnin’ addles the brain.
–TP
Ted Cruz the top-notch lawyer, and Ben Carson the top-notch surgeon, are both top-notch crackpots.
Maybe they’re just pretending to be crackpots to win the crackpot vote. Maybe religious zealots are crackpots by nature. Who knows? One thing seems true: academic achievement and professional excellence are no guarantee of sanity.
If Cruz and Carson were both mild leftists instead of right-wing nutjobs, I’d bet money that they would be derided as pointy-headed intellectuals, in certain quarters, and cited as proofs that book learnin’ addles the brain.
–TP
Obama’s an elitist, you know, Tony P.
Obama’s an elitist, you know, Tony P.
Obama’s an elitist, you know, Tony P.
but everybody who votes for Democrats is an elitist. By definition. Even those who are also “takers” living off the government.
but everybody who votes for Democrats is an elitist. By definition. Even those who are also “takers” living off the government.
but everybody who votes for Democrats is an elitist. By definition. Even those who are also “takers” living off the government.
So are we elite takers, or taking elitists?
So are we elite takers, or taking elitists?
So are we elite takers, or taking elitists?
When it comes to who is going to hold national elected office, I am an unapologetic elitist.
I want the smartest, most capable people available.
I don’t want people I can ‘relate to’ at some kind of personal buddy-buddy level. I don’t want people I would have a beer with. I don’t mind if they act like they are the smartest person in the room, as long as they actually are the smartest person in the room.
Harry Truman famously allegedly said ‘the world is run by C students’.
I’m not sure, but I think he might have thought of that as a good thing.
I don’t.
When it comes to who is going to hold national elected office, I am an unapologetic elitist.
I want the smartest, most capable people available.
I don’t want people I can ‘relate to’ at some kind of personal buddy-buddy level. I don’t want people I would have a beer with. I don’t mind if they act like they are the smartest person in the room, as long as they actually are the smartest person in the room.
Harry Truman famously allegedly said ‘the world is run by C students’.
I’m not sure, but I think he might have thought of that as a good thing.
I don’t.
When it comes to who is going to hold national elected office, I am an unapologetic elitist.
I want the smartest, most capable people available.
I don’t want people I can ‘relate to’ at some kind of personal buddy-buddy level. I don’t want people I would have a beer with. I don’t mind if they act like they are the smartest person in the room, as long as they actually are the smartest person in the room.
Harry Truman famously allegedly said ‘the world is run by C students’.
I’m not sure, but I think he might have thought of that as a good thing.
I don’t.
In America, I’ve decided, here’s the rule:
Take any American regardless of intelligence or education.
Before they enter high office, they know exactly what to do about every single problem, foreign and domestic, that’s likely to arise. Most of their policy prescriptions begin with the words “what we oughta do is we oughta just ….”
Damned if it doesn’t sound exactly what the doctor ordered.
Now, put them in high office. To a man and woman, they know nuttin about nuttin. They can’t find their backsides.
Once they leave office, however, they are paid the big bucks to revert to pre-office-holding form and here comes the glib certainty again.
If the President had to present the State of the Union Address on a set that had him sitting at the end of seedy bar in his cups as he moved his whiskey glass around in circles on the bar, most of the American public would look and each other and say, “Ya know, Betty, the more he drinks the more he hits the nail on the head.”
In America, I’ve decided, here’s the rule:
Take any American regardless of intelligence or education.
Before they enter high office, they know exactly what to do about every single problem, foreign and domestic, that’s likely to arise. Most of their policy prescriptions begin with the words “what we oughta do is we oughta just ….”
Damned if it doesn’t sound exactly what the doctor ordered.
Now, put them in high office. To a man and woman, they know nuttin about nuttin. They can’t find their backsides.
Once they leave office, however, they are paid the big bucks to revert to pre-office-holding form and here comes the glib certainty again.
If the President had to present the State of the Union Address on a set that had him sitting at the end of seedy bar in his cups as he moved his whiskey glass around in circles on the bar, most of the American public would look and each other and say, “Ya know, Betty, the more he drinks the more he hits the nail on the head.”
