Patterico's Pontifications

9/24/2024

Constitutional Vanguard: On Saying What You Actually Believe, Even If Your Tribe Dislikes It

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:59 am

My latest discusses Liz Cheney’s endorsements of Kamala Harris and Ted Cruz’s opponent, and takes on those who criticize either or both. I discuss why she does not hyperfocus on her policy differences with Harris, and why she would endorse a Democrat for the U.S. Senate. I think the reasons are obvious. Sample:

She goes on to say, later in the interview:

[T]he Republicans have nominated somebody who – who, you know, is depraved. Somebody who shows us every day that—that, you know, he has tendencies and he’s willing to embrace things that are fundamentally a danger to—to this nation and to our Constitution. So, the choice, in my view, is not a close one.

Like me, Cheney places a lesser importance on mundane political policy issues like tax rates, and a greater importance on issues like: whether the person holding office was actually the person elected by the American people; or whether one candidate is a Putin-loving ignoramus who makes up a huge percentage of the things he says. (More about that below, in the section for paid subscribers.) The question is not about Harris or how well (or poorly) thought out Harris’s policies are. The point is that Trump is 50,000 times worse, in every way.

For paid subscribers, I discuss the issue of the fairness of the ABC moderators, and offer a different perspective: instead of focusing on who got fact-checked more, why not ask: who was allowed to tell more lies without any pushback? By that metric, the moderators were very unfair . . . to Harris.

Look again at the list of lies mentioned by Dale that I chose to reproduce here. The ones about the economy, and preparations for January 6, and tariffs, and so forth. Include the fabrications from his piece about a dozen recent Trump fabrications told over the past month that were repeated at the debate: stuff like Trump’s claim that Biden sent Harris sent to negotiate with Putin before the Ukraine war; or that Harris was the first candidate to drop out in the 2020 primary; or that everybody (including all legal scholars!) wanted Roe overturned.

One thing that they all have in common is that the ABC moderators never said a word about any of them. Unless you happened to watch Daniel Dale’s fact-check or read a fact-check online, you heard those things asserted at the debate and never heard a correction.

(Let a thousand ad hominems against Daniel Dale bloom.)

Read it here. Subscribe here.

Comments (69)

69 Responses to “Constitutional Vanguard: On Saying What You Actually Believe, Even If Your Tribe Dislikes It”

Yo
Patterico (e30aac) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:08 am
This is good:

The first thing I’ll do about the Houthis will be to read the briefing paper that my staff gives me about the Houthis. This would differentiate me from my opponent, who famously responds to briefings the same way that a dog responds to taking its earworm medication. My next act would be to turn to an adviser and say “thoughts?”, and that adviser will be some glasses-wearing egghead who was on everyone’s short list of Stodgy Foreign Policy Dweebs. That adviser will not be Omarosa or Laura Loomer or Rudy Giuliani or Linda McMahon or Jared F[]ng Kushner or God knows who else — that “black Nazi” po[]no dude in North Carolina, perhaps? I’m not quite sure what will happen after that, but my administration will already be on a trajectory towards a sane decision that the clown car of dyspeptic freaks that my opponent will assemble could never replicate.

Personally, I think Trump is a putrescence which oozed from the Abyss in almost human form to befoul and corrupt everything it touches, but for people who must have “policy” that is right on target.
nk (3e1e8b) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:48 am
Yo.

This, is horsepucky:

policy is less important in this election.

The idea that:

Trump is far worse, by orders of magnitude

Or:

that Trump is 50,000 times worse, in every way.

Fundamentally boils down to the mere fact that you largely have a personal animus towards Trump, rather than some specific policy or actions. And always has. Even before the Capt. Ahab-ish quest to challenge the election or J6. I feel the likes of you’s (Democrats, Kingzinger, Cheney) bitterly cling to your outrage that Trumps deigned to challenge the election that reinforces the existing confirmation bias you have against Trump and comically over-react the “danger” he poses.

I get not voting for Trump. I truly do…

But, you lose me with actually voting for Democrats. Because the former is defensible…you don’t need to tell anyone how you vote. But, the latter is that you’re effectively advocating for the modern progressive/statist policies that will have far reaching impact in our lives.

