David Thompson
Subscribe
Blog powered by Typepad

« Friday Ephemera | Main | Because You Deserve No Less »

June 11, 2018

Comments

Jacob

They just can't help themselves.

https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/status/1006059813460238336

Diver Down

I’m a colonial who didn’t vote for Trump. (No I didn’t vote for the Artist Formerly Known As Mrs Clinton either). I didn’t vote for him partially due to distrust of him and his policies and partially due to residing in a deep blue state. Since my state was in the bag for Clinton from the start I felt I had the luxury of voting third party. All that being said, I am definitely going to vote for him next time.
The deep and utter disdain that so many on the left show for their fellow citizens is alarming!

R. Sherman

What are the odds that DeNiro can string five complete sentences together which state precisely what Trump has done which is so disagreeable?

David

It’s as if the glittering celebrities, all busy adoring each other, have never paused to consider how their ritual piety show might seem to people, including quite a few paying customers, whose politics diverge, even somewhat, from their own.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

What are the odds that DeNiro can string five complete sentences together...

As he is (was) only adept at reciting what someone else wrote, you could have stopped there.

Y. Knott

What are the odds that DeNiro can string five complete sentences together which state precisely what Trump has done which is so disagreeable?

That's the point - no he can't, but he doesn't have to; they'll wildly applaud him anyways, that's what echo chambers are for. And anybody who disagrees with him (and his echo chamber) on Trump? - well, he had no interest in talking to them in the first place...

It's going to be at least ten years before our narcissistic elites begin to grasp how seriously-corrosive to their careers the act of showing open contempt for their fan base can be. Maybe they oughtta' ask MC Hammer or Avril Lavigne ( - who???)

WTP

I didn’t vote for him partially due to distrust of him and his policies

So, this is how I see it. What with the PC culture, the mandarins running our government, and the leftist infesting our academic and media institutions, we have a cancer running through our society. Early on, when it was just infesting our higher academic world, it would have been much easier to cut this ugly tumor out but no one did. Then it metastasized into our news and entertainment media. Nothing seriously was done to stop it. Now it has become so wide spread that we needed Trumpian chemotherapy. Like chemo, you're not gonna like it. It will make you sick. Might even make you very, very sick. But it's just about the last hope of arresting the mitosis of leftism.

David

There are, I think, obvious parallels with the Thatcher era and how endless bejewelled lefties openly sneered at half the electorate. As, for instance, when the well-heeled theatre director Jonathan Miller disdained conservative voters – including those whose taxes subsidised his own loss-making theatre productions - as akin to “typhoid.”

As we discussed at some length in this thread here.

Dr Evil

Just to let you know, if I had had a vote in the US I would have voted for Trump. I had a bet on him to win and he made me over £400 in the UK. What I like about him is what you see and hear is what you get. Warts and all. He doesn't hide it. If even half the dreadful things that had been said about him were true, he would be in jail. Since he isn't, I don't believe a word. I also like that what he says he will do, he does it. He also wrong foots other politicians, as at theG7. They don't know what to do apart from gasp and run about like headless chickens. He will no doubt clarify things, as you do, at a later date when he has done a deal with Kim Jong Un. Isn't that what Trump does, do deals? He already told the G6 others that he has an America first policy. Why are they so shocked that he means it? Too much Obama I expect.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

I am in no way a fan of the Kardashians, but in reference to the virtue signalling "celebrities", this writer has a couple valid points.

Kardashian West met with Trump at the White House to urge him to release Johnson. A week later he did just that.

Her meeting provoked anger and confusion among Trump’s critics. But what it should have done is showed them the error of their ways: Engaging Trump has rewards. Whining to the universe about him doesn’t.

RTWT.

Captain Nemo

Being British, and therefore an outsider to American politics, I thought that many of the reactions of certain Republicans (and their supporters) to the election of Barack Obama were a bit over the top. But the reactions by certain Democrats and their left-leaning supporters to the election of Donald Trump have been astonishing. The responses haven't been just "a bit over the top" - they've been completely f***ing deranged. And I say that as someone who's far from a fan of Trump, although I don't believe that he's as bad as he's frequently made out to be by his detractors.

