Patterico's Pontifications

2/5/2020

Trump Supporters Pretend to Be Aghast at Pelosi Ripping Up the State of the Union Speech

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:45 am



“Oh my God, this is the most classless act ever!!!!1!” say the people who don’t find Donald J. Trump’s actions classless at all:

Pelosi’s action was both understandable after Trump refused to shake her hand at the beginning of the evening, and snitty and petulant and weak.

That said, Ian Miles Cheong is a Trump supporter. I cannot take a Trump supporter seriously when they whine about classless acts by Democrats, since I know that if Trump did the same thing they would applaud and cheer.

As an aside: in the Trump era, any particular thing that happens today must be the biggest worstest mostest thing that has ever happened in the history of the universe. Sure, Representative Preston Brooks brutally beat Senator Charles Sumner on the head with a cane on the floor of the Senate, but yeah, this was the most classless act evah!

More degradation of our politics in the Trump era.

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

199 Responses to “Trump Supporters Pretend to Be Aghast at Pelosi Ripping Up the State of the Union Speech”

  1. “As an aside: in the Trump era, any particular thing that happens today must be the biggest worstest mostest thing that has ever happened in the history of the universe.”

    Sums up #NeverTrump pretty well.

    Munroe (dd6b64)

  2. Yeah yeah. Trump made her do it.

    Still possible she broke the law by doing so to an official government document.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  3. Even Clinton shook hands with the Speaker after impeachment, but it wasn’t the same Speaker that drove impeachment. And, he and Hastert had some things in common they could bond over — like rape.

    I wish Trump had accepted the handshake. It would’ve been great optics for a president who is supposedly an imminent threat to the republic. But, Pelosi can’t help herself and served up better optics.

    Munroe (dd6b64)

  4. Adoring Trump loyalists have lost any moral authority to declare something that the other side does is “classless”.
    And to be clear, Criticism of Party A ≠ Defense of Party B. Pelosi was hardly better last year the way she clapped at Trump at the end of his speech. Her every mannerism toward the guy has been of unhidden contempt.

    Paul Montagu (cbbfc4)

  5. Eh, Pelosi isn’t the only one tearing up official papers:

    Under the Presidential Records Act, the White House must preserve all memos, letters, emails and papers that the president touches, sending them to the National Archives for safekeeping as historical records.

    But White House aides realized early on that they were unable to stop Trump from ripping up paper after he was done with it and throwing it in the trash or on the floor, according to people familiar with the practice. Instead, they chose to clean it up for him, in order to make sure that the president wasn’t violating the law.

    Staffers had the fragments of paper collected from the Oval Office as well as the private residence and send it over to records management across the street from the White House for Lartey and his colleagues to reassemble.

    “We got Scotch tape, the clear kind,” Lartey recalled in an interview. “You found pieces and taped them back together and then you gave it back to the supervisor.” The restored papers would then be sent to the National Archives to be properly filed away.

    Lartey said the papers he received included newspaper clips on which Trump had scribbled notes, or circled words; invitations; and letters from constituents or lawmakers on the Hill, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

    Lartey did not work alone. He said his entire department was dedicated to the task of taping paper back together in the opening months of the Trump administration.

    And Pelosi wasn’t the only one being childish last night.

    Both Trump and Pelosi intensely dislike one another, and as a result, they let their emotions and anger get the best of them last night. All in the name of righteous indignation. I dislike both of them equally and disrespect both of them equally. It’s ridiculous to scream about Pelosi tearing up the speech and conveniently ignore the classless acts of Trump. Yet another example of partisanship clouding any objective evaluation of our elected leaders, to the demise of our nation.

    Dana (aaddb1)

  6. Even odds that the handshake snub was tunnel vision and not deliberate. Like an actor, walking onto the stage, so engrossed in his role, that even if he notices you at all in the first place, responds with “Prithee, sir, what wouldst thou?”

    nk (1d9030)

  7. Yeah, I know, now I have to go lie down for a little while.

    nk (1d9030)

  8. Why are people in such a snit about a three year coup attempt crumbling?

    I thought it was much worse when he declared himself king and destroyed the republic.

    Plus, are they forgetting he started WWIII just a few weeks ago?

    harkin (d6cfee)

  9. I thought Pelosi should have had Trump removed. He was a guest in the House, after all. disrespect should be answered with action, not pettiness.

    Trump pays for prostitutes with campaign funds and gropes little girls. Who cares what his fans think of class? All they know is that class is a positive attribute so therefore Dear Leader is classy and disloyal traitors who would criticize Trump, these inhuman ‘nevertrumpers’ defined entirely by their lack of loyalty for Dear Leader, must be classless.

    Pelosi barely matters to the long arc of history. What’s amazing is Trump’s actual accomplishments also barely matter. He couldn’t make a deal that led to Obama/Bush/Clinton/Reagan even Carter level legislation if his legacy depended on it.

    We traded better judicial appointments for horrible foreign policy in 2016, not that we really knew that. His greatest ‘accomplishment’ is exposing the GOP’s shamelessness. Which is also Pelosi’s greatest accomplishment.

    Dustin (d1c60a)

  10. And, he and Hastert had some things in common they could bond over — like rape

    Any person involved in wrestling instruction is susceptible to a false rape charge. That’s why Jim Jordan, loath as I am to defend that particular fellow Buckeye, was such an enticing target for the Dems.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  11. Like an actor, walking onto the stage, so engrossed in his role, that even if he notices you at all in the first place, responds with “Prithee, sir, what wouldst thou?”

    Or Trump didn’t want Pelosi to learn that his hands are smaller than hers.

    Paul Montagu (e1b5a7)

  12. Children… our political leaders are children.

    Honestly, I laughed hysterically when Pelosi ripped up those papers and immediately thought “there’s a the next Trump campaign Ad”.

    I’ve never seen Trump being so blessed having to run against these opponents.

    whembly (fd57f6)

  13. Why are people in such a snit about a three year coup attempt crumbling?

    I’m in a snit about people who use “coup” for a legal, non-violent process that would only culminate in the VP taking over and continuing Trump’s policies, such as they are.

    Paul Montagu (e1b5a7)

  14. A coup from even before he won. They had a contingency plan in place. A “what if” scenario. An “insurance policy.”

    NJRob (4d595c)

  15. Let’s stipulate that both Trump and Pelosi are classless.

    Pelosi acted classless in the most public way, at a time that is supposed to be bipartisan (or at least pretend to be.) Trump, OTOH, gave an aura of being presidential. It might be a phony aura, but that is what was projected.

    This at a time when the Democratic party is terrified that the radicals are taking over and they will face a McGovern-like blowout in November. https://www.businessinsider.sg/iowa-democrats-fear-bernie-sanders-might-win-nomination-2020-2/

    So what Pelosi did was monumentally stupid. So she is classless AND stupid, while Trump appears classless and smart.

    Bored Lawyer (998177)

  16. Montagu wants us to use “soft coup”. OK.

    Munroe (dd6b64)

  17. A coup from even before he won.

    Add “coup” to “war crimes” as terms that Rob doesn’t comprehend.

    Paul Montagu (e1b5a7)

  18. Montagu wants us to use “soft coup”.

    Um, no, because a “soft coup” is just a coup without the violence. There was no illegality. This reminds me of the days when liberals would just willy-nilly redefine words to suit their political agendas, and then got really mad when called on it. But then, there are a lot of liberal traits in Trump and his adoring followers.

    Paul Montagu (e1b5a7)

  19. 50/50 chance Trump didn’t even notice about the handshake as he was already turning away, focused on delivering his speech. Even nk, no Trump supporter, pointed that out.

    However, to equate his not shaking the hand of the woman who impeached him with her snubbing not just Trump, but everyone Trump talked about, is a stretch. It’s petulant. It’s disappointing.

    It was a calculated gesture she had the entire length of the speech to deliver and it was beneath her office.

    Worst thing ever? Nah. Indicative of who Nancy Pelosi is and damaging to her own Party’s electoral chances (it will appear in several campaign ads)? Yes.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  20. 2. NJRob (4d595c) — 2/5/2020 @ 7:55 am

    Still possible she broke the law by doing so to an official government document.

    I don’t think it’s that kind of a document. It was given to her; she had custody; she could do with it what she wanted.

    Is she not allowed to throw it into a waste paper basket? Is there a procedure for disposing of it? This is not North Korea, even a little.

    Now I think it showed contempt, and the question is, did she do it because of the way some members of her caucus felt about Donald Trump, or did she do it because of the way she herself felt about Donald Trump? I would think she would want to keep a copy of the speech – for study and possible rebuttal.

    But they probably don’t use it for that, but have copies in electronic form.

    This printed out version of the prepared text of the speech is purely an artifact nowadays, And maybe she didn’t want to keep or give away anything from an impeached president. That might be benefiting a little from his continued presidency. So it won’t go wherever last year’s speech went.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  21. A coup from even before he won. They had a contingency plan in place. A “what if” scenario. An “insurance policy.”

    Boy, are “they” Svengali-like. “They” can reach up Duh Donald’s back and make him break the law, admit it AND lie about it, and defy any attempt to ferret out the facts!

    Is there anything “they” can’t do…?

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  22. Dustin (d1c60a) — 2/5/2020 @ 8:19 am

    Trump pays for prostitutes with campaign funds and gropes little girls.

    Where did that come from?

    We traded better judicial appointments for horrible foreign policy in 2016

    His foreign policy isn’t quite that bad. Its’s his immigration policy that’s bad, and the attitudes that he tries to engender
    r are evil and wrong. He even went so far as to argue that it was very important to keep foreigners away from U.S. hospitals. Because the money was needed for current beneficiaries. He made or offered no calculations.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  23. I don’t think it’s that kind of a document. It was given to her; she had custody; she could do with it what she wanted.

    The arguments about the document are silly. It was just one of very many copies of a speech. It’s not the same as if, say, a citizen had filled in a form, submitted it to the government, and a government employee just tossed it rather than deal with it.

    Nancy Pelosi was classless, yes, but did not commit a crime or an act disqualifying from holding office.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  24. This could lead to a happy happenstance I’ve been advocating for years…

    Do away with this disgusting affront to our republic. Nanny Pelosi could simply refrain from inviting Duh Donald, compelling him to submit his SOTU message in written form.

    Win-win!

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  25. compelling him to submit his SOTU message in written form.

    She just provided him the perfect reason for not doing this.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  26. Trump pays for prostitutes with campaign funds and gropes little girls.