Unpopular opinion here – voters get what they deserve. It’s why, for me, policy is the most important aspects in this election. I know I’m very much in the minority in this mindset as I think this race is Kamala’s to lose. If Joe F’n Laughable Biden can win on a basement strategy with minimal public appearances, so can Kamala.
whembly (477db6) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:54 am
“policy is the most important aspects in this election.”

Policy can be successfully opposed. Gross character defects are tougher to counter. This is version 10,763 of the argument that Trump is unfit. You don’t elect someone unfit to control DoD, DoJ, and our foreign policy and make key appointments. What would Trump need to do to make him a greater threat?
AJ_Liberty (5f05c3) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:39 am
policy is the most important aspects in this election

Let me know when policies are discussed by Trump, aside from un-conservative policies like expanding Obamacare or bribing particular voting blocs with unlikely to be enacted tax breaks. As Karl Rove has pointed out, Trump is more focused on Taylor Swift, Haitian pet eaters, and Kamala Harris name-calling than challenging Harris on policy.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:58 am
> bitterly cling to your outrage that Trumps deigned to challenge the election

he spread lies that have undermined the legitimacy of the system.

i don’t think it was intentional — i think he’s just a self-obsessed narcissist with no ability to understand or care what effect his thrashing about has on the people around him — but even unintended it’s the biggest threat to the country since the civil war.

and if it *was* intentional, which I can’t completely discount even though I doubt it?
aphrael (8c9441) — 9/24/2024 @ 10:01 am
policy is the most important aspects in this election

Then again, there is Trump’s solution to every problem, imposing a 20% tariff across the board and 60% on China. Tariffs are a regressive tax and could cost Americans more than $2,600 a year. Yesterday he threatened John Deere with a 200% tariff if it moved manufacturing to Mexico. Apparently he plans to use tariffs as a political cudgel.

Then there is Trump’s plan to impose price controls on credit by capping credit card interest at 10%. That’s lower than the legislative proposal from Bernie Sanders and AOC, which would cap the interest rate at 15%. Capping the interest rate would only deprive those with subprime credit scores. If that’s his motivation, he should admit it, but I doubt it is; it’s election pandering. It also makes it harder for Trump to criticize Harris’s price controls on groceries.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 10:17 am
Pat, to be fair “mundane political policy issues like tax rates” are in fact VERY important. This isn’t to disagree with you: I view Trump as such a threat to our nation that I also put policy issues on the back burner, but I long for the Republican party to come back to a place where these VERY IMPORTANT policy differences can be the thing we focus on.
Nate (be5ee2) — 9/24/2024 @ 10:21 am
whembly, if policy is so important, can you make sense of Trump’s policy below for lowering prices?

Sharyl Attkisson: Kamala Harris has been very short on specifics when it comes to economy, other than saying she wants an “opportunity economy”. What are the specific mechanics of how prices come down? You know, the steps that would be taken in a second term for you?

Trump: So first of all, she can’t do an interview. She could never do this interview because you ask questions like give me a specific answer. She talks about her lawn when she was growing up. This woman is not equipped to be president. She’s not equipped to deal with President Xi, who I was very, I took in hundreds of billions of dollars with him and Putin. We had no war with Putin. Remember, and I’m just gonna go off just for this. With Bush, they took a lot. Russia. With Biden, they’re trying to take everything. With Obama, they took a lot. With Trump, Russia took nothing. Just remember that, you know, it’s a little, a little chart. But what happened? And when you look at what took place was so sad, when they took over, they cut the oil way down and oil started going through the roof. It was gonna go to $10 a gallon. It was gonna go to numbers that nobody’s ever seen. And so they went back to the Trump drilling, they said, “let it go back”. That was the only good thing. But they stopped because I would be there, but four years later, I would be triple what the number was. Right now they’re just about even where I was. But they only did that because of the fact that they eventually have an election coming up. And you remember at the beginning what happened. That’s one of the reasons that Putin went in because it went to $100 a barrel instead of $40 a barrel. And he could fight all the wars he wants with those kind of numbers, cause he’s a big seller of oil and gas. So what happens is they went back to what I was doing, just said reopen. Just reopen. It wasn’t hard. It’s so crazy what they wanna do. They’re gonna destroy lives. They’re gonna destroy the, what they have done to this country. And especially in the sense of allowing millions and millions of people come in because that’s something, you know, we can fix the gasoline situation and we can fix the, anything.