In America, I’ve decided, here’s the rule:
Take any American regardless of intelligence or education.
Before they enter high office, they know exactly what to do about every single problem, foreign and domestic, that’s likely to arise. Most of their policy prescriptions begin with the words “what we oughta do is we oughta just ….”
Damned if it doesn’t sound exactly what the doctor ordered.
Now, put them in high office. To a man and woman, they know nuttin about nuttin. They can’t find their backsides.
Once they leave office, however, they are paid the big bucks to revert to pre-office-holding form and here comes the glib certainty again.
If the President had to present the State of the Union Address on a set that had him sitting at the end of seedy bar in his cups as he moved his whiskey glass around in circles on the bar, most of the American public would look and each other and say, “Ya know, Betty, the more he drinks the more he hits the nail on the head.”
I do
I do
I do
Hoo do?
Why’d you settle for the D student, George W.?
Hoo do?
Why’d you settle for the D student, George W.?
Hoo do?
Why’d you settle for the D student, George W.?
I do
The one thing I will say for the whole ‘the world is run by C students’ thing is that, if it’s true, it explains a lot.
I do
The one thing I will say for the whole ‘the world is run by C students’ thing is that, if it’s true, it explains a lot.
I do
The one thing I will say for the whole ‘the world is run by C students’ thing is that, if it’s true, it explains a lot.
byomtov:
What evidence do we have, rumors aside, that he is not an utter crackpot?
[…]
I am at a loss to understand why we should ignore them. What should we think about Cruz? That he made good grades in law school so he’d be a great president? Lots of people make good grades.
I don’t say that we should ignore what he says (it’s always useful to take note what exact poison gets spread). I think the main evidence for him being mainly a fraud is that he talks differently to the people that really matter, i.e. the donors. If he tells them behind closed doors that abortion would not be among his priorities when elected (and there seem to be eyewitnesses to that) while at the same time promising his potential voters a constitutional amendment to ban it once and for all or is at the same time pushing legislation while condemning rivals for allegedly favoring what is in those bills, that’s to me a clear indicator of him not being an actual fanatic (unlike his father) but a hypocrite pretending to be one. Add him publicly attacking Ivy League elitism while on the record for trying to prevent people from less Ivy schools than his becoming member of the student organisation he is a member of. The guy pretends to be a commoner and one of the rubes while acting like the worst elitist snob.
For comparision, I believe that Michelle Bachmann is indeed not fully sane (or she should get an OSCAR or two for best actress).
byomtov:
What evidence do we have, rumors aside, that he is not an utter crackpot?
[…]
I am at a loss to understand why we should ignore them. What should we think about Cruz? That he made good grades in law school so he’d be a great president? Lots of people make good grades.
I don’t say that we should ignore what he says (it’s always useful to take note what exact poison gets spread). I think the main evidence for him being mainly a fraud is that he talks differently to the people that really matter, i.e. the donors. If he tells them behind closed doors that abortion would not be among his priorities when elected (and there seem to be eyewitnesses to that) while at the same time promising his potential voters a constitutional amendment to ban it once and for all or is at the same time pushing legislation while condemning rivals for allegedly favoring what is in those bills, that’s to me a clear indicator of him not being an actual fanatic (unlike his father) but a hypocrite pretending to be one. Add him publicly attacking Ivy League elitism while on the record for trying to prevent people from less Ivy schools than his becoming member of the student organisation he is a member of. The guy pretends to be a commoner and one of the rubes while acting like the worst elitist snob.
For comparision, I believe that Michelle Bachmann is indeed not fully sane (or she should get an OSCAR or two for best actress).
byomtov:
What evidence do we have, rumors aside, that he is not an utter crackpot?
[…]
I am at a loss to understand why we should ignore them. What should we think about Cruz? That he made good grades in law school so he’d be a great president? Lots of people make good grades.
