Patterico's Pontifications

11/10/2016

DNC Staffer Blows Up At Donna Brazile And It’s Pretty Funny

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:36 pm



[guest post by Dana]

Too bad there isn’t video of this. I bet it was pure awesomeness to see.

When Donna Brazile gave 150 DNC employees a post-election pep talk, a young, emotional Democrat got up and (rightfully) threw the election loss in her face. It’s pretty funny, especially the dying part:

“Why should we trust you as chair to lead us through this?” he asked, according to two people in the room. “You backed a flawed candidate, and your friend [former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz] plotted through this to support your own gain and yourself.”

Some DNC staffers started to boo and some told him to sit down. Brazile began to answer, but Zach had more to say.

“You are part of the problem,” he continued, blaming Brazile for clearing the path for Trump’s victory by siding with Clinton early on. “You and your friends will die of old age and I’m going to die from climate change. You and your friends let this happen, which is going to cut 40 years off my life expectancy.”

Later, when asked for comment, Brazile mumbled something about not wanting to talk about it.

Heh. I bet not.

–Dana

Newt Gingrich: Never Trumpers Are “Whiny, Sniveling, Negative Cowards”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:54 pm



Guess who has behaved in a classy fashion since the election of Donald Trump?

Barack Obama.

Guess who has acted like a triumphalist jackass, who incidentally wants to spend a trillion dollars we don’t have?

Newt Gingrich.

HANNITY: There was a part of me today that really wanted to name names of those Republicans, those —

GINGRICH: [laughs]

HANNITY: All right. You’re going to show yourself the bigger man. [Not really. — Ed.] But I resisted the temptation to name names. All those people that sabotaged him, were not helpful, did everything to hurt him, and frankly, if they were successful, would be beating people like you and me over the head with a baseball bat, and saying, “ah, see, they were all wrong the whole time.” But I didn’t do it. Aren’t you proud of me?

GINGRICH: I’m very proud of you. I think it’s a sign of your newfound post-victory maturity. Let me just say this, ’cause we’ve known each other so long. You and I, along with millions of other Americans, are just beginning one of the great adventures of our lifetime. The eight years of Donald Trump are going to be among the most extraordinary, creative, inventive, exciting periods in all of American political history, and will, I think, both move America back to being great again, dramatically drain the swamp in Washington, and move our systems into the 21st century to provide much, much better experiences for every American. My only point is, compared to all that, the little whiny sniveling negative cowards who are Never Trumpers are beneath our paying attention to them. Let them drift away into the ashbin of history while we go ahead and work with Donald Trump, and with the House and Senate Republicans, to create a dramatically new future.

Thanks, Newtie! We’d love to work with you too.

Meanwhile, Obama has met with Trump, shaken hands with Trump, and said: “If you succeed, the country succeeds.” (Trump, for his part, called Obama a “very good man” — which, as my readers might remember, was High Treason for Republicans to say in 2008, even though none of Obama’s atrocities as President had occurred yet.)

A BRIEF HISTORY LESSON ON NEWTIE FOR THE YOUNG FOLKS: Just so we’re clear, as if the above clip were not evidence enough: Newt Gingrich is a wretched excuse for a human being. One of his more famous punk moves was showing up at his wife’s hospital bed as she recovered from cancer surgery, to discuss the terms of their divorce. His wife related the story to the Washington Post in 1985:

“He can say that we had been talking about it for 10 years, but the truth is that it came as a complete surprise,” says Jackie Gingrich, in a telephone interview from Carrollton. “He’s a great wordsmith . . . He walked out in the spring of 1980 and I returned to Georgia. By September, I went into the hospital for my third surgery. The two girls came to see me, and said Daddy is downstairs and could he come up? When he got there, he wanted to discuss the terms of the divorce while I was recovering from the surgery . . . To say I gave up a lot for the marriage is the understatement of the year.”

Gingrich always claimed Jackie asked for the divorce, but court papers uncovered in 2011 showed that he was lying. His reason for wanting the divorce? He didn’t think his first wife was pretty enough to be a First Lady, and Newtie intended to be president:

Leonard H. “Kip” Carter, a former close Gingrich friend, backed the contention that it was Newt Gingrich who wanted the divorce.

“He (Gingrich) said, ‘You know and I know that she’s not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president,’ ” Carter, who now lives in South Carolina, told CNN recently, relating the conversation he had with Gingrich the day Gingrich revealed he was filing for divorce. Carter served as treasurer of Gingrich’s first congressional campaigns.

A total jerk, and a perfect attack dog for his soulmate Donald Trump.

[Cross-posted at RedState.]