R. Sherman

I must confess, I held my nose and voted for Trump, though I had very little hope that he'd attempt to do anything that he promised. My disdain for the Clintons nevertheless overwhelmed my belief that Trump was a self-promoting charlatan who would be manipulated into maintaining the status quo at best.

Lo, he started to do things he said he would, beginning with Niel Gorsuch and continuing. To say I'm pleasantly surprised is an understatement. I still think he's self-promoting bombast, but I've made peace with it.

Charles J. Pendergast

"Today we live in the age of consensus. The cultural elites no longer debate opposing points of view, they dismiss them as racist or ignorant, ridiculing not only the argument, but the arguer and the very premise that there can even be an argument..."

The "marketplace of ideas" is replaced with "I'm offended that we're even having this discussion" or "Only ignorant people believe that." These alternating poses of victimhood and superiority make it illegal or pointless to even discuss the subject and leave every issue settled by consensus. Scientific debates end before they have begun. Political debates exist only to allow candidates to affirm the consensus or castigate them for standing outside the consensus. Personal exchanges of views either reflect the consensus or become perilous and illegal.

The left veers between outrage and ridicule, between cries of "I'm oppressed" and "You're an idiot". Both are wholly subjective emotion-driven perceptions that cannot be rationally debated because they do not exist in the sphere of reason. They are the root of the "I Feel" creed which follows no intellectual or moral rules, striking poses of empathy and superiority for effect.

... The teenager lives the illusion of being deep in a world of shallow people, identifying with outside groups because they reflect his fantasies of alienation. Rather than empathy, this is actually a failure of empathy that time usually remedies. Time has never remedied that failure of empathy for the left, which buries itself in fantasies of victimhood...

Clam

As we discussed at some length in this thread here.

I just spent an hour down the link rabbit hole. Damn you, Thompson.

Para Ingles Oprime Dos

My theory about DeNiro is that he is projecting his own feelings of worthlessness onto Trump. DeNiro is about the same age as Trump but DeNiro is well past his prime, and hasn't had a really good role in years. Trump is just beginning to peak.

Green is not a good color for DeNiro.

David

Damn you, Thompson.

No refunds. Credit note only.

Pogonip

Hi Dr. Evil, while I must correct your theory that if Trump had done half of what he’s accused of, he’d be in jail—in the U.S., only the little people and Martha Stewart go to jail for anything short of murder—I think everything else you said is correct. Every time some rich idiot like DeNiro throws a public tantrum, another 100,000 little people decide to vote for Trump next time.

Assuming Trump decides to run for re-election, I believe many citizens will get a harsh civics lesson. In U.S. presidential elections the president is actually selected not by who gets more votes, but by the “electoral college,” persons appointed, usually, by the party in charge in their state or by horse-trading between the two parties. Each state gets a certain number of electors based on population. When you see news stories about Candidate Sleazeball totting up electoral votes and deciding to spend more time campaigning in Maine and less in Nebraska, this is why. And in most states, while the electors usually follow the citizen vote as a courtesy, they do NOT have to. I believe that if in 2020 We The People say “We want Trump again!” the electors are quite likely to say, “Sorry, you can’t have him, say hello to President Hillary” [or whomever].

Pogonip

Er, I meant California, not Maine. ☺️

ComputerLabRat

The cognitive dissonance of out elite "betters" is deafening. If he really were the fascist dictator Literally Hitler who is going to put all the minorities and teh gays in concentration camps, they never would get away with saying "f**k Trump". Under a real dictator, people who say bad things about Dear Leader are shot, imprisoned for life, or simply disappear. That they can say these things with impunity means our republic is working as intended.

We were far more muzzled under the Lightbringer, the Healer of the Planet, the Messianic Obama. Criticism of the president was not patriotic during his term. I suspect criticism of a President Hillary would also not be welcomed.

I shall now denounce myself.