I don’t say that we should ignore what he says (it’s always useful to take note what exact poison gets spread). I think the main evidence for him being mainly a fraud is that he talks differently to the people that really matter, i.e. the donors. If he tells them behind closed doors that abortion would not be among his priorities when elected (and there seem to be eyewitnesses to that) while at the same time promising his potential voters a constitutional amendment to ban it once and for all or is at the same time pushing legislation while condemning rivals for allegedly favoring what is in those bills, that’s to me a clear indicator of him not being an actual fanatic (unlike his father) but a hypocrite pretending to be one. Add him publicly attacking Ivy League elitism while on the record for trying to prevent people from less Ivy schools than his becoming member of the student organisation he is a member of. The guy pretends to be a commoner and one of the rubes while acting like the worst elitist snob.
For comparision, I believe that Michelle Bachmann is indeed not fully sane (or she should get an OSCAR or two for best actress).
Why’d you settle for the D student, George W.?
That’s Marty’s ardent exceptionalism coming to the fore, in that our* D students are better than any other country’s A students.
(shortly, that is going to be ‘your’. Or as they say in Polish Nie mój cyrk, nie moje małpy (not my circus, not my monkeys)
Why’d you settle for the D student, George W.?
That’s Marty’s ardent exceptionalism coming to the fore, in that our* D students are better than any other country’s A students.
(shortly, that is going to be ‘your’. Or as they say in Polish Nie mój cyrk, nie moje małpy (not my circus, not my monkeys)
Why’d you settle for the D student, George W.?
That’s Marty’s ardent exceptionalism coming to the fore, in that our* D students are better than any other country’s A students.
(shortly, that is going to be ‘your’. Or as they say in Polish Nie mój cyrk, nie moje małpy (not my circus, not my monkeys)
I don’t know whether Truman believed that presidents “run the world”, or whether he meant that plumbers, carpenters, barbers, and janitors do. Or maybe he meant that investment bankers and corporate lawyers do.
In any case, I assume Marty’s position is that it’s a good thing C students run the world, because otherwise the D students would be doing it. All that A and B students are good for is inventing semiconductors, medicines, search engines, and so forth.
–TP
I don’t know whether Truman believed that presidents “run the world”, or whether he meant that plumbers, carpenters, barbers, and janitors do. Or maybe he meant that investment bankers and corporate lawyers do.
In any case, I assume Marty’s position is that it’s a good thing C students run the world, because otherwise the D students would be doing it. All that A and B students are good for is inventing semiconductors, medicines, search engines, and so forth.
–TP
I don’t know whether Truman believed that presidents “run the world”, or whether he meant that plumbers, carpenters, barbers, and janitors do. Or maybe he meant that investment bankers and corporate lawyers do.
In any case, I assume Marty’s position is that it’s a good thing C students run the world, because otherwise the D students would be doing it. All that A and B students are good for is inventing semiconductors, medicines, search engines, and so forth.
–TP
hartmut,
I think the main evidence for him being mainly a fraud is that he talks differently to the people that really matter, i.e. the donors.
I haven’t seen these stories, which is not to say that they don’t exist or are inaccurate.
But they do raise the question of who exactly Cruz is defrauding.
hartmut,
I think the main evidence for him being mainly a fraud is that he talks differently to the people that really matter, i.e. the donors.
I haven’t seen these stories, which is not to say that they don’t exist or are inaccurate.
But they do raise the question of who exactly Cruz is defrauding.
hartmut,
I think the main evidence for him being mainly a fraud is that he talks differently to the people that really matter, i.e. the donors.
I haven’t seen these stories, which is not to say that they don’t exist or are inaccurate.
But they do raise the question of who exactly Cruz is defrauding.
My bet would be on the rubes in the base. At least on the social issues.
On foreign and to a degree fiscal policy I am much more inclined to ‘believe’ him, i.e. he would indeed not feel any inhibition concerning ‘precision carpet bombing’ and other atrocities and he would follow the orthodoxy of distributing wealth upwards only.