    You’re a nutter, Dustin.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  27. He supported alao that would allow people to sue the state of California for releasing people from jail – but only if the persons released were illegal immigrants, and without any requirement that anybody made a prediction that they would commit serious crimes. And he didn’t want them kept in jail. He only wanted them to kill and rape people in other countries, preventing them from doing so here by a magnificent wall. He didn’t have any proposals for preventing American citizens from running into them in the countries they had been sent to, not even a sex crime offender list.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  28. I often wonder at the mental desert that is a troll.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  29. The President of the United States should be better than an old woman, though. That’s not too much to ask.

    nk (1d9030)

  30. America first, Sammy.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  31. The President of the United States should be better than an old woman, though. That’s not too much to ask.

    As I said and you alluded to, 50/50 chance he didn’t even notice her proferred hand: he was focused on the speech he was about to give and actually turning around at the time.

    Even if he did intentionally snub her in the moment, Nancy Pelosi chose to one-up him on classlessness after having an hour and a half to think about it. It was terrible judgment politically; she snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  32. I didn’t watch the SOTU. Why would I? The odds that Trumps says anything factually accurate are extremely thin and I don’t need to watch the teams go through some silly dance of clapping and silence.

    But from today’s coverage I know Pelosi was rude.

    One of the things that social conservatives are right about is the way that norms deteriorate over time. As one violation is tolerated it begets another. Eventually the norm is completely gone. During this vicious cycle there’s a dumb conversation around where people who don’t really care about the norm make insincere noises.

    Your team did the thing!

    But your team did it first and said nothing so you don’t really care about this!!

    I’m not a hypocrite!!! You’re a hypocrite because you complained about this already!!!!

    This is justified because you did a thing like it first!!!!!

    That thing was different because of reasons and this is a vast an unjustified expansion of breach!!!!!!

    We’ll keep doing and make your team play by the rules you created!!!!!!!!

    You’ll notice that after the first 2 you can re-arrange the responses without changing the meaning. That’s a clue that much of the noise is stupid.

    Final thought, this is about the only commentary I’ve seen on the speech. So if her goal was to pull a trump and make it all about her she did a good job at that. I doubt anyone that cares one way or another that Pelosi tore up some papers didn’t already have their voting plan figured out.

    Time123 (a7a01b)

  33. You’re a nutter, Dustin.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793) — 2/5/2020 @ 9:25 am

    I’ve always wanted to be institutionalized at a facility sponsored by Almond Joy.

    But trump did indeed pay Stormy Daniels with campaign funds. You’d think a man that wealthy and successful on paper wouldn’t need to pay for sex, but hey, some people don’t have it in them to attract women conventionally.

    He walked in on pageant children getting dressed, he was handsy with his own daughter (somewhat infamously), and I assume you recall him bragging that he sexually assaulted women because when you’re a star they don’t do anything about it.

    when we talk about class, ethics, etc, let’s not forget that Trump is basically horrible in every respect except the balance in the trust fund he inherited. And let’s not forget that the default response when a valid Trump criticism scores a point is to insult, not that I consider ‘nutter’ to be inaccurate.

    say, how many nicks have you used and been banned with at this point?

    Dustin (764e61)

  34. I didn’t watch the SOTU. Why would I? The odds that Trumps says anything factually accurate are extremely thin and I don’t need to watch the teams go through some silly dance of clapping and silence.

    I alternate between being critical and supportive of Trump (I just find the never-Trumpers eye-rolling and wrong about so much). I doubt it was as inaccurate as you would think, but at the same time I’m sure it was heavily slanted in his favor and for his upcoming electoral success.

    However, the fact that you didn’t watch it, as many other Americans didn’t I’m sure, makes my point beautifully:

    But from today’s coverage I know Pelosi was rude.

    Once again (as with impeachment), Pelosi and the Democrats scewed the pooch politically.

    If Trump is as terrible as you and Patterico et al. think, the Democrats should be running rings around him especially after years of his alleged incompetence and boorish personality were on view.

    But they’re not. Trump will trump them in 2020. And even the never-Trumpers realize that now.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  35. I alternate between being critical and supportive of Trump

    THAT is an asinine lie, as is easily demonstrated by your trolling. Like Munroe, the reason you bother here is a mystery.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  36. “I’m in a snit about people who use “coup” for a legal, non-violent process that would only culminate in the VP taking over and continuing Trump’s policies, such as they are.“

    So the people talking about it culminating in him becoming king and destroying the republic are talking out their backsides?

    harkin (fb7ea4)

  37. Does pattericco have any opinion that isn’t reflexively left wing and just as petty as Trump and Pelosi anymore? Half his posts contain stupid little words like “trump kin”, “trump cultists” and other slurs. How are you any different?

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  38. @36,

    Once again (as with impeachment), Pelosi and the Democrats scewed the pooch politically.

    I wasn’t going to vote for Trump is 2020. But There are a number of republicans on the ballot this year that I would normally support. Based on the impeachment so far I will vote for none of them. Don’t expect I’ll vote Dem, but I’m not sure this is what winning looks like for the GOP. Maybe there are 2 people out there so impressed with how this went down that they’ll now vote for the GOP? But I sort of doubt it.

    But we’ll see.

    Time123 (a7a01b)

  39. “I’m in a snit about people who use “coup” for a legal, non-violent process that would only culminate in the VP taking over and continuing Trump’s policies, such as they are.“

    So the people talking about it culminating in him becoming king and destroying the republic are talking out their backsides?

    harkin (fb7ea4) — 2/5/2020 @ 9:51 am

    yes

    Time123 (a7a01b)

  40. Does pattericco have any opinion that isn’t reflexively left wing and just as petty as Trump and Pelosi anymore?

    I noticed that. I swear to G-d he used to talk about actual things.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  41. Does pattericco have any opinion that isn’t reflexively left wing and just as petty as Trump and Pelosi anymore? Half his posts contain stupid little words like “trump kin”, “trump cultists” and other slurs. How are you any different?

    Property rights (6e5e6e) — 2/5/2020 @ 9:54 am

    Can you define ‘left wing’ in a way that doesn’t reference Trump?

    Time123 (a7a01b)

  42. Never trump blogger: “I can’t believe what vile names trump calls people and the things he types on Twitter!”

    Five minutes later “Trump and anyone who votes for him is an idiot, a vile racist, they don’t get to lecture anyone on norms I wish they’d rot. He’s a criminal (even tho he convicted of nothing just keep repeating it) !! He’s destroyed the party! I will now vote for Sanders cause I hate him so much. Stupid trumpkins! You are cultists and only I have kept true to principles! So henceforth I will vote for someone who will legalize abortion up to 6 hours after birth and take away private health insurance. Suck on that you Trump voters!”

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  43. ^

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  44. Can you define ‘left wing’ in a way that doesn’t reference Trump?

    Time123 (a7a01b) — 2/5/2020 @ 9:59 am

    Well can you find me anything he’s wrote in 2 years that didn’t mention Trump or throw in a gratuitous shot at him?

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  45. It’s like Trump has broken the man’s spirit.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  46. Dustin (764e61) — 2/5/2020 @ 9:40 am

    But trump did indeed pay Stormy Daniels with campaign funds.

    Michael Cohen claimed that it should have been campaign funds ,and should have ebeen accounted as such, and pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws.

    You’d think a man that wealthy and successful on paper wouldn’t need to pay for sex, but hey, some people don’t have it in them to attract women conventionally.

    This all happened in 2006 and 2007. Stormy Daniels did it for free, but then wanted to be put on Celebrity apprentice for more, and he thought or was told former Playboy centerfold(?) Karen McDougal was a prostitute – this was, after all, Nevada – and attempted to pay her after their first coitus but she refused to take the money. So he started a 10-month affair, paid for stuff for her and even introduced her to his wife – that last was maybe too much for Karen McDougal and she broke off the relationship.

    He walked in on pageant children getting dressed,

    But that’s not groping, and they weren’t little girls but teenagers past puberty.

    he was handsy with his own daughter (somewhat infamously),

    This ne I really don;t know.

    and I assume you recall him bragging that he sexually assaulted women because when you’re a star they don’t do anything about it.

    No, he said they let him do it

    Which was an obvious lie because such things don’t happen. Even with starlets. Yes, a minority might but not as a general rule. And Trump claimed it was a lie (locker room talk = lies)

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  47. To be clear I don’t think that when Donald Trump, in 2007, introduced Karen McDougal to Melania Trump nee Knauss, he described her as his mistress. He would have had a cover story.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  48. Make America Ordered Again (23f793) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:01 am

    I honestly think their (never trump former republicans whatever you want to call them) problem isn’t even with Trump anymore. It’s with people like us. Hear me out, if Sanders wins like they want, abolished private healthcare, late term abortion, appoints 3 SC judges and codifies some form of amnesty and climate change bills…..who gets hurt? It won’t be billionaire Trump who will skate off with Melania that’s for sure.

    It’s us. Pattericco and others like him want US punished for daring to vote in a way they didn’t like. How else can you explain what the end game of what they want to happen will accomplish. They want Republican voters punished. Am I off base here or what?

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  49. I LOVED pelosi tearing up the speech. Think of it, Pelosi had a chance to make the D’s Look good by taking the high road. She could have attacked Trump later for being childish and not shaking her hand. BUT, she ruined all that by tearing up the Speech and one of the most childish stunts ever. What’s next in 2021, if Trump gets reelected? Will Nancy stick her tongue out and yell “Nananana” during Trump’s speech? Once again, the D’s step in and bail out Trump. Thanks nancy!

    rcocean (1a839e)

  50. Bringing up Trump not shaking her hands, is what boys and girls?

    Answer: Whataboutism. Which we all dislike. Right?

    rcocean (1a839e)

  51. Does pattericco have any opinion that isn’t reflexively left wing

    Quote some of the many, many left-wing opinions that Patterico has expressed. It shouldn’t be hard, if that’s the only kind of opinion he has.

    Being critical of Donald Trump does not make an opinion “left-wing.” Nor is it left-wing to notice the cultish devotion attached to him, or the hypocrisy and mental gymnastics that his apologists frequently resort to in an effort to argue that things they condemned not long ago are just fine if Trump does them.

    It isn’t left-wing to point out the gross double standards of any Trump defender who gets into high moral dudgeon about Trump-critics supposedly being classless or uncivil or dishonest — i.e. being the very things they love about Trump.