Sharyl: Do prices come down magically because it’s not them.

Trump: They come down with energy and they come down with interest rates. We’re gonna get, as I told you, we’re gonna get energy down by 50% in 12 months. We’re gonna have it. It’s gonna be a major smash on energy. If you look at the energy for, and I’m not just talking about cars, I’m talking about air conditioning, heating your basic energy, operating a bakery, operating any kind of a business, it’s all having to do with energy. That was where they started wrong. When they cut way back on what I did, and again, just so you understand, they then let it go back to where it was, which was very smart thing. Otherwise you would’ve had, I think you would’ve had a depression if you want to know the truth. But energy was rising at a level that nobody had ever seen. And then they said: “Go back, go back”. They were telling people: “Go back to your wells, go back to drilling, go back to fracking. Do whatever you have to do.” But if they win the day after, they’re going all the way. They were only doing that because of an election coming up. They’re going all the way. It’s madness. And what they’ve done to our country is mad.

Leaving aside the easy observation that his 78-year old brain is turning to mush, out of all the “weaving” and word salad above, his only comment about lowering prices was “get energy down by 50% in 12 months”. How does he do that? Because it sounds like a worthless boast to me, a raft of contentless bullsh-t as he offered no path or prescription toward reaching that objective.

In effect, Trump actually said nothing about policy, no “specific mechanics” and no “steps that would be taken”. Instead, Trump offered only an aspiration that would make the Underpants Gnomes proud.

This isn’t an issues election, it’s a character election. Trump can hardly complete a full sentence on policy, so all Kamala has to do is offer a complete sentence or two and she’s already supplied more policy detail than Trump.
Paul Montagu (de60e0) — 9/24/2024 @ 10:35 am
but I long for the Republican party to come back to a place where these VERY IMPORTANT policy differences can be the thing we focus on.

The Republican Party has gone full populist, so that won’t happen.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 10:37 am
Patterico, I agree that Jonah was too far out over his skis about Liz Cheney, because she clearly stated her reservations about Kamala’s issues.
I’m still okay with conservatives voting for Kamala or protest-voting someone else. Either way, they’re each rejecting Trump in their own way.
If Trump was down single digits instead of 21 here in WA State, I’d reconsider.
Paul Montagu (de60e0) — 9/24/2024 @ 10:41 am
Rip, they are right now but they don’t have to stay that way.
Nate (21e6fb) — 9/24/2024 @ 11:06 am
[T]he Republicans have nominated somebody who – who, you know, is depraved. Somebody who shows us every day that—that, you know, he has tendencies and he’s willing to embrace things that are fundamentally a danger to—to this nation and to our Constitution. So, the choice, in my view, is not a close one.

This doesn’t sound like someone who voted and endorsed Trump in both 2016 and 2020. Sounds more like someone who was scorned and has taken it personally. Suddenly in 2024 who she endorses matters. The Cheneys have put themselves before country since the lucrative Halliburton and WMD years, and this is no different.
lloyd (4bd832) — 9/24/2024 @ 12:25 pm
The question is not about Harris or how well (or poorly) thought out Harris’s policies are. The point is that Trump is 50,000 times worse, in every way.

Unless you actually know what Harris’s policies are, you cannot judge the candidates by this metric. You cannot compare a known and an unknown, no matter how much you may dislike the known.

That’s why her unwillingness/inability to articulate her platform is disqualifying.
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 9/24/2024 @ 12:26 pm
Trump’s policy is that life is like a box of chocolates. When you finish the last box, you cry and beg and scream and threaten until Mommy sends the chauffeur to get you another one.
nk (3e1e8b) — 9/24/2024 @ 12:49 pm
Rip, they are right now but they don’t have to stay that way.

Nate (21e6fb) — 9/24/2024 @ 11:06 am

?
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:08 pm
Rip, they are right now but they don’t have to stay that way.

