U.S. President Donald Trump: It Is Bad to Have U.S. Citizens from Iran
The President of the United States tweeted this early this morning:
Just out that the Obama Administration granted citizenship, during the terrible Iran Deal negotiation, to 2,500 Iranians – including to government officials. How big (and bad) is that?
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 3, 2018
The first thing to realize here is that it’s unclear whether it’s actually true. President Trump has a habit of proclaiming the truth of things he sees on the teevee, even when he has access to actual governmental information that could confirm or deny the teevee allegations. (Remember his false tweets about how Obama wiretapped him, for example.) A Fox News report emerged in the last 24 hours making the accusation about the 2500 Iranian immigrants — and the story seems to be based on the as-yet unsubstantiated allegations of “a senior cleric and member of parliament” in Iran named Hojjat al-Islam Mojtaba Zolnour. I suspect this report ended up on the Fox News network, and our Cable News Watcher in Chief pounced.
Is Zolnour telling the truth? I have no idea. The Washington Times reports:
“This sounds like totally made-up B.S.,” said Marie Harf, a former State Department spokeswoman who now works for Fox News.
The current State Department said in a statement to Fox News: “We’re not going to comment on every statement by an Iranian official.”
Moreover, the numbers don’t appear to reflect any particular bump in either green cards or citizenship for Iranians during this period. According to the Fox News story:
Though Zolnour did not mention anyone by name during the interview, several children of current and former Iranian officials live in the United States, including Ali Fereydoun, whose father Hossein Fereydoun is the brother of and special aide to Rouhani; and Fatemeh Ardeshir Larijani, whose father Ali Larijani is speaker of parliament.
There is no suggestion either of these people received citizenship in the wake of the Iranian nuclear deal. It’s also unclear if Zolnour meant citizenship or a green card.
In 2015, 13,114 people born in Iran were issued green cards, while 13,298 were issued one in 2016, according to figures from the Department for Homeland Security. In 2015, 10,344 Iranians became naturalized, with a further 9,507 in 2016.
But putting aside the question of the tweet’s truth, there seems to be no plausible way to read Trump’s tweet other than as a bigoted rejection of Iranian citizens. When I raised this issue on Twitter, Trump defenders told me that certainly the Iranians admitted would have been the bad ones that the Ayatollah didn’t want. (There is no evidence of that, of course, but a certain species of Trump supporter doesn’t require evidence to defend Trump.) But even if we accepted the notion that the 2500 (if they exist) were chosen for being antithetical to the views of the Ayatollah, that could easily mean that they were among the least fundamentalist and Islamist of possible emigres. And indeed, according to the Fox News report, Zolnour, the cleric making the accusation, said the new immigrants were undermining Iran’s interests:
He estimated that between 30 and 60 were studying in the U.S. while the rest of them were working in the country “against our national interests.”
He’s talking about Iran’s interests, not ours. Wouldn’t those be the most desirable of Iranian immigrants, and not the least?
No, it seems that the real problem here for Trump is that we admitted people from Iran. And apparently Trump thinks that Iran is bad and therefore U.S. citizens who come from Iran are bad.
And this is both ignorant and bigoted. The Iranian immigrants I know are among the most patriotic people I’ve ever met. Keep in mind that after 9/11, the citizens of Tehran supported the United States:
In Iran, vast crowds turned out on the streets and held candlelit vigils for the victims. Sixty-thousand spectators respected a minute’s silence at Tehran’s football stadium.
When the President of the United States puts out a statement that suggests that it’s a bad thing to have U.S. citizens who hail from Iran, he sends a message to U.S. citizens here who come from Iran: you are not welcome. It is a bad thing that you are here.
In short, this tweet makes President Donald J. Trump look like a real asshole.
[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]
Here is hoping that there is a good discussion with the usual nonsense. It seems to me that everything today is about Narrative—right and left—without concern about truth or consistency. Sloganeering.
Fingers crossed, Patterico.
Simon Jester (79a3c0) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:08 amJust when you start to think that Trump may not be a demented clown ….
This story is obviously horsesh!t. Did he bother to read past the clickbait headline? Even that has :Iran official as the source. But this is the guy who retweeted a British Nazi’s tirade about Muslims in the UK.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:16 amIn short, this tweet makes President Donald J. Trump look like a real asshole.
He IS a real assh0le. That was never in dispute. Sometimes you need one. It’s the assHAT part I could do without.
Kevin M (5d3e49) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:22 am“But putting aside the question of the tweet’s truth, there seems to be no plausible way to read Trump’s tweet other than as a bigoted rejection of Iranian citizens.”
Is it total nonsense to read it as implying there was a quid pro quo of granting favored (by the Iranian govt) Iranians, including govt officials, US citizenship, as part of the deal that also involved secret pallets of cash?
harkin (ef4f0e) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:39 amWhen the President of the United States puts out a statement that suggests that it’s a bad thing to have U.S. citizens who hail from Iran, he sends a message to U.S. citizens here who come from Iran: you are not welcome. It is a bad thing that you are here.