R. Sherman

Just watched the Thatcher documentary. There is a lot of meaty stuff in there. As you imply, the reaction to Trump among the elites of both the nominal "right" and "left" is remarkably similar to what Thatcher endured. It seems the true tension is not between "right" and "left" or "conservative/liberal" or "collectivist/individualist" but between the elite "haves" and the rest of us "have nots." The "haves" want to restrict access to power, wealth and prestige because an increase in the supply of those things diminishes the value of what they already have. They instinctively understand that the creation of wealth and all that follows is not zero-sum. Thus, they have to set up all manner of artificial barriers for the rest of society to obtain/attain it, in order to make sure that some widget factory owner with only a high school diploma can't rent out their favorite villa in St. Barts out from underneath them.

David

Just watched the Thatcher documentary.

For those who haven’t seen it, I do recommend it, and the subsequent thread. From which this, by Janet Daley, caught my eye:

At the time of Dr Miller’s widely quoted remarks in which he likened Thatcherism and its supporters to “typhoid,” a BBC television arts producer I knew who had grown up in a lower-middle-class family said: “Hey, that’s my mum and dad he’s talking about.”

And I don’t think the elevated lefties in question ever forgave Thatcher for throwing into clear relief exactly what lay behind their own ‘socialist’ pretensions.

Governor Squid

I believe that if in 2020 We The People say “We want Trump again!” the electors are quite likely to say, “Sorry, you can’t have him, say hello to President Hillary” [or whomever].

After decades of being told "every vote matters" as the Left pushed automatic voter registration and fought against voter ID rules, We The People would not react well to being told that our votes don't matter, and that we'll be governed according to the whims of our betters.

If the parties try this, it is the end of them. Best-case scenario is that we have two years of moaning, a mobilization of voters to form a "Throw The Bastards Out" political party, and then kick the entitled cowards out of office at every level from Congress to dogcatcher. Worst-case scenario is that four million pissed-off Pennsylvania deer hunters drive down to D.C. to discuss what "consent of the governed" means with the new administration. I lived in Pennsyltucky for a lot of years, and lemme tell ya -- them boys could teach Antifa a thing or two.

One hopes that the party leaders understand that rejection of the voters' preference, while possible, is something they can do exactly once. If they want to play Mutually Assured Destruction with their constituents, may God have mercy on their souls.

R. Sherman

@Pogonip & Squid,

While it's technically possible for electors in some--not all--states to vote for someone other the victor in the state's elections, there are numerous checks and balances to prevent that from happening. In a presidential election, one votes not for the candidate but for a slate of most likely unknown individuals picked by the candidate who are committed to vote a certain way in the Electoral College. Also, the various states have laws to prevent just that sort of chicanery. That's why the left hates the Electoral College so much.

As Squid suggests, such an obvious coups attempt would not merely spark a Constitutional Crisis but undoubted a civil war, which likely would not turn out in real life as it does in the leftist fantasy world.

champ

It's come to this (another example of how the US higher education system is producing way too many PhD's)...

https://www.thecollegefix.com/post/45648/

Pogonip

Hi R. Sherman, on at least one leftist site, as the dreaded Official Victory Day approached, there were increasingly frantic discussions of appealing to the electoral college to vote in “bad faith” (that’s what it’s called when an electoral voter goes against the citizen vote). Leftists like the electoral college just fine as long as it does what they want it to do.

I’ve seen Trump Derangement articles so extreme that I wouldn’t be surprised to learn the Secret Service keeps tabs on those sites. I thought Obama Derangement was nutty enough, but Trump Derangement is ten times nuttier.

Pogonip

I think that dog article must be parody.

WTP

While it's technically possible for electors in some--not all--states to vote for someone other the victor in the state's elections, there are numerous checks and balances to prevent that from happening

True. It's not wide spread. Maybe not yet. But there were six unfaithful votes:

Colin Powell 3 votes, with VP's of Elizabeth Warren, Maria Cantwell, and Susan Collins from three different states
Bernie Sanders 1 vote, with VP: Elizabeth Warren
John Kasich 1 vote, with VP: Carly Fiorina
Ron Paul 1 vote, with VP: Mike Pence
Faith Spotted Eagle 1 vote, with VP: Winona LaDuke

That would be plenty enough in some circumstances to throw the decision into the House of Representatives. And per Pogonip, TDS is quite wide spread.

WTP

Heh...make that seven unfaithful votes. I needs to proofread my maths as much as my writens.