Nate (21e6fb) — 9/24/2024 @ 11:06 am

I get it. The Republican Party old guard is, well, old and retiring. Up and comers like Josh Hawley, Elise Stefanik, JD Vance, Kirsti Noem, Vivek Ramaswamy, Kari Lake, Eric Schmitt, Ken Paxton, Adam Laxalt, Ron DeSantis etc. have no interest in returning to the “go along to get along” Republican Party of the Bushes, Cheneys, McConnells, and Haleys.

To think otherwise is wishful thinking. Those days are gone.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:25 pm
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 9/24/2024 @ 12:26 pm

Unless you actually know what Harris’s policies are, you cannot judge the candidates by this metric.

I think you can make a good guess.

Basically, what Biden did, except she will do a little bit more of what is asked for by the “left” – and a lot of the ideas she throws out are going nowhere, (like doing something about “price gouging” in grocery stores, which is just for the election, or the idea taxing unrealized capital gains, which is activated more long term but will never pass or a bill restoring Roe v Wade rules, also not likely to pass)

And she will sign any bill supported by Democrats in Congress.

Most likely to pass: Admission of most of DC as a state. It will take a year.

This will also leave 3 Electoral votes to be cast by a very few number of people, like people who live in the White House, but a third party could register a lot of homeless people in District of Columbia. (But Congress could arrange to not have a vote for president in 2028 in what remains of DC)

Things to look out for: A variation on court packing, some changes in voting law, an ethics code for the Supreme Court, some higher taxes – and possibly some credits or exemptions.

The Haitians and others who live in Springfield will be protected, quietly, by extending Temporary Protected Status (or – a long shot – legalizing them for good) while Trump will have many deported as illegal aliens after letting that expire.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:28 pm
stuff like Trump’s claim that Biden sent Harris sent to negotiate with Putin before the Ukraine war;

That’s a minor distortion – Kamala Harris was apparently one of the numerous people sent to Ukraine to warn Zelensky hat Russia was planning to invade. Se publicly warned Putin against invading.

https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-joe-biden-united-states-europe-vladimir-putin-0bf64906713725d75535cf8912e0b9ee

Published 3:20 PM EDT, February 19, 2022
Share
MUNICH (AP) — Vice President Kamala Harris said Saturday that the world has arrived at “a decisive moment in history” as the Biden administration warns a Russian invasion of Ukraine in the coming days is highly likely.

During a meeting with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, Harris vowed that the U.S. was committed to Ukraine’s sovereignty. The vice president also used an address at the conference to reiterate the Biden administration’s promise to hit Russia with economy-jarring sanctions if it invades Ukraine again, following the 2014 seizure of Crimea.

“Let me be clear, I can say with absolute certainty: If Russia further invades Ukraine, the United States, together with our allies and partners, will impose significant and unprecedented economic costs,” Harris said…

If you like, you can call this an attempted negotiation with Russia.

The threat was not taken seriously. She wasn’t even warning that the attack would be a failure.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:37 pm
I think you can make a good guess.
………
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:28 pm

LOL! That really assumes facts not in evidence, like the Democrats retaining control of the Senate and the House.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:37 pm
I think you can make a good guess.
………
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:28 pm

LOL! That really assumes facts not in evidence, like the Democrats retaining control of the Senate and the House.

Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:37 pm

And assuming that Harris will win the election.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:38 pm
About the only specific from Harris – and it’s snake oil based on voters’ total ignorance of the constitution:

https://www.npr.org/2024/09/23/nx-s1-5123955/kamala-harris-abortion-roe-v-wade-filibuster

Harris says she would support ending the filibuster to bring back Roe v. Wade

Updated September 24, 2024 1:13 PM ET
Heard on Morning Edition

…Vice President Harris says she would support eliminating the filibuster in the U.S. Senate in order to bring back federal protections for a woman’s right to an abortion as they existed under Roe v. Wade.

Harris outlined her position during an interview Monday with Wisconsin Public Radio, saying that when it comes to the issue of abortion, she believes the Senate should do away with the filibuster rule that requires a 60-vote threshold for most legislation to pass.