As far as a return to the gold standard is concerned, I’d like to know first in what context he usually talks about that (in Congress, only on the campaign trail, since when etc.), i.e. whether it is primarily in ‘red meat’ situations or also in ‘serious’ ones.
In any case, whether he is a fraud or not, he’d be a pure disaster as POTUS with the only open question being which of his policies would work faster in bringing ruin (will he blow up the economy or the Middle East first?).
Imo Hillary Clinton just represents the status quo and not much would change. That is not necessarily a good thing, since the risk of Wall Street ‘doing it again’ remains pretty real. But I’d take a mere risk there over a certainty anytime.
On foreign policy I would consider it possible that she has grown a bit more risk averse after her bad experiences in the past. She’s be more hawkish outwardly certainly but I doubt that she’d go much further than Obama in deeds.
My bet would be on the rubes in the base. At least on the social issues.
On foreign and to a degree fiscal policy I am much more inclined to ‘believe’ him, i.e. he would indeed not feel any inhibition concerning ‘precision carpet bombing’ and other atrocities and he would follow the orthodoxy of distributing wealth upwards only.
As far as a return to the gold standard is concerned, I’d like to know first in what context he usually talks about that (in Congress, only on the campaign trail, since when etc.), i.e. whether it is primarily in ‘red meat’ situations or also in ‘serious’ ones.
In any case, whether he is a fraud or not, he’d be a pure disaster as POTUS with the only open question being which of his policies would work faster in bringing ruin (will he blow up the economy or the Middle East first?).
Imo Hillary Clinton just represents the status quo and not much would change. That is not necessarily a good thing, since the risk of Wall Street ‘doing it again’ remains pretty real. But I’d take a mere risk there over a certainty anytime.
On foreign policy I would consider it possible that she has grown a bit more risk averse after her bad experiences in the past. She’s be more hawkish outwardly certainly but I doubt that she’d go much further than Obama in deeds.
My bet would be on the rubes in the base. At least on the social issues.
On foreign and to a degree fiscal policy I am much more inclined to ‘believe’ him, i.e. he would indeed not feel any inhibition concerning ‘precision carpet bombing’ and other atrocities and he would follow the orthodoxy of distributing wealth upwards only.
As far as a return to the gold standard is concerned, I’d like to know first in what context he usually talks about that (in Congress, only on the campaign trail, since when etc.), i.e. whether it is primarily in ‘red meat’ situations or also in ‘serious’ ones.
In any case, whether he is a fraud or not, he’d be a pure disaster as POTUS with the only open question being which of his policies would work faster in bringing ruin (will he blow up the economy or the Middle East first?).
Imo Hillary Clinton just represents the status quo and not much would change. That is not necessarily a good thing, since the risk of Wall Street ‘doing it again’ remains pretty real. But I’d take a mere risk there over a certainty anytime.
On foreign policy I would consider it possible that she has grown a bit more risk averse after her bad experiences in the past. She’s be more hawkish outwardly certainly but I doubt that she’d go much further than Obama in deeds.
Hartmut,
I agree with your comment in general, though I hope Hillary might surprise us once or twice.
As for the gold standard, it’s been a staple of right-wing crackpottery for a while. Cruz didn’t just think of it himself. Whether he is just pandering or serious, it’s clear he doesn’t know a damn thing about the economy.
And again, I’m tired of politicians having it both ways. If you want to pander to the nuts, go ahead, but don’t try whispering, “I don’t really mean it,” on the side.
I think we have entirely too much of that in politics. Everybody wants to be a knowledgeable insider, especially the press, so we get played for suckers.
“Hey, he’s just saying that to appeal to X. He’s actually reasonable on the issue.” Sounds sophisticated, but it’s not.
Hartmut,
I agree with your comment in general, though I hope Hillary might surprise us once or twice.
As for the gold standard, it’s been a staple of right-wing crackpottery for a while. Cruz didn’t just think of it himself. Whether he is just pandering or serious, it’s clear he doesn’t know a damn thing about the economy.