    Radegunda (0eb6fa)

  52. I revel in the irony that a guy with the handle “Property Rights” is a clear supporter of the Kelo loving Trump.

    And I await hearing about those left wing ideas Patterico has. Becuse I don’t think rule of law is especially leftist, nor is character matters. Well, Patterico hated the GOP tax reform and the repeal of the state tax deduction. I never thought of that as an especially left/right thing.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  53. I haven’t read French, Goldberg, or Kristol yet. But no doubt they will make the “Conservative case for Nancy Pelosi”.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  54. Am I off base here or what?

    Totally.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  55. If you want Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to be our next president then yes you are left wing. Even Joe Biden is now to the left of where Obama was in 2008. How is that hard to grasp?

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  56. Totally.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:15

    Pat has stated he wants Trump to lose in 2020 and he’d vote for pretty much anyone else. Who would be hurt by that? Not Donald Trump that’s for sure.

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  57. I LOVED pelosi tearing up the speech. Think of it, Pelosi had a chance to make the D’s Look good by taking the high road. She could have attacked Trump later for being childish and not shaking her hand. BUT, she ruined all that by tearing up the Speech and one of the most childish stunts ever. What’s next in 2021, if Trump gets reelected? Will Nancy stick her tongue out and yell “Nananana” during Trump’s speech? Once again, the D’s step in and bail out Trump. Thanks nancy!

    rcocean (1a839e) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:12 am

    She’s a footnote. you make a good point, but politics is not about civility. It’s about little 5 second snippets, ideally picture or video format.

    Remember, Trump is both stupid and horrible. He is no great innovation in politics. He is a symptom of what’s happening in society. As politician observe what works expect people to throw food during committee mark-ups, insult the appearance of spouses of opponents, and laugh at how they ignored evidence or intelligent arguments against their team.

    Dustin (764e61)

  58. I honestly think their (never trump former republicans whatever you want to call them) problem isn’t even with Trump anymore. It’s with people like us. Hear me out, if Sanders wins like they want, abolished private healthcare, late term abortion, appoints 3 SC judges and codifies some form of amnesty and climate change bills…..who gets hurt? It won’t be billionaire Trump who will skate off with Melania that’s for sure.

    It’s us. Pattericco and others like him want US punished for daring to vote in a way they didn’t like. How else can you explain what the end game of what they want to happen will accomplish. They want Republican voters punished. Am I off base here or what?

    Property rights (6e5e6e) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:10 am

    Yes you are a victim. Thin skin and imagination is not a winning combo.

    Dustin (764e61)

  59. Most Never-trumpers – and Patterico is NOT one – say they are “conservative” because they believe in smaller Government and “freedom”. George Will says he’s “Temperamentally” a conservative. Matt Lewis claimed to be a conservative because he believed in “Free Trade” and “Smaller Government” and was against abortion and “isolationism”. Of course, he’s also against doing anything practical – like electing R’s – to put those beliefs into practice.

    The “I”m in favor of smaller Government” is one of those vague statements that can mean anything. George Bush was the Big thrift king till Obama came along. And Hillary would’ve made trump look like a miser, but the Never trumpers saw zero difference between them.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  60. I can’t and won’t pretend to speak for our host, but you were not limiting your ranting him.

    Your are deeply wrong.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  61. Remember, Trump is both stupid and horrible.
    Dustin (764e61) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:19 am

    Pat and people like you throw stuff like that out in every comment or post them call Trump the meanie meanie bad guy for saying something on Twitter. How do you hold both those opinions in your head at the same time without it exploding.

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  62. She’s a footnote. you make a good point, but politics is not about civility. It’s about little 5 second snippets, ideally picture or video format.

    So Politics is just for tough guys. All that stuff about civility is nonsense. Good the D’s believe that. it hurts them with people who think otherwise, including independents.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  63. Your are deeply wrong.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:21 am

    I disagree, it’s obviously become personal to him. But have a good day sir

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  64. The “I”m in favor of smaller Government” is one of those vague statements that can mean anything.

    Only if you are intentionally or genetically stupid.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  65. Trump and anyone who votes for him is an idiot, a vile racist, they don’t get to lecture anyone on norms I wish they’d rot.

    I’ve never said such things about “anyone who votes for Trump.” But I’m astonished that so many people who used to lecture others on “norms” now take the position that it’s wrong to expect the president to follow “norms” or make some effort to be honest and civil.

    I’m disgusted by all the allowances made for Trump by people who hold others to much stricter standards.
    I’m embarrassed that such a pathological narcissist and chronic liar has been made into the defining face of “conservatism.”
    And I’m amazed that the “Trump intellectuals” are unconcerned about all the signs of mental impairment in Trump. Instead, they insist that he “understands” things that his critics are just too dense to grasp.

    These views don’t show that I’m “left-wing.” They show that I didn’t change my core beliefs and principles just to accommodate Donald Trump.

    Radegunda (0eb6fa)

  66. Pat and people like you throw stuff like that out in every comment or post them call Trump the meanie meanie bad guy for saying something on Twitter.

    The president’s public statements should be held to a higher standard than comments on a small blog.

    And does it never occur to Trump defenders that his critics wouldn’t be calling him a meanie meanie bad guy if he didn’t regularly behave in such an appalling way?
    Trump could make himself a lot more respected by changing his behavior. Except that he can’t change his behavior, because he is constitutionally a horrible person.

    Radegunda (0eb6fa)

  67. Here’s a true fact…

    a great many Americans are getting fed up with the nature of our politics as they have degenerated to this point. More, they are aghast by what they see in our “leaders”.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  68. My favorite (paraphrased) quote? “Wasn’t sure if Pelosi was tearing up the speech or the US Constitution.”

    David Longfellow (44fae2)

  69. Does pattericco have any opinion that isn’t reflexively left wing and just as petty as Trump and Pelosi anymore? Half his posts contain stupid little words like “trump kin”, “trump cultists” and other slurs. How are you any different?

    Property rights (6e5e6e) — 2/5/2020 @ 9:54 am

    You’re going to have to give us an example of P’s “left wing” opinions, if you want your comment to be given any serious consideration.

    If you believeAre “trump kin”, “trump cultists” to be slurs, then logically you would also view the reflexive use of “NeverTrump(ers)” as slurs as well, right?

    Pattericco and others like him want US punished for daring to vote in a way they didn’t like. How else can you explain what the end game of what they want to happen will accomplish. They want Republican voters punished. Am I off base here or what?

    Property rights (6e5e6e) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:10 am

    Many of us have made it very clear that we understand that there are good and decent people who voted for Trump because in their minds he was the lesser of two evils. He was not their ideal candidate, nor was he someone they liked. He was simply the only choice in what they felt was a binary choice. Other voters opted to go forthe third choice and not vote for him, and either sit it out or write in a candidate.

    No one I know wants Republican voters punished. Trump has been punishment enough for the GOP. Its members have reaped who they’ve sown, as it should be.

    Dana (aaddb1)

  70. “Wasn’t sure if Pelosi was tearing up the speech or the US Constitution.”

    Yeh, that was the sanctimonious sycophant Mike Pence, who, like a lot of Republicans used to at least appear to have some integrity.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  71. No one I know wants Republican voters punished. Trump has been punishment enough for the GOP. Its members have reaped who they’ve sown, as it should be.

    Yeah, we’re really suffering with the tax cuts, judges, booming economy, and stopping the left-wing takeover of the USA. I get out of bed crying every day – “if only Hillary had won. Think of how much better the R Party would be with a Kagan run SCOTUS and wars in the middle east”.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  72. Mittens is voting guilty because of his “conscious” – his “convictions” required him to vote Guilty before is God and his country.

    What a backstabbing, pompous clown. Well, Mittens got his revenge.

    rcocean (1a839e)

  73. I didn’t think he had it in him… Romney just announced he’s voting for removal.

    For good or ill… that will be his legacy going forward.

    whembly (fd57f6)

  74. However, Romney will vote to acquit on Obstruction of Congress.

    whembly (fd57f6)

  75. Paul Montagu (cbbfc4) — 2/5/2020 @ 8:06 am

    Criticism of Party A ≠ Defense of Party B

    Normally this is true. But it’s a well-established rule around these parts that pointing out flaws in NeverTrump arguments means defending Trump. It really depends on A and B.

    frosty (f27e97)

  76. 67 Radegunda (0eb6fa) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:30 am

    But I’m astonished that so many people who used to lecture others on “norms” now take the position that it’s wrong to expect the president to follow “norms” or make some effort to be honest and civil.

    I am not picking on you, but I thought your comment was a good starting point for what I have been observing.

    I read a lot of comment threads and they so quickly devolve into schoolyard invectives. The online universe has pushed our society into a crass and belligerent one. First, I think that the anonymity of comments allowed people to be free with their feelings, unmoderated by risk of being a pariah among those who know you. However, this has subsequently seeped out of the shadows. Facebook and other sites where there is no anonymity began to show more coarse discourse. It is apparent in news and other media as well. It is becoming the norm for society to belittle your opponents.

    Trump is a reflection of that. His style is exactly what we have been seeing everywhere, already. Politicians used to be more subtle than that or they used surrogates. Trump might have realized that society was already ready for it and used it mercilessly. Or he was simply the right person at the right time. His style was not ground-breaking, it was already de rigueur and he is reaping the benefits. This is just a symptom of our society made possible by all of us and clearly mirrored even in the comments on this blog.

    I am not sure about the idea that people who used to lecture about “norms” suddenly excusing it. I think what you have on the right is a frustration that being civil got you nowhere. Whether you were nice, or quiet or polite, your were evil, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist, fascist, etc. In other words being polite won you no points. Now that someone is giving as good as he gets people are standing up and cheering. Finally, someone who is not afraid of the scolds and harridans and is willing to fight. Bush was polite, look how that helped him. Romney was polite, didn’t help him either. Frustrated people who are constantly maligned unfairly are releasing pent up anger and cheering on the guy who isn’t taking it lying down.

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  77. No one I know wants Republican voters punished. Trump has been punishment enough for the GOP. Its members have reaped who they’ve sown, as it should be.

    Dana (aaddb1) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:59 am

    Pat has said he’s voting Biden or even Sanders next election, and he wants Trump out. Ok, if that happens who is punished? Not trump, people like me.

    Do you not see the constant put downs and slurs to Trump voters? I mean yeah occasionally he throws out “oh some of them made an ok decision blah blah”, but it’s 99% negative toward people like me.

    Property Rights (6e5e6e)

  78. Frustrated people who are constantly maligned unfairly are releasing pent up anger and cheering on the guy who isn’t taking it lying down.