“I’ve been very clear, I think we should eliminate the filibuster for Roe, and get us to the point where 51 votes would be what we need to actually put back in law the protections for reproductive freedom and for the ability of every person and every woman to make decisions about their own body and not have their government tell them what to do,” Harris told WPR host Kate Archer Kent.

Her position is that the Senate should carve out another exception to the filibuster rule but you might miss that detail.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:44 pm
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:37 pm

like the Democrats retaining control of the Senate and the House.

You can only talk about what a president will support.

Of course it makes a great deal of difference who has control of each House of Congress and if there are any dissenters in each party and what happens to the filibuster rule.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:47 pm
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:44 pm

Harris’s opinion on the filibuster doesn’t mean squat because a) she has no role, as it is a Senate rule; and b) the Republicans have nearly a lock to control the Senate next term.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:51 pm
But, the latter is that you’re effectively advocating for the modern progressive/statist policies that will have far reaching impact in our lives.

whembly (477db6) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:54 am

Terminating the Constitution and letting Russia “do whatever the hell they want” will have an even bigger impact, or did you miss those statements?
norcal (3c8ed0) — 9/24/2024 @ 2:00 pm
Rip,

there is nowhere near a guarantee of a Republican Senate in 2024, but if there is… now do 2026.
NJRob (95c8d8) — 9/24/2024 @ 2:26 pm
Rip,

there is nowhere near a guarantee of a Republican Senate in 2024, but if there is… now do 2026.

NJRob (95c8d8) — 9/24/2024 @ 2:26 pm

LOL! Projecting election results two years in advance is a fool’s errand. It’s easier to project the results of an election 42 days from now.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 2:39 pm
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 1:51 pm

b) the Republicans have nearly a lock to control the Senate next term.

Because ted Cruz won’t lose, however despicable he may be?
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 3:18 pm
Thank you for admitting you have no idea what Harris will do and that you’re only guessing. Which, by definition, means it is impossible to say that Trump would be worse.

What you can know is that a Harris administration will be just as open and transparent as the Harris campaign. Do you like Chief Executives knowing they’re completely unaccountable? Because that’s what we’ll have.
SaveFarris (efa52a) — 9/24/2024 @ 5:04 pm
Because ted Cruz won’t lose, however despicable he may be?

Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/24/2024 @ 3:18 pm

He’ll probably win by 2-3%, similar to his win over Beto. Trump will drag him over the finish line.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/24/2024 @ 5:17 pm
Harris is within the boundaries of normalcy. Trump has been, is, and will be worse than any other normal person. Let’s keep him “has been” when it comes to the Presidency.
nk (3e1e8b) — 9/24/2024 @ 6:00 pm
Harris is within the boundaries of normalcy.

Objection, your Honor. Facts not in evidence.

In fact, the one time she had a chance to stand up for election integrity…

https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/may/10/fact-checking-kamala-harris-claim-stacey-abrams-an/
SaveFarris (69317a) — 9/24/2024 @ 6:44 pm
A drop of partisanship versus the barrel of Trump’s four-year, nationwide “rigged and stolen election” con game which got Ashli Babbitt killed, hundreds with criminal convictions and prison sentences, lawyers disbarred, money in Trump’s pockets, and is now tuning up for this election too.
nk (6f22ae) — 9/24/2024 @ 7:23 pm
You couldn’t have said it better, nk.
norcal (3c8ed0) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:13 pm
@33 A four-year nationwide “border security” con game which got Laken Riley and countless others murdered, thousands with criminal convictions and prison sentences, lawyers defending lawlessness, money in Biden family pockets, voting irregularities, and will continue on overdrive for the next four years.
lloyd (c7d633) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:43 pm
Border security has been an issue for decades. Overt attempts to overturn an election? Not so much.
norcal (3c8ed0) — 9/24/2024 @ 8:56 pm
@36 We have not been flying migrants around the country for decades. Asylum has not been gamed for decades. We have not operated an unaccompanied minor shuttle service for decades. We have not had Democrat mayors and governors admitting a migrant crisis exists for decades. We had covert attempts to overturn the 2016 election, under color of law, which somehow are more tolerable (in your mind) than overt attempts by clueless morons on one day.
lloyd (c7d633) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:10 pm
Asylum has not been gamed for decades.

lloyd (c7d633) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:10 pm

I beg to differ. I had a front row seat.
norcal (3c8ed0) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:22 pm
Fine. You didn’t have millions routinely crossing and giving themselves up to BP for bogus asylum claims for decades.
lloyd (c7d633) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:25 pm
You couldn’t have said it better, nk.