And again, I’m tired of politicians having it both ways. If you want to pander to the nuts, go ahead, but don’t try whispering, “I don’t really mean it,” on the side.
I think we have entirely too much of that in politics. Everybody wants to be a knowledgeable insider, especially the press, so we get played for suckers.
“Hey, he’s just saying that to appeal to X. He’s actually reasonable on the issue.” Sounds sophisticated, but it’s not.
Hartmut,
I agree with your comment in general, though I hope Hillary might surprise us once or twice.
As for the gold standard, it’s been a staple of right-wing crackpottery for a while. Cruz didn’t just think of it himself. Whether he is just pandering or serious, it’s clear he doesn’t know a damn thing about the economy.
And again, I’m tired of politicians having it both ways. If you want to pander to the nuts, go ahead, but don’t try whispering, “I don’t really mean it,” on the side.
I think we have entirely too much of that in politics. Everybody wants to be a knowledgeable insider, especially the press, so we get played for suckers.
“Hey, he’s just saying that to appeal to X. He’s actually reasonable on the issue.” Sounds sophisticated, but it’s not.
Sounds sophisticated, but it’s not.
and it makes it impossible for us to now how that person would handle the issue as President, where there are more and higher pressures from all sides.
Sounds sophisticated, but it’s not.
and it makes it impossible for us to now how that person would handle the issue as President, where there are more and higher pressures from all sides.
Sounds sophisticated, but it’s not.
and it makes it impossible for us to now how that person would handle the issue as President, where there are more and higher pressures from all sides.
“now” is my new, simpefyd speling of the ol fashend “know”
“now” is my new, simpefyd speling of the ol fashend “know”
“now” is my new, simpefyd speling of the ol fashend “know”
byomtov, the very fact of (ab)using that tool should disqualify anyone but unfortunately it usually needs egregious degrees to actually kill one’s campaign that way (Romney was just incompetent there). A certain degree of pandering is normal human behaviour but to build one’s whole strategy on it should be punished with little mercy.
Thus Cruz would be out of the question as POTUS based on this alone independent of what I believe he possesses concerning competence and knowledge let alone personal beliefs. The guy is a) a digestive rear exit (which could be tolerated under extreme circumstances) b) totally untrustworthy (which cannot) and c) possibly incompetent and with a nonnegligible probability not mentally sound (a risk better not taken).
It’s the old question of what is worse: the fake or the true fanatic?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/donald-trump-muslim-woman-protesting-ejected/
byomtov, the very fact of (ab)using that tool should disqualify anyone but unfortunately it usually needs egregious degrees to actually kill one’s campaign that way (Romney was just incompetent there). A certain degree of pandering is normal human behaviour but to build one’s whole strategy on it should be punished with little mercy.
Thus Cruz would be out of the question as POTUS based on this alone independent of what I believe he possesses concerning competence and knowledge let alone personal beliefs. The guy is a) a digestive rear exit (which could be tolerated under extreme circumstances) b) totally untrustworthy (which cannot) and c) possibly incompetent and with a nonnegligible probability not mentally sound (a risk better not taken).
It’s the old question of what is worse: the fake or the true fanatic?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/donald-trump-muslim-woman-protesting-ejected/
byomtov, the very fact of (ab)using that tool should disqualify anyone but unfortunately it usually needs egregious degrees to actually kill one’s campaign that way (Romney was just incompetent there). A certain degree of pandering is normal human behaviour but to build one’s whole strategy on it should be punished with little mercy.
Thus Cruz would be out of the question as POTUS based on this alone independent of what I believe he possesses concerning competence and knowledge let alone personal beliefs. The guy is a) a digestive rear exit (which could be tolerated under extreme circumstances) b) totally untrustworthy (which cannot) and c) possibly incompetent and with a nonnegligible probability not mentally sound (a risk better not taken).
It’s the old question of what is worse: the fake or the true fanatic?
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/donald-trump-muslim-woman-protesting-ejected/
Recall the pigf*cking, subhuman conservatives who say an armed society is a polite society.