Donald Trump: Barack Obama Is “A Very Good Man”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 5:56 pm



I’m old enough to remember when it was High Treason for a person — who will go unnamed, but who hadn’t witnessed a single day of Barack Obama’s presidency — to call Obama a “good man” who cared about his country. In a discussion with his eight-year-old daughter, to teach her that politics need not be about vilifying the people you oppose.

Now Donald Trump, having witnessed eight years of Obama’s unconstitutional power grabs, deception on a massive scale, doubling the debt, fostering racial grievances, and governing like a rank partisan, has said Barack Obama is a “very good man.”

And 90% of you are about to defend Trump for saying this.

I know, I know. Trump’s statement is different and better because he is lying. Is that it?

P.S. My 16-year-old daughter was not happy about Trump winning. I told her that I am happy on one level, and upset and a little worried on another. I told her that there are several silver linings to Trump’s election. One of which is that the Supreme Court will have good people on it. One of which is that the horrible Hillary Clinton will not be President. She’s developed more of a mind of her own, and she clearly would have preferred Hillary, but she understands many of the problems with Hillary. My son is cool with Trump getting elected, I think. He thinks Trump is bad but that Hillary is corrupt, as evidenced by her using stolen debate questions.

My children are not hysterical about the election, like some of the crazed lefties have been in recent days. I’m proud of that.

Will Rahn On The Unbearable Smugness Of The Press

Filed under: General — Dana @ 5:09 pm



[guest post by Dana]

One thing to come out of this election, aside from our president-elect, is confirmation of the blatant partisanship of the MSM. Account after account demonstrated the collective sneering disdain the media elites have for those who live in “flyover” country and lacking a college degree. Heaven forbid you are not living on a coast, breathing the rarefied air of liberalism. On one hand, we’ve always known about these left-leaning preferences, and that they naturally eliminated any hope of objective reporting. And we’ve always known that what once passed as investigative journalism is now simply advocacy. But nevertheless, it’s good to see it exposed and confirmed in such an irrefutable manner.

Whether the MSM will actually do some collective self-examination regarding their role in indirectly helping put Trump in the White House is doubtful. They are an insular bunch with a myopic view of the world around them. And like small, petulant children, it’s always someone else’s fault. But that’s what the self-centeredness of youngsters begets. And don’t you find it utterly ironic that these recorders of life lack the necessary curiosity to explore, be open to, and present the bigger, fuller picture of the world around them and what they see? Or maybe they once were curious, but agendas don’t permit the luxury of curiosity and wonder. It only allows one to stick to the narrative and make the “facts” bend to it.

But there is hope. There is at least one journalist willing to take a hard look at the role of the media during this election. And what he discovered isn’t pretty. In fact, it’s downright despicable. And yet it’s amusing, too, because outside of junior high school, rarely do you find such a collection of judgmental and intolerant adolescents who really believe that the world revolves around them and hangs on to their every word. The desperate quest for relevancy is not an attractive look on anyone.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that, with a few exceptions, we were all tacitly or explicitly #WithHer, which has led to a certain anguish in the face of Donald Trump’s victory. More than that and more importantly, we also missed the story, after having spent months mocking the people who had a better sense of what was going on.

This is all symptomatic of modern journalism’s great moral and intellectual failing: its unbearable smugness. Had Hillary Clinton won, there’s be a winking “we did it” feeling in the press, a sense that we were brave and called Trump a liar and saved the republic.

So much for that. The audience for our glib analysis and contempt for much of the electorate, it turned out, was rather limited. This was particularly true when it came to voters, the ones who turned out by the millions to deliver not only a rebuke to the political system but also the people who cover it. Trump knew what he was doing when he invited his crowds to jeer and hiss the reporters covering him. They hate us, and have for some time.

And can you blame them? Journalists love mocking Trump supporters. We insult their appearances. We dismiss them as racists and sexists. We emote on Twitter about how this or that comment or policy makes us feel one way or the other, and yet we reject their feelings as invalid.

It’s a profound failure of empathy in the service of endless posturing. There’s been some sympathy from the press, sure: the dispatches from “heroin country” that read like reports from colonial administrators checking in on the natives. But much of that starts from the assumption that Trump voters are backward, and that it’s our duty to catalogue and ultimately reverse that backwardness. What can we do to get these people to stop worshiping their false god and accept our gospel?

We diagnose them as racists in the way Dark Age clerics confused medical problems with demonic possession. Journalists, at our worst, see ourselves as a priestly caste. We believe we not only have access to the indisputable facts, but also a greater truth, a system of beliefs divined from an advanced understanding of justice.