OrionsNest

How electors are chosen is all governed by state law, and not every state has a winner take all rule. There are some states with proportional selection, which I always thought was way more fair than the winner take all in most states. Not every elector's vote contrary to a majority in that state would be unfaithful, although doubtless most of them are.

fnord

Robert DeNiero = Lamentation of deh Wimmin.

David

And remember, this is what they think makes them look good.

R. Sherman

Via Instapundit comes this related article. By all means watch the linked Anthony Bourdain piece.

Alex deWinter
Hi R. Sherman, on at least one leftist site, as the dreaded Official Victory Day approached, there were increasingly frantic discussions of appealing to the electoral college to vote in “bad faith” (that’s what it’s called when an electoral voter goes against the citizen vote).

During that period there were indeed some rather desperate (and increasingly deranged) attempts by butthurt leftists to persuade members of the Electoral College to become 'faithless electors.' This included everything from celebrity YouTube videos to abuse and outright death threats aimed at said electors. Entertainingly enough, all of that sturm-und-drang managed to generate a grand total of seven faithless electors -- only /two/ of whom had been pledged to Trump/Pence. The other five had been pledged to Clinton/Kaine. Since neither of the two votes pledged to Trump went to Clinton (one went to Ron Paul, the other to John Kasich), the actual net result was only to make Clinton's loss slightly bigger. It was never going to have any other effect, which is why the faithless electors did it. It was just a lot of empty posturing.

Barney

Rivalling or, indeed, surpassing Mr De Niro's petulance is this recent gem from the television host Bill Maher:

“This economy is going pretty well. I feel like the bottom has to fall out some time and, by the way, I’m hoping for it, because I think one way you get rid of Trump is a crashing economy. So, please, bring on the recession. Sorry if that hurts people, but it’s either root for a recession or you lose your democracy.”

One suspects Mr. Maher is financially better equipped to weather a recession than most of the US electorate and it is doubtful how much his "sorry" would ameliorate their "hurt".

The sheer viciousness of the spite coming from certain sectors is absolutely mind-buggering and seems to display a total absence of self-awareness, maturity and any sense of proportion.

In an afterword to his story "A Cross-Country Trip to Kill Richard Nixon" the science-fiction author Orson Scott Card notes:

“The national hatred of Richard Nixon in the 1970s particularly bothered me, mostly because it was so out of scale with anything he actually did. At no point did he distort or endanger the constitution of the United States as much as it was distorted or endangered by his two immediate predecessors; indeed, they were clearly his political school in just how vile a politician can be and still become president…”

After discussing the hypocrisy of Benjamin Bradlee, et al, he continues:

“...Still, finding Nixon’s poltical executioners with dirty hands doesn’t cleanse his own; he did what he did and was what he was, and I for one am sorry he was president. Nevertheless, in the late 1970s I was constantly disturbed by the virulence of the hatred poured out on the man. It wasn’t Nixon who was poisoning America; it was the hatred of Nixon that was hurting us.”

Public discourse in US now seems to be well beyond this level of toxicity.

Pogonip

The Archdruid,at https://www.ecosophia.net/ , says we don’t have to worry about liberals trying to assassinate Trump because if they succeeded, then they’d have no one to hate. 😄

Richard

I believe in free speech. I think that Mr. DeNiro should say what he thinks. If his audience thinks that was he says is great, then they should applaud. The rest of us take note and vote. Free speech lets people say what they think and our free press lets us know what famous people think and say. Thank God for that else we might become confused and think that they are smart. Or something.

Craig Mc

Trump's campaign should inter-cut this with the same people giving Roman Polanski a standing ovation and make it their 2020 ad.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

...because if they succeeded, then they’d have no one to hate.

I have no doubts their list of potential hatees is nigh endless, after all, look how quickly they went after their own Jack the Twitterführer for being insufficiently Woke™ and committing the wrongthought crime of eating at Chick-fil-A.

Pogonip

Hi Farnsworth, I too thought they didn’t seem to have problems finding people to hate, but then again Trump is, fortunately, still with us, so maybe Archdruid’s right.

Who is Jack Twitterfuhrer?