He could have been much more succinct:

“It’s okay when my side does it.”

That’s what nk’s entire argument boils down to.
SaveFarris (efa52a) — 9/25/2024 @ 4:02 am
Some years ago I came to two unpleasant conclusions: As president Barack Obama told at least one order of magnitude more falsehoods than George W. Bush. As president the Loser told at least two orders of magnitudes more falsehoods than Bush.

Do those very rough estimates seem about right to you?
Jim Miller (ff03ae) — 9/25/2024 @ 10:14 am
What was the worst falsehood George W. Bush told, Jim?
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 10:16 am
That Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Maybe that one rings a bell in sockland?
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 11:10 am
That Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Did that falsehood cost anyone their lives?

If so, was it more or less people than perished under the Loser’s lies?
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 11:58 am
It seems to me that getting people killed through a falsehood, as a baseline metric, would make the orders of magnitudes above that baseline to be something incredible. I am braced for the grim news Jim and Klink will be sharing shortly.
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:03 pm
Did that falsehood cost anyone their lives?

Even in Sockland they’re telling you you’re too dumb to post.
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:09 pm
That Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Did that falsehood cost anyone their lives?

Operation Iraqi Freedom (2003-2010) resulted in 4,418 US military deaths (of which 3,481 were in combat; 937 “non-hostile”) with 31,994 wounded in action; and 13 DOD civilian deaths.
Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:10 pm
Is Sockland the alternate universe where posers pretend they have cool cars only to be tripped up by not knowing the first thing about engines and transmissions?

LOL

Anyway, I guess the latest from you means you prefer to writhe about if your self made trap at 11:10am?

You really don’t know how to not say something doltish.
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:14 pm
Thank you, Rip.

With that stat in mind, Jim and Klink, what falsehood did The Loser tell that cost more lives than GW’s?

(Hat tip to Klink for pointing out GW’ falsehood; I couldn’t have done it without him 🙂)
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:17 pm
Well, there’s the whole 1,000,000 in a thing that he encouraged, and is encouraging, his buddy to do.
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:22 pm
Kaliningrad, interesting address.
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:23 pm
Like I said, doltish.

I expect Jim will at least try.
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:25 pm
“I went in yesterday and there was a television screen, and I said, ‘This is genius.’ Putin declares a big portion of the Ukraine — of Ukraine — Putin declares it as independent. Oh, that’s wonderful, he used the word ‘independent’ and ‘we’re gonna go out and we’re gonna go in and we’re gonna help keep peace.’ You gotta say that’s pretty savvy.”
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:29 pm
Start here, Klink.

There will be a test later.
BuDuh (19bc15) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:29 pm
“NATO was busted until I came along, I said everybody’s going to pay. They said, ‘Well, if we don’t pay, are you still going to protect us?’ I said, ‘Absolutely not.’ They couldn’t believe the answer. And everybody, you never saw more money pour in.”

“One of the presidents of a big country stood up said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay and we’re attacked by Russia will you protect us? I said, ‘You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent?’ He said, ‘Yes. Let’s say that happened.’ ‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills. And the money came flowing in.”

“And that’s why they have money today because of what I did and then I hear that they like Obama better. They should like Obama better. You know why? Because he didn’t ask for anything. We were like the stupid country of the world and we’re not going to be the stupid country of the world any longer.”
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:33 pm
Hmm

“When Putin saw that, he said, ‘You know what? I think we’re gonna go in and maybe take my …’ This was his dream. I talked to him about it. His dream”
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:37 pm
Still Kaliningrad?
Colonel Klink (ret) (96f56a) — 9/25/2024 @ 12:37 pm
Asylum has not been gamed for decades.

lloyd (c7d633) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:10 pm

I beg to differ. I had a front row seat.

norcal (3c8ed0) — 9/24/2024 @ 9:22 pm

There was an article about that years ago in the New Yorker.