    Jacksonians are back.

    DRJ (15874d)

  79. “Do you not see the constant put downs and slurs to Trump voters? I mean yeah occasionally he throws out “oh some of them made an ok decision blah blah”, but it’s 99% negative toward people like me.”

    I’m sorry your feelings were hurt.

    Davethulhu (94520c)

  80. “Romney just announced he’s voting for removal.“

    Pierre Delecto, too — wow, two Repub votes for removal.

    Munroe (861db5)

  81. I’m sorry your feelings were hurt.

    Davethulhu (94520c) — 2/5/2020 @ 11:30 am

    Oh I’m perfectly fine with it. Insult away…..but just like he’s claiming Trump voters can’t cite how Pelosi is being rude here he can’t either. He can’t hide behind “I’m decent I swear”. He does the same stuff Trump does in his tweets it’s just directed at people like me.

    Property Rights (6e5e6e)

  82. I mean yeah occasionally he throws out “oh some of them made an ok decision blah blah”, but it’s 99% negative toward people like me.

    P directs his ire at Trump and people who support Trump no matter what he does. He understands why some people might vote for Trump.

    DRJ (15874d)

  83. P directs his ire at Trump and people who support Trump no matter what he does. He understands why some people might vote for Trump.

    DRJ (15874d) — 2/5/2020 @ 11:33 am

    That’s not what I’m getting at. I am saying who gets punished when all the “Republicans” or “former republicans cause of trump” get their wish and Sanders wins? One of the slurs they throw out at Trump is that he’s a con man. Would a conman care if he lost a second term as president? He’d skate off into the sunset lamenting how his legacy was foiled and blaming everyone. He wouldn’t care. He might even be happy to get back to golfing.

    The only people punished by Sanders winning by voting for a party they normally said they despise is people like me. I’m sure pat would get 4 years of schadenfreude out of it and saying “this is what you deserve!” The entire time tho. I mean yeah I get why Democrat’s will vote for whoever they nominate but anyone halfway right of a socialists at this point is only doing it to shove their finger in the eye of republican voters. Do that if you want but don’t act like it’s for a noble purpose

    Property Rights (6e5e6e)

  84. 72 Dana (aaddb1) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:59 am

    If you believeAre “trump kin”, “trump cultists” to be slurs, then logically you would also view the reflexive use of “NeverTrump(ers)” as slurs as well, right?

    Not necessarily. There is a difference between calling someone pro-choice vs pro-abortion Take it one step further and call the pro-death. Trumpkin and cultist are connotative and are meant to belittle the person. NeverTrumper is more of a descriptive of those whose disdain for Trump is so high that they will not support him out of principle. People who are NeverTrumpers would not necessarily consider the label to be a negative, any more than Bernie considers being Socialist a negative even though conservatives might call him that as a derisive descriptor.

    Just to bring up something that has been at the back of my mind for a while…. By using clearly derogatory terms for people who have differences of opinions on how to deal with Trump, you (referring in general sense to anyone who comments, not the Host or Guests) undermine both your status as principled, objective individuals as well as your ability to find common ground with those who are aligned with the majority of your political views. In other words, if your words are the same words they hear from people on the left, you are more likely to be viewed as having common cause with those on the left. (talks like a duck…)

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  85. Pat and people like you throw stuff like that out in every comment or post them call Trump the meanie meanie bad guy for saying something on Twitter. How do you hold both those opinions in your head at the same time without it exploding.

    Property rights (6e5e6e) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:23 am

    Maybe having two socks in one thread is straining you, but I did not reference twitter. Obviously the sexual assaults informed my opinion of Trump. You can tell because of the words I wrote in the thread.

    Thin skin isn’t good for you.

    Dustin (764e61)

  86. I see we’ve heard from the mindless Trumper contingent. Thank God. That point of view was starting to feel unrepresented.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 2/4/2020 @ 8:50 pm

    That’s from last post. What about that doesn’t show a general disdain and contempt? He is insulting who he hates and wants punished. It isn’t Trump

    Property Rights (6e5e6e)

  87. Oh I’m perfectly fine with it. Insult away…..but just like he’s claiming Trump voters can’t cite how Pelosi is being rude here he can’t either. He can’t hide behind “I’m decent I swear”. He does the same stuff Trump does in his tweets it’s just directed at people like me.

    Try as I have, I cannot understand that. Clarification, please.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  88. 83 Davethulhu (94520c) — 2/5/2020 @ 11:30 am

    I’m sorry your feelings were hurt.

    No you are not. You use invectives and derogatories to put down people, and when called on it try to deflect and belittle them by implying that if their feeling were hurt then they must be weak people. We know the “apology” wasn’t an apology, just a passive aggressive rhetorical device.

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  89. I see we’ve heard from the mindless Trumper contingent. Thank God. That point of view was starting to feel unrepresented.

    Patterico (115b1f) — 2/4/2020 @ 8:50 pm

    That’s from last post. What about that doesn’t show a general disdain and contempt? He is insulting who he hates and wants punished. It isn’t Trump

    Dude…!!! Seriously, there are some OBVIOUS trolls here, am the comment was directed at them!

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  90. @31. The President of the United States should be better than an old woman, though. That’s not too much to ask.

    Depends… [there’s pun in there some place] some folks held Thatcher in higher regard than a POTUS or two.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  91. Ragspierre (d9bec9) — 2/5/2020 @ 11:58 am

    This might be the winner of the award for the least self-aware comment of the month.

    frosty (f27e97)

  92. Dude…!!! Seriously, there are some OBVIOUS trolls here, am the comment was directed at them!

    People you don’t understand (and who’ve made better political predictions than you have, to wit, Trump’s election) are not “trolls.”

    Make America Ordered Again (4e92ad)

  93. I like how we’re still doing

    A: You were mean.
    B: But you were mean before.
    A: You don’t care about that because you support ppl being mean.

    round and round again with ever thinning justifications.

    Either you care about the norm or you don’t. Partisan’s don’t make norms a primary consideration. The don’t care about it as a thing and would never criticize their person for breaking a norm. They just want to use it as a way to score points.

    This isn’t confined to any specific party.

    Time123 (a7a01b)

  94. Trumpkin and cultist are connotative and are meant to belittle the person. NeverTrumper is more of a descriptive of those whose disdain for Trump

    Well exactly. The pejoratives in the T direction are numerous. IIRC, NeverTrump was a handle, if not chosen at the very least somewhat embraced, especially from nominal Republicans, by those opposed to Trump. I don’t think I’ve seen an equivalently pejorative term as Trumpaloos, TrumpHumpers, etc. used to describe the NeverTrump side. Though I myself do cop to trying out ‘Pelosi Pumpers’ once. Just for kicks, you understand. 😉 I was just curious…just to see how it felt…but it wasn’t as much fun as I thought it would be. Not that I regret it, but I doubt I’ll use it again. Surely Dana would have used such a term instead of ‘NeverTrump’ as her example if there’s something else that I’m missing, right?

    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message is for the sole use of the intended recipient, and may contain information that is confidential, including Protected Health Information. Any unauthorized review, use, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of confidentiality or privilege.

    PTw (378575)

  95. @76. The Romneys are easily brainwashed. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  96. Think the invective quotient was high this thread? Let’s get it raised some more!

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/02/romney-impeach-trump/606127/

    Let’s see if Sen. Romney’s arguments will be engaged in a civil fashion. (He rolls eyes. He knows he is not serious. Why do I do it, he says. Then he smirks. How long will he have to wait…)

    Appalled (1a17de)

  97. #98 — If you post any PHI here, you are going to be so busted….

    Appalled (1a17de)

  98. #99 — I don’t know if I am more concerned that (i) you make references to the 1968 GOP race and expect to be understood, or (ii) that I get it immediately.

    Appalled (1a17de)

  99. If you post any PHI here, you are going to be so busted….

    Heh…Yeah, no worries. Network issues so I couldn’t post. Had that all set to post but network gave me grief. Emailed myself. Wonder if this will post…

    PTw (894877)

  100. IIRC, NeverTrump was a handle, if not chosen at the very least somewhat embraced, especially from nominal Republicans

    LOL OK

    Dustin (764e61)

  101. People you don’t understand (and who’ve made better political predictions than you have, to wit, Trump’s election) are not “trolls.”

    Perhaps, but you most certainly ARE a troll, and not even a very artful one.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  102. the whole sick twisted morm-cult’s extremely over-represented at both the CIA and the FBI

    they’re just creepy like that

    but i don’t think we’re in any danger of electing one of these weirdos to the presidency anymore

    thanks mitt

    happyfeet (49d443) — 2/5/2020 @ 11:23 am

    Oh good happyfeet is back to smear people based on their religion again.

    Time123 (a7a01b)

  103. “No you are not. You use invectives and derogatories to put down people”

    I do?

    “and when called on it try to deflect and belittle them by implying that if their feeling were hurt then they must be weak people.”‘

    Which group loves to use the term “snowflakes”?

    Davethulhu (fab944)

  104. Trolling = not hating President Donald Trump.

    Got it.

    Property Rights (6e5e6e)

  105. frosty (f27e97) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:06 pm

    You don’t understand much, huh?

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  106. Trolling = not hating President Donald Trump.

    Got it.

    No. you emphatically do NOT begin getting it if that is actually what you think.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  107. #NeverTrump apparently likes the label they coined themselves:

    http://nevertrump.org/

    Munroe (861db5)

  108. Trolling = not hating President Donald Trump.

    Got it.

    Property Rights (6e5e6e) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:21 pm

    It’s no surprise you got it… you made it up to explain that you are a victim.

    It’s interesting that y’all go with ‘Trump mad them eat a sh*t sandwich lol’ when you aren’t going with ‘cry for me’. They are quite different perspectives.

    Dustin (764e61)

  109. “Do you not see the constant put downs and slurs to Trump voters? I mean yeah occasionally he throws out “oh some of them made an ok decision blah blah”, but it’s 99% negative toward people like me.”

    I’m sorry your feelings were hurt.

    Davethulhu (94520c) — 2/5/2020 @ 11:30 am

    Dave, I often agree with you. But this isn’t an apology. An apology would be “sorry I hurt your feelings”

    Time123 (235fc4)

  110. #NeverTrump apparently likes the label they coined themselves:

    http://nevertrump.org/

    Munroe (861db5) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:26 pm

    By “they” you mean people who say they aren’t that. By insisting they are, when they say they aren’t, you’re intending the insult you’re actually also crying about. LOL

    Dustin (764e61)

  111. ‘More degradation of our politics in the Trump era.’