That’s the fantasy, the idea that if we mock them enough, call them racist enough, they’ll eventually shut up and get in line. It’s similar to how media Twitter works, a system where people who dissent from the proper framing of a story are attacked by mobs of smugly incredulous pundits. Journalists exist primarily in a world where people can get shouted down and disappear, which informs our attitudes toward all disagreement.

Journalists increasingly don’t even believe in the possibility of reasoned disagreement, and as such ascribe cynical motives to those who think about things a different way. We see this in the ongoing veneration of “facts,” the ones peddled by explainer websites and data journalists who believe themselves to be curiously post-ideological.

That the explainers and data journalists so frequently get things hilariously wrong never invites the soul-searching you’d think it would. Instead, it all just somehow leads us to more smugness, more meanness, more certainty from the reporters and pundits. Faced with defeat, we retreat further into our bubble, assumptions left unchecked. No, it’s the voters who are wrong.

I hope that sound we hear in the near future will be any number of arrogant, self-promoting bubbles of noxious hot air bursting.

–Dana

Grubhub CEO: Support Trump? Then Resign [Update: the Walk-back Begins]

Filed under: General — JVW @ 1:57 pm



[guest post by JVW]

Fox news reports, you decide (or whatever):

The CEO of Grubhub, an online food delivery service, sent a company wide email Wednesday suggesting employees who agree with President-elect Donald Trump’s behaviors and his campaign rhetoric should resign.

“If you do not agree with this statement then please reply to this email with your resignation because you have no place here,” wrote Matt Maloney, Co-Founder of Grubhub. “We do not tolerate hateful attitudes on our team.”

Maloney, a Hillary Clinton supporter, sent the email Wednesday afternoon with the subject line, “So…that happened…what’s next?” He made it clear in the email statement that he is personally stunned and deeply concerned with the results of Tuesday’s election.

“I absolutely reject the nationalist, anti-immigrant and hateful politics of Donald Trump and will work to shield our community from this movement as best as I can,” Maloney wrote about Trump’s supporters.

Grubhub is headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska — Nah! Just kidding! Of course its offices are in New York and Chicago. It is publicly traded on the New York Stock Exchange and last year reported $361 million in revenue. For what it’s worth, Grubhub’s stock price fell four percent today despite the overall market being up one percent and hitting an all-time high.

There is no word on whether or not the very high-strung Mr. Maloney believes that choosing to expose company secrets through gross negligence or then lying about it when confronted are acceptable values at Grubhub.

[Update:] Maloney is now tentatively starting to walk-back his email. The Grubhub PR people and lawyers must have flipped out. At I mentioned in a comment below, amazon has just rolled-out a dining delivery service so Grubhub now has a very powerful competitor to deal with. This was a horrible time to piss off a good segment of the market.

https://twitter.com/M3aloney/status/796826068598530048 [Tweet now deleted]

[Update II] – Maloney deleted the original Tweet. My bad for not getting a screen-shot first, although I’m sure someone on the internet will come up with one. Grubhub has released a statement from Maloney via the corporate channels lamenting that his message had been “misconstrued,” with no explanation why his earlier Tweet (which was a link to the Fox article mentioned above) had been deleted.

– JVW

Predictions for a Trump Presidency

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 10:00 am



Get your predictions for a Trump presidency in now!

Here are a few of my own:

We’ll get great Supreme Court justices. No, really. Donald Trump doesn’t care about the Court. He’ll do whatever the Federalist Society wants him to.

We’ll get a giant spending bill for “infrastructure.” It will end up being pork pork porkity pork. Legislators never turn up their noses at that. #pleaseclap

He won’t repeal ObamaCare. This will be filibustered and McConnell won’t resort to the nuclear option.

There will never be a wall along our entire Mexican border. Some more money will be allocated for expanding the existing fence, and some of it will be transformed into a “wall” instead of a fence, with great fanfare and pictures of the big beautiful wall.

The GOP will finally pass some form of amnesty bill. They have wanted to forever. Now they can.

Big, beautiful, classy executive power grabs. You’re gonna love ’em.

He will make a large foreign policy mistake. After all, he knows nothing about it.

Trumpers can discount my predictions because I didn’t call the election for Trump. I got that one wrong; no doubt about it. But I wasn’t as far off as you think. I did say: “Trump’s strength will surprise many.” I did predict the GOP would hold the Senate. My electoral count for Hillary was close (275-263) — and my popular vote prediction, having Hillary slightly up, is still looking pretty good. It’s still looking like Trump got fewer votes than Mitt Romney. So, a little less triumphalism from the Trumpers, please. Let’s see what their starry-eyed predictions for his Presidency are. In four years, we’ll see who is wrong then.

And the rest of you weigh in too! Get ’em in early!

[Cross-posted at RedState.]


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2093 secs.