Farnsworth M Muldoon

Who is Jack Twitterfuhrer?

Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter. Of course he groveled to the circling buzzards for his sins.

Pogonip

I don’t know why people use Twitter, Facebook, or Tumblr. Nearly all Internet horrors seem to originate with one of those.

Hal

We were far more muzzled under the Lightbringer, the Healer of the Planet, the Messianic Obama. Criticism of the president was not patriotic during his term.

Do . . . tell..

As the exercise for the reader to duplicate that, go to Google and do a search for "Fuck Obama", with those quotes included. When you get the results, go to the right side of the search field, to the toggle bit reading Tools. Click on that, go to the left side of the search field to the toggle bit reading Any Time and then select Custom range . . .. Set the dates for 11/5/2008 through 1/20/20017 and see the results. All the results.

Given such Occam's razor bolstered evidence to the contrary regarding any claims of anyone being muzzled when President Obama was in office, before his going back to being called Mr. Obama, can you cite any actual occurrences of such apparently alleged muzzling?

Hal

I don’t know why people use Twitter, Facebook, or Tumblr.

I have a pair of FB accounts which I use as a variety of interpersonal and cross country bookmarking system, and which I mostly ignore. I have a Twit account for the same reason and ignore it even more. I have no familiarity with Tumblr, but I do have a Gab account which I've eyeballed with very intermittent curiosity, and I ignore it even more than the Twit account.

Governor Squid

...can you cite any actual occurrences of such apparently alleged muzzling?

From the fourth entry in Wonko the Sane's list:

Her Students for Liberty chapter put together a "free speech wall" and invited students to write whatever the hell they wanted to write. Entries ranged from listing the college president's salary to calling out cheating lovers to the inevitable "Nazi Punks Fuck Off."

But things got hairy when a professor spied a "Fuck Obama" message - and literally cut it out of the wall. And then the campus cops showed up, telling the students to start censoring free speech.

It is ever so tiresome to have the village scold insist on solid evidence that the sun set earlier in February than it did in April.

R. Sherman

It is ever so tiresome to have the village scold insist on solid evidence that the sun set earlier in February than it did in April.

I, for one, refuse to believe that Hal is that dense. I'm perfectly willing to stipulate that over the course of 8 years, there were any number of people who uttered/published the sentiment "Fuck Obama." So what? There are 300+ million people in this country, some of whom are going to be a) loons or b) cranky, especially when e.g. their health insurance that they were told they could keep got canceled.

The salient fact is not the utterance, but the venue. If Hal cares to link us to evidence of behavior similar to DeNiro's during Obama's time in office by someone of DeNiro's stature on a national stage or on national TV to wild applause, I'd be happy to see it. Or, a national cable news flunky calling one of his daughters a "c..t." And no, Reddit doesn't count.

Hal

I'm perfectly willing to stipulate that over the course of 8 years, there were any number of people who uttered/published the sentiment "Fuck Obama."

Done, then.

. . . during Obama's time in office by someone of DeNiro's stature . . .

. . . which is not what was being discussed.

Ten

By all means watch the linked Anthony Bourdain piece.

No.

What is it about the right that it's become a pop-culture, lifestyle-signalling movement without remaining basis in structural principle who's best talent is co-opting liberal stars and late Democrats? Give it a toehold into a Hollywood star or a late Democrat politician or figure or even a reactionary lifestyle fad and watch it scrabble for a purchase in the rot that, unchecked, cost it a nation.

Daniel Ream

...which is not what was being discussed.

Your autism is showing again.

Hal

. . . the village scold . . .

???

Heh.

So what you're apparently saying is that a dislike for reality gets enhanced when reality is also known for a sense of humor as well as being matter of factly, well, reality . . . . !

As David phrases what you're declaring, How Dare You Not Perform Our Fashionable Contortions.

We "dare" because you keep offering ideology instead of reality.

---And speaking of Jordan Peterson, I'm currently about a third of the way through the Biblical Series transcripts. Very interesting reading, where I rather expect that any dedicated left wingers would wind up grinding their dentures at the thought of looking into the roots of Christianity and where all that empty ideology would have originally have come from . . . where quite in turn, any dedicated Christian right wingers would wind up grinding their dentures at the thought of looking into the roots of Christianity and where all that empty ideology would have originally have come from . . .