    But great TeeVee: LCDA. Any savvy producer could beat The Trump Show at and with his own game.

    Run, Oprah. Run.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  112. Radegunda (0eb6fa) — 2/5/2020 @ 10:38 am

    The president’s public statements should be held to a higher standard than comments on a small blog

    I’ve noticed a trend were someone holds out a standard they themselves don’t follow and then have a variety of excuses for why this isn’t a double standard.

    The issue is whether your comments should be held to the standards you claim for yourself and those should be the standards you apply to other people. Maintaining that the lofty principles you hold are only applied to the president is ridiculous and I don’t think it’s a claim I’ve heard from our host or many of the people here I respectfully disagree with. They can certainly correct me if I’m wrong but I understood that honestly, consistency, etc. were things they valued in themselves and other people generally.

    frosty (f27e97)

  113. PTw (378575) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:09 pm

    You’re supposed to work all of that stuff out in college and keep it to yourself. We’re getting close to TMI.

    frosty (f27e97)

  114. ’By “they” you mean people who say they aren’t that. By insisting they are, when they say they aren’t, you’re intending the insult you’re actually also crying about.’
    Dustin (764e61) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:28 pm

    I neither said “they”, nor did I cry about any insult.

    You’re off the rails, as usual.

    Munroe (861db5)

  115. I’ve noticed a trend were someone holds out a standard they themselves don’t follow and then have a variety of excuses for why this isn’t a double standard.

    The issue is whether your comments should be held to the standards you claim for yourself and those should be the standards you apply to other people. Maintaining that the lofty principles you hold are only applied to the president is ridiculous and I don’t think it’s a claim I’ve heard from our host or many of the people here I respectfully disagree with. They can certainly correct me if I’m wrong but I understood that honestly, consistency, etc. were things they valued in themselves and other people generally.

    frosty (f27e97) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:32 pm

    It’s absolutely a double standard.

    It’s actually a multiple standard. How I speak here and how I might speak while having a beer with a friend from school are very different. They’d laugh if I was this careful and polite. I suspect you on the other hand would not appreciate it if I was as ‘informal’

    Bottom line, different levels of decorum are appropriate in different circumstances. The President speaks for the nation and should be a figure of respect and influence. Trump wants that, but doesn’t seem wiling to give anythign to get it.

    Time123 (235fc4)

  116. We’re getting close to TMI.

    Well, OK. I’m sure these chest pains, fatigue, fever, chills, loss of appetite, body ache, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, nasal congestion, sneezing, coughing, shortness of breath, headache, and sore throat are just jet lag from my long trip.

    PTw (894877)

  117. “Adoring Trump loyalists have lost any moral authority”

    As it turns out, ‘moral authority’ hasn’t been historically useful for ordering society about in a moral manner of your particular preference.

    Temporal authority, on the other hand, has turned out far more useful indeed!

    And truthfully, neither side really believes in ‘class’, but up until this point, it’s been the liberals who have issued declasse! declarations upon conservatives with impunity. So throwing it back at them is perfectly acceptable, under the theory of moral arithmetic that two equal hypocrisies cancel each other out.

    “I dislike both of them equally and disrespect both of them equally.”

    That seems to be a poor example of moral reasoning, one symbolically snubbed a person, while the other symbolically snubbed both a people and their accomplishments over the past three years. I realize that solipsism is a quintessentially feminine trait, but anyone who claims to be an avatar or follower of ‘not the feelings, just the TRUTH’ should be capable of rising above their instinctual emotions for this one, especially the day after.

    (See, I can shamelessly appeal to worldviews I don’t really support too!)

    “But great TeeVee: LCDA. Any savvy producer could beat The Trump Show at and with his own game.”

    Sorry, DCSCA, you’re living in the past, there is no producer currently living who’s funnier, more productive, and with broader appeal than a man whose primary job was moving New York real estate.

    “Quote some of the many, many left-wing opinions that Patterico has expressed.”

    Pat isn’t really a ‘leftwinger’, he’s more an embittered anti-Trumper who’ll swing any stick, left or right, against Trump without a care for how strong it is or who hands it to him. Because he’s a lawyer by trade, he occasionally puts in work to make sure it’s a halfway sound stick, but more often than not he just misses, tosses it away, finds a new one, and bans anyone who asked about the old one.

    Sorry, big P, but just like movies, something people and things are just popular because they’re actually good. Or because Will Smith is in them.

    No Agenda(TM) (f28f29)

  118. Are we talking burning a-hole diarrhea or the easier kind?

    Make America Ordered Again (4e92ad)

  119. Are we talking burning a-hole diarrhea or the easier kind?

    Not sure. What’s the kind that you get from bat soup?

    PTw (894877)

  120. Sorry, DCSCA, you’re living in the past, there is no producer currently living who’s funnier, more productive, and with broader appeal than a man whose primary job was moving New York real estate.

    That was sort of intelligent up to that point. Afterwards, it sunk rapidly. Like a rock.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  121. since I know that if Trump did the same thing they would applaud and cheer.

    You Voices tell you these things, do they?

    tom swift (38544b)

  122. @121. Sorry, DCSCA, you’re living in the past, there is no producer currently living who’s funnier, more productive, and with broader appeal than a man whose primary job was moving New York real estate.

    Oprah aside, George Schlatter.

    You lose, bub.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  123. I think what you have on the right is a frustration that being civil got you nowhere. Whether you were nice, or quiet or polite, your were evil, racist, homophobic, xenophobic, sexist, fascist, etc.

    So the solution is to elect someone who tends to confirm ugly stereotypes about conservatives — and then complain that libs keep saying mean things about conservatives?

    What the Trump defenders keep overlooking is that a person can be resolute and courageous, without being openly a jerk, an ignoramus, a chronic liar, etc.
    And they overlook the fact that advancing their agenda in the long term isn’t helped by Super-Gluing it to such a repellent, self-absorbed, dishonest human being, and constantly making excuses for him and insisting that he’s really smart, and sniffing that those who are repelled by him are snobby elitists who sneer at average Americans. (My very average American family do not hold Trump in high regard.)

    Radegunda (0eb6fa)

  124. Time123 (235fc4) — 2/5/2020 @ 12:53 pm

    That’s a fair criticism of Trump that I wouldn’t disagree with. But that’s a different issue than people who say honesty is important and Trump lies but then lie about his lies, this one is especially odd given that he does lie but some people can’t keep themselves from twisting and embellishing it for effect. This happens with consistency as well.

    Then there are the claims that Trump supporters are compromised by association with Trump from people who’ve embraced equally morally challenged people in some sort of enemy of my enemy arrangement.

    My point is a slight variation on your point in @97. You won’t break the cycle by demanding the other side go first and you certainly won’t break it by saying with a straight face, I’ll go first because you’re obviously incapable, i.e. just going to the next step in the cycle.

    frosty (f27e97)

  125. “(My very average American family do not hold Trump in high regard.)”

    NONE OF MY 3.2 CHILDREN and 1.7 PETS APPRECIATE THIS PARTICULAR BRAND

    No Agenda(TM) (55bddf)

  126. sure glad frosty is here to judge everybody

    it’s like having your own slurpee machine

    convenient

    Dustin (764e61)

  127. 127 Radegunda (0eb6fa) — 2/5/2020 @ 1:41 pm

    What the Trump defenders keep overlooking is that a person can be resolute and courageous, without being openly a jerk, an ignoramus, a chronic liar, etc.

    That is a false dichotomy. What they have is Trump and they can either accept or reject him. There is no resolute and courageous non-jerk alternative for them to select. I do wish the republican voters has opted for Cruz over Trump when they had the chance, that was still viable even as late as mid March, 2016, but shortly thereafter it was pretty much over. Now we have: accept or reject Trump.

    And they overlook the fact that advancing their agenda in the long term isn’t helped by Super-Gluing it to such a repellent, self-absorbed, dishonest human being, and constantly making excuses for him and insisting that he’s really smart, and sniffing that those who are repelled by him are snobby elitists who sneer at average Americans. (My very average American family do not hold Trump in high regard.)

    Trump has been more effective advancing the conservative agenda than recent options, so it is quite normal for people make excuses for him. It is human nature, it is also logical and advances their political goals. You and they might disagree on the issue of whether, long-term, Trump damages Republican and conservative agendas, but it is not illogical, immoral, or stupid necessarily for them to weigh the pros and cons and come to a different conclusion than you. It is purely a matter of opinion and not a 2+2 = 4 deal. Lots of people hate Trump, he might not get re-elected, but lots of people love what he is doing and may again come down on his side when weighing the stark alternative because there is political buffet table where one can build their ideal candidate from a menu of offerings. The complex process that brought here is what it is and we are faced with Trump or the Dem candidate. If one hates the other side enough, then one will weigh Trump’s deficiencies as less odious than the alternative.

    I don’t love Trump, but right now, I think he is more likely to delay the slide into socialist utopia than any alternative both short and long term, so I live with the consequences and wish that others who are conservative would see that undermining him lends aid an comfort to those that would ruin your life.

    Radegunda (0eb6fa) — 2/5/2020 @ 1:41 pm

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  128. MUCH shorter WaBlogLog (5fcf49)…

    Lie back and think of ‘Merca…

    Sorry, dude, I have a voice and discernment and I will use both.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  129. What the Trump defenders keep overlooking is that a person can be resolute and courageous, without being openly a jerk, an ignoramus, a chronic liar, etc.

    Yes, there once was a conservative politician in this country that fit that description. His name was Ronald Reagan.

    But after him, all the “conservative” politicians lacked his courage, and were afraid of being called “racist” or some such. Milt Romney is more of a gentleman than Trump can ever hope to be. But he is a wus and a loser who simply lacked spine. And we got four more years of Obama because of it.

    The Republican party could have nominated another Romney. (Jeb Bush, phone home.) He would have been beaten by Hillary Clinton, and we would have gotten four more years of the same as we had the prior eight, only with more corruption.

    Bored Lawyer (998177)

  130. That’s a fair criticism of Trump that I wouldn’t disagree with. But that’s a different issue than people who say honesty is important and Trump lies but then lie about his lies, this one is especially odd given that he does lie but some people can’t keep themselves from twisting and embellishing it for effect. This happens with consistency as well.

    Then there are the claims that Trump supporters are compromised by association with Trump from people who’ve embraced equally morally challenged people in some sort of enemy of my enemy arrangement.