Recall the pigf*cking, subhuman conservatives who say an armed society is a polite society.
Recall the pigf*cking, subhuman conservatives who say an armed society is a polite society.
Pigf*cker anti-American Streiff at Redstate invokes the Republican loyalty pledge against Jeb Bush:
http://www.redstate.com/2016/01/08/video-jeb-bush-violates-loyalty-pledge-will-south-carolina-gop-take-ballot/
Pigf*cker anti-American Streiff at Redstate invokes the Republican loyalty pledge against Jeb Bush:
http://www.redstate.com/2016/01/08/video-jeb-bush-violates-loyalty-pledge-will-south-carolina-gop-take-ballot/
Pigf*cker anti-American Streiff at Redstate invokes the Republican loyalty pledge against Jeb Bush:
http://www.redstate.com/2016/01/08/video-jeb-bush-violates-loyalty-pledge-will-south-carolina-gop-take-ballot/
Slarti,
Show me a Democratic candidate for President who hasn’t said anything verifiably incorrect, laughably disconnected with reality, or deliberately mendaceous, and I’ll give you a prize.
I claim no prize. But at least a great deal of what the major Democratic candidates say has a connection with reality.
Much of what Cruz says does not. It’s not even a question of lying. It’s a question of rationality.
Slarti,
Show me a Democratic candidate for President who hasn’t said anything verifiably incorrect, laughably disconnected with reality, or deliberately mendaceous, and I’ll give you a prize.
I claim no prize. But at least a great deal of what the major Democratic candidates say has a connection with reality.
Much of what Cruz says does not. It’s not even a question of lying. It’s a question of rationality.
Slarti,
Show me a Democratic candidate for President who hasn’t said anything verifiably incorrect, laughably disconnected with reality, or deliberately mendaceous, and I’ll give you a prize.
I claim no prize. But at least a great deal of what the major Democratic candidates say has a connection with reality.
Much of what Cruz says does not. It’s not even a question of lying. It’s a question of rationality.
Slarti,
Let me elaborate a bit. All candidates say dumb stuff, lie, and so on. Unfortunate, but true.
My objection to Cruz is that everything he says seems to be from outer space. It’s not that he’s shading the truth, or maybe exaggerating the benefits of his proposals. It’s that they seem to me to be utterly unhinged. I know he did well as a lawyer, but that is a specialized skill, like doing well in a debate contest, another point often raised in his support.
To be a skilled advocate in a formal setting is one thing. To have good judgment about what it makes sense to advocate for is something else. The latter is what I think Cruz completely lacks.
I really do find him frightening, so much so that if I had to choose I would put him at or near the bottom of the Republican candidates.
Slarti,
Let me elaborate a bit. All candidates say dumb stuff, lie, and so on. Unfortunate, but true.
My objection to Cruz is that everything he says seems to be from outer space. It’s not that he’s shading the truth, or maybe exaggerating the benefits of his proposals. It’s that they seem to me to be utterly unhinged. I know he did well as a lawyer, but that is a specialized skill, like doing well in a debate contest, another point often raised in his support.
To be a skilled advocate in a formal setting is one thing. To have good judgment about what it makes sense to advocate for is something else. The latter is what I think Cruz completely lacks.
I really do find him frightening, so much so that if I had to choose I would put him at or near the bottom of the Republican candidates.
Slarti,
Let me elaborate a bit. All candidates say dumb stuff, lie, and so on. Unfortunate, but true.
My objection to Cruz is that everything he says seems to be from outer space. It’s not that he’s shading the truth, or maybe exaggerating the benefits of his proposals. It’s that they seem to me to be utterly unhinged. I know he did well as a lawyer, but that is a specialized skill, like doing well in a debate contest, another point often raised in his support.
To be a skilled advocate in a formal setting is one thing. To have good judgment about what it makes sense to advocate for is something else. The latter is what I think Cruz completely lacks.
I really do find him frightening, so much so that if I had to choose I would put him at or near the bottom of the Republican candidates.