They don’t investigate. They consult Wikipedia to see if a similar thing, or the very same thing claimed, happened.
Sammy Finkelman (e4ef09) — 9/25/2024 @ 2:06 pm
Washington Post fact checker Glenn Kessler discusses “falsehoods”, not “lies”.

What’s the difference? A person telling a lie knows that they are lying; a person telling a falsehood may believe what they are saying, or may not have bothered to check.

I think Kessler’s policy is right, since he doesn’t claim to have the ability to look inside minds. Nor do I.

But the sheer volume of lies matters, too, and, after a point, it is reasonable to doubt everything a compulsive liar says.
Jim Miller (63b128) — 9/25/2024 @ 4:14 pm
#3, Whembley: wasting your breath with rip Murdock and anyone else that thinks Trump is not about policies:

(1), control the border (as he tried to do in 2017-2020, despite swarms of inunctions from Judge Tigar),

(2) limit the flood of “refugees” (“my husband was mean to me.” “Ok, you’re in”) from Hillary Clinton’s projected 110,000 and higher to less than 40,000;

(3), export energy to drop the balance of payments gap;

(4), modernize our nukes; (opposed by Biden who proposed dropping that modernization plan, (Politico 2/21/22, “Biden Team Weighs Killing trump’s new nuclear weapons”);

The list goes on, but all Rip sees is Taylor Swift (which is OK in a way: at least Rip has a good appreciation of shapes).

Similarly others here vote based on feelings: none of them address any of the policies trump endorsed and promoted.

But anyone voting for an admin that was ready to dump Trump’s modernized nukes, has encouraged the largest land war in Europe since 1945 (yes he did-sorry of you can’t see that), bumbled out of Afghanistan and cuddled with Iran–is beyond hope.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (b80f42) — 9/25/2024 @ 7:31 pm
But the sheer volume of lies matters, too, and, after a point, it is reasonable to doubt everything a compulsive liar says.

There’s a pretty gaping hole in your logic though. Kessler, Dale, and the like scrutinized every single syllable that flowed forth via Trump’s mouth and Twitter feed. Which would be fine, in and of itself: Presidents are SUPPOSED to be held accountable.

But then you take a look at their performance the last 4 years where they spent the entire time either on vacation or … still fact-checking Trump as a candidate. Almost completely ignoring the current residents of 1600 and the Naval Observatory as if they didn’t exist.

You can’t compare Trump’s “sheer volume of lies” against Biden/Harris because they weren’t judged on the same scale. And you can’t use the excuse of “Well Biden just didn’t tell as many lies” because they didn’t fact-check his statements and say “Yep, it checks out!”. They just pretended Biden didn’t exist.

THAT’S the issue. If Trump returns to office, you can guarantee that the press will do everything in their power (and everything outside their power) to investigate the snot out of Trump in an attempt to bring him down. If Harris assumes the Oval Office, you can guarantee that the press will continue their 4 year vacation and never question authority. In fact, they’ll question anyone (like Joe the Plumber) who dares to go against our Dear Leader.

I want an President that is held to account.
What about you?
SaveFarris (79ab12) — 9/26/2024 @ 5:10 am
60. On his best day, do you consider Trump capable of writing that comment you wrote?

There’s a joke that goes: “Why are New Yorkers so depressed?” “Because the light at the end of the tunnel is New Jersey.”

Do you want J. D. Vance to be the best thing you could even hope to look forward to in the event Trump is elected?
nk (7da3b2) — 9/26/2024 @ 5:20 am
61. “Held” is the keyword. It is one thing knowing that a President has done things for which he should be held accountable and another actually “holding” him accountable. Trump has avoided or slipped out of every hold so far.
nk (7da3b2) — 9/26/2024 @ 5:25 am
@63

61. “Held” is the keyword. It is one thing knowing that a President has done things for which he should be held accountable and another actually “holding” him accountable. Trump has avoided or slipped out of every hold so far.

nk (7da3b2) — 9/26/2024 @ 5:25 am

The Andrew Weissman Persecution™, sorry, The Mueller Special Counsel investigated his ass.