    My point is a slight variation on your point in @97. You won’t break the cycle by demanding the other side go first and you certainly won’t break it by saying with a straight face, I’ll go first because you’re obviously incapable, i.e. just going to the next step in the cycle.

    These are both good critiques. There are some situations where being factually inaccurate about what Trump said is totally appropriate; such is a stand up comedian making a joke that relies on exaggeration. But if you’re doing straight commentary that’s not the case. Even if you’re making a joke the forum may make that type of humor inappropriate, such as when Adam Schiff did it with the transcript.

    Your second point gets to who you bother to listen to. Maddow may have been right about the impeachment. I don’t actually know because I stopped paying any attention to a long time ago. Some people are hacks who will say whatever it takes to advance a narrative. You can’t get rid of them, but you can treat maddow/cernovich/hannity/Trump as noise and ignore what they say. Occasionally they’ll have a good point or be factually accurate, but that’s in spite of who and what they are. If your primary focus is Party&Tribe they might make sense. If you’re focused on anything else there’s no point in listening to them.

    Time123 (235fc4)

  131. The Republican party could have nominated another Romney. (Jeb Bush, phone home.) He would have been beaten by Hillary Clinton, and we would have gotten four more years of the same as we had the prior eight, only with more corruption.

    Bored Lawyer (998177) — 2/5/2020 @ 2:25 pm

    I assert that we got the corruption part anyway.

    Time123 (235fc4)

  132. Dustin (764e61) — 2/5/2020 @ 2:07 pm

    it’s like having your own slurpee machine

    convenient

    It’s become increasingly clear that you live in your own little reality. If I can add a slurpee machine to it then I’m glad. You’re welcome.

    frosty (f27e97)

  133. 134. There you go again, asserting that there’s a dime’s worth of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. There isn’t.

    Gryph (08c844)

  134. Time123 (235fc4) — 2/5/2020 @ 2:29 pm

    This was given no matter who was voted in. I’m the least corrupt person I know and you are probably the least corrupt person you know. If either of us were POTUS we’d still get corruption.

    The better question is whether it increased or decreased and this will largely depend on POV. I think a lot of the reaction to Trump isn’t about lying or corruption per se. It’s about whose beak is getting wet.

    frosty (f27e97)

  135. On the topic of the original post; I thought it was odd when I saw it but I’m not in the pearl-clutching crowd. I didn’t notice the missed handshake at the beginning. After it was pointed out I thought maybe he didn’t see it. It’s not something I would do without thinking about it beforehand since my natural reaction would be to shake her hand.

    The optics are worse for Pelosi because it just looks petty and weak. But it’s ridiculous for either side to complain about class. Personally, I’d prefer the old school cane beatdowns. Or at least something more authentic than bipartisan wolves deciding which piggies to eat while wrapped in the flag and pretending to be working for the people.

    frosty (f27e97)

  136. So there are two elected Republicans in Washington capable of distinguishing right from wrong.

    Praise be.

    Dave (2c186f)

  137. 133 Ragspierre (d9bec9) — 2/5/2020 @ 2:16 pm

    MUCH shorter WaBlogLog (5fcf49)…

    Lie back and think of ‘Merca…

    Sorry, dude, I have a voice and discernment and I will use both.

    You have a voice. I am less convinced of the second attribute considering how you seemed to miss my point and ascribe to me an attitude I neither said nor implied. So go ahead and use your voice. I will take stock of your discernment and determine how much wight your voice carries.

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  138. 138 Gryph (08c844) — 2/5/2020 @ 2:40 pm

    134. There you go again, asserting that there’s a dime’s worth of difference between the Republicans and the Democrats. There isn’t.

    I’ll take Gorsuch and give you Kagan + 10

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  139. Shorter WaBlogLog:

    “He fights.”

    Make America Ordered Again (f28c9c)

  140. You have a voice. I am less convinced of the second attribute considering how you seemed to miss my point and ascribe to me an attitude I neither said nor implied.

    Well, you EXPRESSLY said…

    That is a false dichotomy. What they have is Trump and they can either accept or reject him. There is no resolute and courageous non-jerk alternative for them to select. I do wish the republican voters has opted for Cruz over Trump when they had the chance, that was still viable even as late as mid March, 2016, but shortly thereafter it was pretty much over. Now we have: accept or reject Trump.

    How ’bout this…

    accept him when he’s right and

    reject him when he’s wrong.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  141. 144 Make America Ordered Again (f28c9c) — 2/5/2020 @ 3:38 pm

    Shorter WaBlogLog:

    “He fights.”

    Slightly longer and more accurate WaBLogLog:

    “Some people like him because he fights.”

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  142. 145 Ragspierre (d9bec9) — 2/5/2020 @ 3:38 pm

    How ’bout this…

    accept him when he’s right and

    reject him when he’s wrong.

    More like…

    Accept him if he is better than the alternatives reject him when he is not. YMMV

    WaBlogLog (5fcf49)

  143. As you probably know, it’s a famous quote by Lincoln about the somewhat boorish Grant: “I can’t spare this man. He fights.”

    Same logic goes for Trump, despite his imperfections.

    Make America Ordered Again (f28c9c)

  144. That analogy makes sense, Make…since the opposition will likely be an old doddering Horace Greeley 2.0 (that covers a few of the pretenders, even the esteemed barber of Cranbrook) in as in 1872.

    Four more SCOOPS…at every meal

    urbanleftbehind (a96430)

  145. Accept him if he is better than the alternatives reject him when he is not.

    But that leaves him with a free-hold where he cannot be criticized. That makes no sense…for an American.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  146. No one said you can’t criticize him. I criticize him on a daily if not weekly basis.

    But don’t take it to general, ridiculous extremes like Patterico. For the moment he’s our guy, the only one we’ve got.

    Who’s the alternative? Bernie Sanders? Senile hairy leg (that children love to touch) Joe Biden?

    Make America Ordered Again (279002)

  147. “Pat isn’t really a ‘leftwinger’, he’s more an embittered anti-Trumper who’ll swing any stick, left or right, against Trump without a care for how strong it is or who hands it to him.“

    Yeah that sums up a lot of how I feel. I mean he posted a video of the serial liar Adam Schiff the other day and said it was spot on. If you want to point out corruption and lies that would be one of the main ones in DC, but yeah you think he has some anti Trump zingers so all of a sudden he’s got a point and “is quotable”. The dude makes up fake quotes for crying out loud.

    Property rights (6e5e6e)

  148. No one said you can’t criticize him. I criticize him on a daily if not weekly basis.

    LOL! You are one of the worst trolls I’ve seen or heard tell of!

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  149. So the people talking about it culminating in him becoming king and destroying the republic are talking out their backsides?

    So it’s okay to use hyperbole like “coup” because your political enemies use hyperbole like “becoming king”?

    Paul Montagu (e1b5a7)

  150. Yeah that sums up a lot of how I feel.

    Which suggests that you have a profound personality order that drives you here.

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  151. Pelosi’s action was beyond the pale and she should be censured by the House. Her attempt to justify her PLANNED action by reaching out for a handshake (which she knew would be refused), as Trump was turning away, was what was pathetic. As are the partisan Democrats and their attempting to justify the unjustifiable.

    Her refusal to use the time-honored words when introducing the President were part and parcel with her intended disrespect.

    But you mistake me. I am not a Trump supporter, and I am not aghast; Pelosi’s actions only further my disinclination to vote “present.”

    Kevin M (8ae2cb)

  152. 140 frosty (f27e97) — 2/5/2020 @ 2:59 pm

    On the topic of the original post; I thought it was odd when I saw it…

    Inside Edition reported tonight (and showed a picture) that during the speech Nancy Pelosi had pre-ripped the paper – that is made little ters so that she could it quickly and easily. (maybe she does that every time she wants to throw something into the waste paper basket)

    She did it for the cameras. (Specifically, for those people who would know what it she was tearing apart.)

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  153. Last year he didn’t even wait to let her introduce him.

    Maybe it’s not a high privilege or distinct honor to introduce a guest who gratuitously disrespects you in the chamber where you invited him to speak, and disdainfully snubs your attempt to show basic civility?

    Just a possibility.

    Dave (1bb933)

  154. I criticize him from the right, not the left (where you and yours slum), Ragspiere.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  155. 8. harkin (d6cfee) — 2/5/2020 @ 8:16 am

    I thought it was much worse when he declared himself king and destroyed the republic.

    That was satirical.

    Trump (or his political people for him or some random suporter) took a TIME magazine cover:

    https://time.com/magazine/us/5421567/october-22nd-2018-vol-192-no-16-u-s

    …from October 22, 2018, that was entitled “How Trumpism Will Outlast Trump” and showed campaign yard signs saying Trump 2024 and Trump 2028 getting smaller in the distance going up to Trump 2044.

    Trump’s people, or maybe some independent supporter, eight months later, turned it into a video, set it to the tune of “Peer Gynt Suite No. 1” — a tune that thehill.com says “is regularly featured in movies and television,” and added an additional sign at the end that read “Trump 2048” – and then it stated really going ahead. It began jumping 100 years at a time, and then more, like Tau Zero, until it eventually read “Trump 4EVA.”

    And then Trump was standing behind that last yard sign like it was a podium.

    And on June 21, 2019, at 1:50 PM Trump tweeted it.

    Of course this shows him going beyond his life expectancy, even beyond Kirk Douglas, unless maybe, as this Atlantic article from May 2005 issue says:

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2005/05/the-coming-death-shortage/304105/

    …If high-level anti-aging therapy were expensive enough, it could become a perk for movie stars, politicians, and CEOs. One can envision Michael Moore fifty years from now, still denouncing the rich in political tracts delivered through the next generation’s version of the Internet—neural implants, perhaps. Donald Trump, a 108-year-old multibillionaire in 2054, will be firing the children of the apprentices he fired in 2004. Meanwhile, the maids, chauffeurs, and gofers of the rich will stare mortality in the face.