---And certainly conservative Christians---quite of course as distinct from mere right wing Christians---are going to look at Peterson's conclusions and not be the least bit concerned . . .

Hal

...which is not what was being discussed.

Your autism is showing again.

As always, do try to come up with some actual details . . . otherwise, all you're stating to us is a cat video transcript.

Again.

David

this recent gem from the television host Bill Maher

Readers may recall when the Guardian’s George Monbiot also wished for a crippling economic recession, regardless of the cost to those less comfortable than himself. He was vexed by the existence of designer saucepans, which signalled the apocalypse or something.

which is not what was being discussed.

It isn’t about The Two Words, so much as when, where and by whom they were said. The context, the venue and participants, and their class-and-status-positioning, are, shall we say, of interest.

[+]

This.

prm

Daniel, Sherman, Squid, and various others here. I have a genuine question for y'all, asked without any malice.

What part of Do Not Feed the Troll are you having difficulty with?

I ask in all seriousness; I think someone even mentioned this before.

Richard Cranium

I believe that President Obama will continue to be called that, Hal. Unless things are different in your reality.

Col. Milquetoast

the odds that DeNiro can string five complete sentences together which state precisely what Trump has done which is so disagreeable?

Would he mention that he is a multimillionaire whose pet project gets government subsidies and Trump suggested cutting them?

https://colmilquetoast.blogspot.com/2017/08/taxpayer-subsidies-for-millionaires.html

Dr Cromarty

Meanwhile in academia, channelling Critical Theory through Glam Rock

http://www.thenational.scot/culture/15071775.Profile__The_Glasgow_Glam_Rock_Dialogues/

David

If anyone has trouble with comments not appearing, email me and I’ll rattle the spam filter.

David

Would he mention that he is a multimillionaire whose pet project gets government subsidies and Trump suggested cutting them?

Heh. That, as they say. It’s also worth noting how slyly Mr De Niro frames a reduction in taxpayer subsidy as “hostility towards art,” as if no other motives or concerns could possibly exist, and then conflates taxpayer-subsidised art with “other… life-saving… programs.”

Jeff
[Hal:] ...can you cite any actual occurrences of such apparently alleged muzzling?

Do weaponizing the IRS and Dinesh D'Souza count?

Hal

I believe that President Obama will continue to be called that, Hal.

. . . . There's that bit about former office holders vs current office holders and how to refer to whom. Mr. Washington and all that.

Hal

Do weaponizing the IRS and Dinesh D'Souza count?

Oh---and actually going back to the original question---the note is much more a matter of . . . . . . Under a real dictator, people who say bad things about Dear Leader are shot, imprisoned for life, or simply disappear. That they can say these things with impunity means our republic is working as intended.

So it doesn't really matter whether Dear Leader is named Obama or Trump . . . .

Richard Cranium

So your reality is different as I expected.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

Daniel, Sherman, Squid, and various others here. I have a genuine question for y'all, asked without any malice.

As Dionne Warwick put it,

And walk on by (don't stop)
And walk on by (don't stop)
And walk on by...

Hal

So your reality is different as I expected.

As being noted . . .

Jeff

Hal, you specifically asked if there were any occurrences of Obama's muzzling critics. Do the instances I cited count?

Governor Squid

I know, guys, and I apologize. Perhaps we can agree on a reasonable frequency for rebuttals? I'd hate for any newcomers to naively assume that the rest of us take Wonko seriously. Maybe a monthly allowance where those of us with pent-up frustration can vent a bit?

Whatever we come up with, just don't tell David about it; he's far too gracious a host to allow such goings-on.

David

just don’t tell David about it; he’s far too gracious a host to allow such goings-on.

I’m too busy feigning ignorance of the pimping and racketeering.

Farnsworth M Muldoon

Perhaps we can agree on a reasonable frequency for rebuttals?

The military solution for distasteful tasks, a duty roster.

champ

Hal,

Have you ever thought about starting your own blog?

Asking for a friend...