Congress impeached his ass…twice.

The courts refused to entertain his election challenges.

The fricking media, loses their ever-loving minds over EVERYTHING… that created doldrums that led to Democrats retaking the House during his 1st administration.

He LOST the 2020 election.

You have a very skewed perspective that “Trump has avoided or slipped out of every hold so far”…
whembly (477db6) — 9/26/2024 @ 7:37 am
62: So the country and its citizens are benefitted by an open border, weakened military, government-wide DEI, Sam Brinton in charge of nuclear waste, and someone who believes in dumping the electoral college and packing the USSC? You must believe so, since like many here, you implicitly endorse that by your choice.

Good choices are hard. Sometimes the uncle that says unpleasant things is right, and the comforting, smiling purveyor of bromides, and gauzy platitudes is wrong. So, when the court is packed, the military further degraded, the border even less than now, Denver’s hospitals are not just asking for federal aid but insolvent, etc., at least your vote will have had the desired effect.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (37c8c6) — 9/26/2024 @ 8:59 pm
………..modernize our nukes; (opposed by Biden who proposed dropping that modernization plan, (Politico 2/21/22, “Biden Team Weighs Killing trump’s new nuclear weapons”);

The list goes on, but all Rip sees is Taylor Swift (which is OK in a way: at least Rip has a good appreciation of shapes).
……….

The Biden Administration currently is developing a the B61-13 gravity bomb, for use against hardened and large military targets, and is continuing the LGM-35 Sentinel ICBM replacement missile program.

The Biden Administration has also adopted a new nuclear strategy that envisions coordinated nuclear confrontations China, Russia, and North Korea, something the Trump administration never considered.

Although former President Donald J. Trump confidently predicted that Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader, would surrender his nuclear weapons after their three in-person meetings, the opposite happened. Mr. Kim has doubled down, and now has more than 60 weapons, officials estimate, and the fuel for many more.

If you read my post, the reference to Taylor Swift was made by Karl Rove, who was referencing Trump’s “I Hate Taylor Swift” screed, not me. Too skinny.
Rip Murdock (7b8a68) — 9/26/2024 @ 9:51 pm
Although former President Donald J. Trump confidently predicted that Kim Jong-un, the North Korean leader, would surrender his nuclear weapons after their three in-person meetings, the opposite happened. Mr. Kim has doubled down, and now has more than 60 weapons, officials estimate, and the fuel for many more.

Rip Murdock (7b8a68) — 9/26/2024 @ 9:51 pm

The Norks will surrender their nuclear weapons when Mexico pays for the wall, and Obamacare is replaced, and the budget is balanced. It will be tremendous.
norcal (f27989) — 9/26/2024 @ 10:07 pm
Bill Clinton and W ought to be hauled before the bar to answer for Kim getting those weapons. It should never have been allowed.
Kevin M (2f4912) — 9/26/2024 @ 11:33 pm
66, Rip:

You seem to have posted that w/o any of your usual, careful analysis: Its nice that we’re “developing” a new bomb: really cute. That’s ordinance that assumes control of the skies. (And like we really “need” a new bomb).

But while the Chinese and the Russians have hypersonic missels on order, workable ones, the admin ready to dump Trump’s new gen nukes, the admin you seem to want, touts that the still plodding process to replace Minuteman III’s with a “Sentinel,” – -that was proposed in 2014–and still has yet to build. So, no progress, no intention to progress,-and the tech is already outdated compared to the hyper-sonics the Russian and Chinese are stocking.

North Korea: at least he TRIED something new. No one else had or has. NoKo just keeps festering. I applaud anyone who tries something to defuse that: you seem to endorse just glowering at it and letting it grow.
Harcourt Fenton Mudd (37c8c6) — 9/27/2024 @ 8:34 am

9/24/2024

Constitutional Vanguard: On Saying What You Actually Believe, Even If Your Tribe Dislikes It

69 Responses to “Constitutional Vanguard: On Saying What You Actually Believe, Even If Your Tribe Dislikes It”

Leave a Reply

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out