    Of course there is a simple thing: Confining meals to an 8 hour window per day. Perhaps the Chinese leadershp diet is something similar (irt was shared with Madame Chiang Kai-Chek (Soong Mei-ling or Soong Mei-ling or Soong May-ling (Chinese: 宋美齡; pinyin: Sòng Měilíng) March 5, 1898 – October 23, 2003), because her sister Soong Ching-ling was married to Sun Yat-sen, who was honored by both the Communists and the Nationalists and she held high positions in Communist China all through the reign of Mao and even later. She died at only 92, living from 27 January 1893 – 29 May 1981, at which time she was “Honorary Chairwoman of the People’s Republic of China” but by that time the Communists had probably devised their diet, probably adapted from that of John D. Rockefeller I. (July 8, 1839 – May 23, 1937) who was the oldest Republican who attended the 1936 Republican National convention – an idea for featuring the oldest Republican in some radio interview was discarded when they discovered who it was. John D. Rockfeller, if he understood why, did not pass his doctor’s advice (which was simple calorie restriction, as they had discovered through working with rats before World War I) down to his descendants – in 1974, Nelson Rockefeller, in his confirmation hearing, thought it was genes.

    But it wasn’t. It was for Charles McGee, honored at both the Superbowl and the State of the Union message.

    And there’s the other thing: A man marrying a much younger woman.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  156. I criticize him from the right, not the left (where you and yours slum), Ragspiere.

    You poor lil troll. It must burn to be busted!

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  157. The spam filter ate my comment because it contained a link.

    However, there is video of Nancy Pelosi “pre-ripping” the SOTU speech.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  158. Let’s see what time the sockpuppets/bots punch the clock, Ragspierre. The last time around it was 7:00 pm Pacific time. But I wonder
    Are they getting a check; or
    Angling for a pardon for their relative doing time in a federal pen; or
    Getting a check from somebody angling for a pardon for a relative doing time in a federal pen?

    nk (1d9030)

  159. BTW, isn’t there a law against providing forged documents to Congress? If Trump did not write that speech, others did, but he is passing it off as his own, isn’t that a crime?

    nk (1d9030)

  160. Right, because the tiny tribe of allegedly conservative NeverTrumpers is obviously so much larger than those who support the current and soon-to-be re-elected President of the United States.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  161. There was actually, for real, literally, a person by person headcount of Never Trumpers and Pro Trumpers on November 8, 2016, Monsieur Le Bot. The results were:

    Never Trumpers: 65,853,514
    Pro Trumpers: 62,984,828

    nk (1d9030)

  162. I’m glad to see you openly and honestly count yourself, Patterico, and most of the other people here as allies of the Democratic Party, nk.

    Make America Ordered Again (279002)

  163. I am even gladder to have you confirm my estimation of you, MAOA.

    nk (1d9030)

  164. Just think, he paid a VPN so he could do this. He even gave himself three handles today, and several of them are just praising himself. What a god damn loser! I bet he really kills it with the ladies.

    Dustin (b8d6d1)

  165. 162. Make America Ordered Again (23f793) — 2/5/2020 @ 6:27 pm

    The spam filter ate my comment because it contained a link.

    I think it eats it if it contains four links, or three links without much commentary. I am not sure of the exact formula.

    It can also east it if somewhere in there there is a bad word, even if you don’t realize it, and it might be that, and not the link, if there was only one.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  166. Inside Edition reported tonight (and showed a picture) that during the speech Nancy Pelosi had pre-ripped the paper – that is made little ters so that she could it quickly and easily.

    Oh please. How many printed pages was it? 5? 10 tops?

    More likely she just fiddled with it during the speech waiting for the torrent of fecal matter to finally end.

    Dave (1bb933)

  167. mr. trump the president, about whom the only thing that is confirmed is that he has no hair on the back of his head, does not deserve to have copies of his speeches ripped in two

    that’s what shredders are for

    nk (1d9030)

  168. Maybe she wasn’t confident that she would rip it in two neatly and quickly if she didn’t make little tears in the paper in advance.

    Sammy Finkelman (083d4c)

  169. Yeah yeah. Trump made her do it.

    Not what I said.

    Still possible she broke the law by doing so to an official government document.

    LOL

    Patterico (115b1f)

  170. Still possible she broke the law by doing so to an official government document.

    LOL

    I’m genuinely curious which TrumpWorld mouthpiece originated this unhinged idea that Pelosi somehow broke a law by tearing up her copy of the speech.

    Clearly it was someone influential, because it’s being faithfully regurgitated by all the usual suspects, despite being self-evidently insane.

    Dave (1bb933)

  171. Make America Ordered Again (279002)

    Giving Fearless Leader’s slogan an authoritarian twist, I see.

    Kishnevi (f2e7c0)

  172. Giving Fearless Leader’s slogan an authoritarian twist, I see.

    Order. Discipline. Responsibility. Harmony.

    These are synonymous with President Donald J. Trump.

    Dave (1bb933)

  173. @171 My guess is it was said as a joke. Like the one about not being sure it was the speech or the constitution. But jokes aren’t allowed anymore. Everything has to be literal and serious.

    frosty (f27e97)

  174. My guess is it was said as a joke.

    If somebody had said it once, and let it go, I would have figured the same.

    But it has been repeated enough that it seems like the people saying it are actually serious.

    Dave (1bb933)

  175. My guess is it was said as a joke.

    Nah. I’ve seen various Trump supporters say that in all seriousness. It is very silly.

    The law isn’t meant to stop someone from destroying the umpteenth copy of something.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  176. @46 “But that’s not groping, and they weren’t little girls but teenagers past puberty.”

    Sammy, I think that’s the most horrible thing I’ve ever seen you write. It’s OK to ogle young girls because they have boobs now?!?

    @83 My taxes went up under Trump. So there’s that.

    I definitely think that your view is worth talking about however. You say that you will suffer under not-Trump. I think this is a short term viewpoint. Maybe whoever it is makes some changes, maybe they don’t. Trump couldn’t get what he wanted through even with a majority in both houses and I suspect that it wouldn’t be any different in a Democratic administration. If the Dems pick up more seats, it will be in conservative districts. If Trump is reelected, I am not reassured that he will follow the law. He has not done so so far (no, he wasn’t convicted. I also think OJ Simpson killed Nicole Brown Simpson.). I think this is long-term harmful for the country as a whole. And lets say he continues on his current path. He is alienating most independents, which can easily generalize onto alienating independents from all Republicans. Even currently, Rs who have never voted D are talking about doing so and once you take that step, it’s easier to do the next time. (I, BTW, am for voting split ticket 😛 ). If your goal is long term viability of the Republican party and conservative ideals, Trump seems likely to drive people away from that and it could take a generation or more to bring them back. I am not an R or a D, but I believe that a healthy exchange of opinions is important in governing, otherwise a party only does what they think makes their people happy and may overlook better solutions or reasons why one party or the other may be mistaken in their current idea.

    @117 Oh, neither party has been particularly classy, but Trump does take things to a whole new level, I think we can all admit it. The ridiculous nicknames are ridiculous.

    @130 Romney isn’t either a wus or a loser. Yes, he did not beat an incumbent President who had had significant economic and political success. No one was going to beat Obama, it was wishful thinking. No, Romney was not a “severe Conservative.” But he won the Governorship of a liberal state as a Republican AND has won a Senate seat in a conservative religious state. He may not be in line with the current fad for walking lock-step with the national party regardless of personal beliefs or needs of individual states, but I would say that the current fad is very bad for individual states (It’s no secret that it think that’s part of what has cause problems with the viability of the R party in CA) and for the country as a whole.

    (general) I wasn’t sure Pence knew the difference between Trumps opinion and the Constitution. Now I know that he doesn’t. 😛

    Nic (896fdf)

  177. “My guess is it was said as a joke. Like the one about not being sure it was the speech or the constitution. But jokes aren’t allowed anymore. Everything has to be literal and serious.”

    Noted Brain Genius Mat Gaetz, who somehow avoided dying of irony tweeted:

    I’m filing an ethics complaint against @SpeakerPelosi
    for destroying @realDonaldTrump’s State of the Union speech.

    Her conduct was beneath the dignity of the House, and a potential violation of law (18 USC 2071).

    Nobody is above the law. She must be held accountable.

    https://twitter.com/RepMattGaetz/status/1225255448745533440

    Davethulhu (fe4242)

  178. Frosty,

    people can’t even tell anymore when others are mocking them over the constant crimes they allege occurred that mean the President is a “bad man” who must be removed from office by any means necessary.

    NJRob (4d595c)

  179. — What’s the difference between Matt Gaetz and a mosquito?
    — The mosquito stops sucking when you slap it.

    nk (1d9030)

  180. @175 Because that’s how the world works now and it’s not confirmation bias at all.

    frosty (f27e97)

  181. An op-ed appearing today in The Hill:

    Nancy Pelosi should resign
    BY JONATHAN TURLEY

    an utter disgrace. First, Pelosi dropped the traditional greeting before the start of the address, “Members of Congress, I have the high privilege and distinct honor of presenting to you the president of the United States.” Instead, she simply announced, “Members of Congress, the president of the United States.” It was extremely petty and profoundly inappropriate. Putting aside the fact that this is not her tradition, but that of the House, it is no excuse to note that the president was impeached.

    Such an indignity was not imposed on President Clinton during his own impeachment proceeding, and anyone respecting due process would note that Trump has been accused, not convicted, at this point in the constitutional process. Pelosi proceeded to repeatedly shake her head, mouth words to others, and visibly disagree with the address. It was like some distempered distracting performance art behind the president.

    Indeed, House Speakers have been the authority who kept other members in silent deference and respect, if not to the president, then to the office. However, Pelosi appeared to goad the mob, like a high schooler making mad little faces behind the school principal at an assembly. It worked, as members protested and interrupted Trump. Pelosi became another Democratic leader, little more than a twitching embodiment of this age of rage.

    Patterico makes hay out of the fact that Trump didn’t shake Pelosi’s hand despite him turning away at that moment, focused on giving his speech, and it being 50/50 he didn’t even notice that (nk suspects he didn’t notice).

    Since who insulted whom first seems to be important to Patterico, you’d think he would want to update his post with the fact Nancy Pelosi violated decorum and was rude before Trump (maybe) did.

    Also, Trump may well have been aware of Pelosi’s initial and egregious breach of decorum as not only has he delivered three SOTU addresses himself, he will have watched a few dozen of them over his life and, what’s more, been briefed by his staff.

    At worst, in a brief moment while turning around, if he noticed it, he didn’t shake her hand… immediately after she’d insulted him and the office of the Presidency.

    Pelosi, on the other hand, started with disrespecting both her office and his, continued to do so throughout his speech, pre-ripped the SOTU, then ripped it dramatically, showing disrespect to his office, her office, and the great and sometimes suffering people mentioned in the speech, both those present in the audience and those not.

    How Patterico thinks these two sets of behaviors, Trump’s and Pelosi’s, are even close to equivalient is something I genuinely do not understand.