Chester Draws

Trump is right now dealing with North Korea. Obama dealt with Iran. Both will likely be failures, in the long run, because the partners are faithless.

It is interesting to see the difference in the way this has been reported in New Zealand. No censoring is needed. Obama simply got the benefit of any doubt that Trump does not get.

Pst314

a particularly wealthy and statusful person steps onto the stage and shouts “Fuck Trump!” At which point, the other wealthy and statusful people rise to their feet, applauding

If, in some improbable parallel universe I were speaking after Robert De Niro I would hobble to the mike on my semi functional legs and say: “With regard to Mr. de Niro’s Crass comment, and your approval, if I were half the man I used to be I would take a flamethrower to this place!” ;-)

Geoffrey

It may be true that both Iran and North Korea are faithless. But the difference is not between them, but between Obama and Trump. Obama is also faithless, but Trump is not. I believe Trump will attack a non-compliant North Korea in a way that Obama would never attack a non-compliant Iran.

That's the difference. They're both evil dictators, but they both like not being obliterated by an enemy supremely more powerful than them. They'll comply enough to remain safely outside of Trumps ire.

Hal

Hal,

Have you ever thought about starting your own blog?

Asking for a friend...

Oh, still as commented . . . .

Pete of Perth

Mmmmm.. a Trump sex doll.
.. should make a squillion judging by the number of wealthy leftoids who want to have coitus with him.

Sort-Of-Mad Max

I was aghast to find out Bob DeNiro is worth 200 million rasbuckniks; now I find it's more like 300 million. Yep, the guy could write a few checks to his pet causes, couldn't he?

And speaking of ol' Bob, bet he'd like THIS to go away:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/the-sex-scandal-that-wouldnt-lie-down-1185127.html

But it's OK, you see; he just used the SERVICES of the underage sex ring; he wasn't, like, INVOLVED or anything.

JJM

The irony here is that De Niro seems to have come across as a "wannabe-Trump":

1. He's full of braggadocio (though Trump doesn't routinely stoop to peppering his statements with foul language).

2. He's intimately involved in high-flying real estate developments (through his company, Nobu Hospitality).

3. He’s a skilled actor (and like all actors, he loves an adoring audience).

So, perhaps some of his ridiculous bile stems from plain old-fashioned envy?

Pst314

Another side of Robert De Niro:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/the-sex-scandal-that-wouldnt-lie-down-1185127.html

Pst314

Oh no, I failed to check whether anyone had posted that. (Grabs coat and runs for the door before David can alert the henchlesbians.)

Geezer

Have you ever thought about starting your own blog?

The question was straightforward. The answer, an evasion.

Daniel Ream

Do weaponizing the IRS and Dinesh D'Souza count?

Wait, exactly how does one weaponize Dinesh D'Souza?

Sort-Of-Mad Max

"Wait, exactly how does one weaponize Dinesh D'Souza?"

The usual; bolt a fricken' LASER to his fricken' HEAD.

Hal

Have you ever thought about starting your own blog?

The question was straightforward. The answer, an evasion.

Heh.

Or, in simple terms, either you didn't read the answer, or you didn't like it.

Geezer

Or, in simple terms, either you didn't read the answer, or you didn't like it.

Perhaps I misread the answer. The one I read said:

. . . . . Interesting question. And where the closest to any sort of answer keeps keeps having too many variables.
A straightforward answer would be "yes" or "no".

Hal

A straightforward answer would be "yes" or "no".

Aso---You didn't like the answer.

Geezer

You didn't like the answer.

So it seems. I tend to dislike an evasion, equivocation, or deflection that purports to be an answer.

Hal

You didn't like the answer.

So it seems. I tend to dislike an evasion, equivocation, or deflection that purports to be an answer.

Or, in short, the answer is fine then, given your own description of what you dislike.

An issue may be the concept of nuance.

As usual, my answer was and remains totally accurate and honest, where two of the answers that would have been quite dishonest are "Yes." and "No.".

Geezer

An issue may be the concept of nuance.

Alas, I fear that I am too simple-minded to distinguish nuance from gibberish.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

For Amazon US use this link .

Your filthy consumerism supports this blog.

Blogroll