    ~

    Note: I put this under the wrong thread before, so placed it here when it’s more relevant. I’ll try to now get on with my morning, assuming the erudite conversation here doesn’t magnetically draw me back, which is possible.

    Have a good day, everyone!

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  182. So quoting someone with an opinion about an event that actually happened in the real world, describe it not as it actually happened, but as he wished it happened. Much of his description is shown as a lie, on video.

    Now, that Nancy is a bad faith politician, is not at issue. At issue is the level of freak out, against actions by the orange-one. She’s an ethical role model in comparison. 2 things can be true at once, Nancy bad, Orange man more bad.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (92fb27)

  183. OT – well good on DHS, but could the inconveniencing of a relatively specific cohort a shot across the bow and/or a bait to damning action specific to Bloomberg?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/dhs-global-entry-trusted-traveler-new-york-ice-sanctuary-law

    urbanleftbehind (647d52)

  184. @144

    As you probably know, it’s a famous quote by Lincoln about the somewhat boorish Grant: “I can’t spare this man. He fights.”

    Same logic goes for Trump, despite his imperfections.

    Make America Ordered Again (f28c9c) — 2/5/2020 @ 3:45 pm

    I think this is one of those why Trump won.

    I don’t think I’m being too presumptuous in that all of us wished Trump has a better filter between his brain and his mouth. But he *is* a counter-puncher, and his supporters appreciate that.

    Actually, now that I think about it, it’s probably the only was why he took off during the primary (and also the free media coverage thinking Trump would be the weakest opponent for Hillary). Before Trump, most GOP presidential candidates would just take the crap sitting down. The only other person I think who could fight back, with a filter, would be Cruz or Rubio. Alas… it wasn’t meant to be.

    whembly (fd57f6)

  185. Word.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)

  186. Trump does not fight. He talks. More specifically, he rants and yammers. That’s not fighting, and it’s not particularly exceptional. At any given more moment, there are tens of thousands of women going through PMS or menopause doing the exact same thing.

    nk (1d9030)

  187. 139. Given that the Supreme Court has way overstepped its constitutionally defined bounds and has been doing so since Marbury v Madison, that isn’t a dime’s worth of difference. Unless you’re dumb enough to think that Gorsuch has really tipped the balance in favor of freedom in any meaningful way.

    Gryph (08c844)

  188. @187

    Trump does not fight. He talks. More specifically, he rants and yammers. That’s not fighting, and it’s not particularly exceptional. At any given more moment, there are tens of thousands of women going through PMS or menopause doing the exact same thing.

    nk (1d9030) — 2/6/2020 @ 8:14 am

    How do you explain him pulling out the Paris Accord? Iran Deal? Standing up for Kavanaugh? Moving embassy to Jerusalem? Challenging NATO countries on burden sharing?

    In the face of absolute outrage by democrats, media and the powers-that-be, Trump plowed though. I’m not convinced that any other GOPers would’ve stayed the course.

    What do you call that…if that’s not what you call fighting?

    whembly (fd57f6)

  189. 139. Given that the Supreme Court has way overstepped its constitutionally defined bounds and has been doing so since Marbury v Madison, that isn’t a dime’s worth of difference. Unless you’re dumb enough to think that Gorsuch has really tipped the balance in favor of freedom in any meaningful way.

    Gryph (08c844) — 2/6/2020 @ 8:36 am

    I think Gorsuch absolutely is such a jurist who’d protect individual liberty.

    whembly (fd57f6)

  190. Trump does not fight. He talks. More specifically, he rants and yammers. That’s not fighting, and it’s not particularly exceptional.

    All true. Except he also galvanizes the mob his followers into a potent political force. His opponents should be grateful he’s so ineffective in leading them anywhere.

    Kevin M (8ae2cb)

  191. How do you explain him pulling out the Paris Accord? Iran Deal? Standing up for Kavanaugh? Moving embassy to Jerusalem? Challenging NATO countries on burden sharing?

    I think those are fair points, and I could add a few more.

    Now, can you name some items were Trump has done stuff by diktat?

    Ragspierre (d9bec9)

  192. 177.

    It’s OK to ogle young girls because they have boobs now?!?

    No, it’s not, although Trump, we would assume from the way he said what he said, didn’t want them to know he was doing that. (He said he could walk in on pageant children getting dressed because he was running the beauty pageant) It’s not, but at the same time, he was not as was said @9, “grop[ing] little girls,” which is worse.

    Sammy Finkelman (8e96a4)

  193. By the way, for those who had issue with pre-ripping” Nancy Pelosi later said she did it to get attention because she wanted people to know that Trump’s speech was full of lies. (except she doesn’t like to use that word)

    https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/2620-0

    Q: You often counsel Members to be dignified in their response, to take the high ground? Did you step on that message by tearing up the speech?

    Speaker Pelosi. No, I did not. I tore up a manifesto of mistruths. It is very hard for us to get you to talk about the issues we are working on: H.R. 3, infrastructure and the rest. He misrepresented all of that. It was necessary to get the attention of the American people to say, ‘This is not true, and this is how it affects you.’ And I don’t need any lessons from anybody, especially the President of the United States, about dignity – dignity. Is it okay to start saying ‘four more years’ in the House of Representatives? It’s just unheard of. It is unheard of for the President to insult people there who don’t share his views, as well as to misrepresent – present falsehoods. Some would use the word lie – I don’t like to use the word lie – about what he is saying.

    So, no, I think it was completely, entirely appropriate. And considering some of the other exuberances within me, the courteous thing to do.

    She also said that when Donald Trump started talking about Stage 4 cancer, she (we? Who did she have a chance to consult?) she thought he was going to be talking about a member of Congress. If you read the transcript r listen to the video Trump indeed takes a little while to identify the person, although maye on;y Nancy Pelosi culd have thought he didn’t mean Rush Limbaugh.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/us/politics/state-of-union-transcript.html

    We have launched ambitious new initiatives to substantially improve care for Americans with kidney disease, Alzheimer’s, and those struggling with mental health. And because Congress was so good as to fund my request, new cures for childhood cancer, and we will eradicate the AIDS epidemic in America by the end of this decade. (Applause.)

    Almost every American family knows the pain when a loved one is diagnosed with a serious illness. Here tonight is a special man, beloved by millions of Americans who just received a Stage 4 advanced cancer diagnosis. This is not good news, but what is good news is that he is the greatest fighter and winner that you will ever meet. Rush Limbaugh, thank you for your decades of tireless devotion to our country. (Applause.)

    Nancy Pelosi had expected him to mention Congressman John Lewis (D-Ga.) who had announced he had stage 4 pancreatic cancer at the end of December.

    Sammy Finkelman (8e96a4)

  194. NAncy Pelosi did say “I” bit she switched to “we” in reformulating her thought.

    We want a State of the Union. Where are we, where are we going and the rest. Not, ‘Let me just show you how many guests I can draw. And let me say how I can give a medal of honor’ – do it in your own office. We don’t come in your office and do Congressional business. Why are you doing that here? Quite frankly, when he started talking about someone with stage IV cancer all that – I thought – I don’t know which stage John Lewis’ cancer is at – but when he started talking about someone’s cancer, we thought he was going to talk about John Lewis, a hero in our country.

    Sammy Finkelman (8e96a4)

  195. You often counsel Members to be dignified in their response, to take the high ground?

    Sounds like we’ve found another Russian asset who doesn’t know the difference between the high ground and the high road.

    frosty (f27e97)

  196. Dana quoting something at 5:

    “We got Scotch tape, the clear kind,” Lartey recalled in an interview. “You found pieces and taped them back together and then you gave it back to the supervisor.” The restored papers would then be sent to the National Archives to be properly filed away.

    Lartey said the papers he received included newspaper clips on which Trump had scribbled notes, or circled words; invitations; and letters from constituents or lawmakers on the Hill, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

    An Op Ed piece in the New York Times Wednesday said the people who did that were fired later (and this therefore may have stopped)

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/opinion/archives-document-destruction.html

    President Trump has long made it a practice to tear up his papers and throw them away. It is a clear violation of the Presidential Records Act, which is supposed to prevent another Watergate-style cover-up. Workers in the White House records management office who used to tape these records together say they were fired without explanation.

    Sammy Finkelman (8e96a4)

  197. What I saw:
    1. Pelosi doesn’t give Trump the customary introduction, quite consciously.
    2. Trump doesn’t shake her hand, apparently quite consciously.
    3. Pelosi rips the speech, very consciously.

    My take: Pelosi was clever when she did it because it distracted from Trump’s speech during the news cycle. But in the longer run her rip only took 1-2 seconds and will make a perfect piece of negative campaign ads – especially in close House races, maybe combined with the ASU guy screaming “SLASH REPUBLICAN THROATS!” She is the second most astute user of mass media in government and like him or hate him, she was standing behind the most astute. Trump as a hostile Maury Povich is effective for him.

    So this is a sad piece of where things are but I think Pelosi lost more than she gained because the rip will be used hundreds of times by her opponents to energize voters.

    Lazlo Toth (cbb623)

  198. Property Rights 83.

    You are clearly upset by this and feel personally threatened. That is no excuse for dispensing with logic. Trump wants to win. He wants to hurt people who oppose him. And Sanders isn’t the only Democrat in the race. Trump just wants us to think that because Sanders is the one Trump thinks he can beat.

    DRJ (15874d)

  199. You are clearly upset by this and feel personally threatened. That is no excuse for dispensing with logic. Trump wants to win. He wants to hurt people who oppose him. And Sanders isn’t the only Democrat in the race. Trump just wants us to think that because Sanders is the one Trump thinks he can beat.

    Yeah, but Biden is a complete lost cause. Buttigieg is, as of now, the establishment candidate. That’s why they’re cheating for him.

    Trivia facts: How many coin tosses did Hillary win in the 2016 Iowa Caucus? 6. How many were there? 6. How many did Buttigieg win this year? 4. How many were there? 4.

    Democrat Party establishment-favorite candidates do real good in coin tosses. Jimmy Dore has a great YouTube video about that titled “Obvious Cheating On Coin Toss In Iowa Caucus”. And I see he just published another one, although not about the coin toss shenanigans: “DNC Caught Flipping Votes From Bernie To Buttigieg”.

    You can find both on his channel.

    So, if you’re OK with them cheating their way to victory, you should be with your buddies at the DNC on the Buttigieg train, not Biden. Because, you know: ethics, principles, sacred honor.

    Make America Ordered Again (23f793)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1701 secs.