That’s the message Trump meant to send. Just because Trump tweets during bio breaks doesn’t mean the message isn’t clear, thought through, and calculatedly vile.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:40 amIf Trump is an asshole rinos and no trumpers are turds in a punch bowl.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:55 amBut putting aside the question of the tweet’s truth, there seems to be no plausible way to read Trump’s tweet other than as a bigoted rejection of Iranian citizens.
India, Pakistan, Israel and France have nuclear weapons. Isn’t it bigoted to say they’re not entitled to one?
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:56 amIf Trump is so g.d. Bad why don’t you peeps move to Iran? And, hey throw a burka on.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:57 amThe flicking booshes got us into this mess. Such a traitorous family.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:00 amSo glad President Trump is making America Great Again.
“India, Pakistan, Israel and France have nuclear weapons. Isn’t it bigoted to say they’re not entitled to one?”
– random viking
Isn’t that a complete and transparent “SQUIRREL!” argument on your part?
Leviticus (efada1) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:01 amZolnour “claimed it was done as a favor to senior Iranian officials linked to President Hassan Rouhani, and he alleged the move sparked a competition among Iranian officials over whose children would benefit from the scheme.”
Yes, one would have to be a bigot to see something wrong with this.
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:03 amWithout denying that I have no insight into President Trump’s thought processes and that I have no way to prove this reading, it does occur to me, reading the Fox report, that what Mr. Trump may be objecting to is not the Iranian origin of these citizens in and of itself, but that American citizenship was essentially granted to the children of key officials of a hostile and untrustworthy nation as a bribe in order to secure the agreement. However unlikely one thinks said children to be an actual threat, it’s a defensible stance to hold that national citizenship should not be used as a casual commodity of exchange in political dealmaking, especially with governments with a demonstrated history of hostility and illiberal behaviour.
The tweet may also, as the original article notes, have been intended to further drive a widening wedge between Tehran’s elite and the ordinary Iranian populace. It is hard to believe a government’s calls for “Death to America” if they send their own children to study there.
None of this means the President was not being an a**hole or that there may not be fallout from such tweets against innocent Iranian-Americans, but for what it’s worth, I don’t think the people already likely to believe this needed this as confirmation, nor are those already skeptical of Trump’s opinions likely to be swayed.
Stephen J. (308ea7) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:06 amYou could say that the President thought that linking the issuance of Green Cards/granting of citizenship to children of Iranian government officials as part of the Iran deal, would be even further evidence of the corrupt nature of that transaction, which he has criticized consistently since the campaign.
Or does the granting of 2500 Green Cards/citizenship — whichever might have been the case — improve the deal in your eyes, given that the Iranian citizens in Iran supported the US after 9/11.
How much time must pass, how many US servicemen must die at the hands of the AQ forces and their proxies (EFP’s — remember those) before its not racist to suggest that it’s perhaps not the best policy to have rewarded or encouraged the regime behind those efforts, i.e., that it was “bad” idea?
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:08 amThe question is: Is Donald Trump stupid, or does he think the American people are stupid?
I don’t think he;s that stupid, and I think it’s more like he hopes the American people are stupid. And maybe not even that, really.
I think he’s just trying to be consistent. He has excluded most citizens of Iran from even visiting the United States, and he’s justifying his policy by pretending some result of the pre-Trump policy is horrible.
He’s got to say that doing things on the basis of citizenship, without looking at much of anything else, is right.
He’ll go on with this until somebody (somebody in politics) makes an argument against him.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:17 amThat one actually came from Mark Levin, on the radio, and was repeated by Breitbart News online.
Was that also on Fox News?
In any case Trump probably heard that second hand.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:19 amBut Trump’s in-laws selling investor green cards to the Chicoms for $500K-$1 million a pop is okay?
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:21 amIf Trump wanted to make a point about the corrupt nature of the Obama deal, he should have tweeted about that … instead of targeting citizens or permanent residents who came from Iran but are now living in America. Trump likes the drama. He thrives on it and his political status improves because of it.
But that doesn’t mean acting like Trump is the only way to succeed. mg’s dreaded Bush Presidents had strong support when they spoke out against bad policies and people in the world. They just didn’t do it enough. By the way, Bush 41 was a successful and wealthy businessman In 1966 is company was worth $350M, which would be $8B today. That is far more than Trump’s worth.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:23 amThere are about 1 million people of Iranian descent living in the United States. They are almost all, of course, loyal to the United States and not Iran. It’s like Trump forgot that the mullahs are an unpopular dictatorship.
About 2% of peoplke who ask for it are receivuing waivers.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/26/world/americas/trump-travel-ban-effects.html
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:23 amAnd for that story we don’t have some alleged Iranian cleric. We have recorded statements by Jared Kushner’s sister.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:23 amYou know who else targeted people living in America based on their common beliefs and/or background? Obama’s IRS and Lois Lerner. Trump is just like Obama.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:25 amBy the way, Bush 41 was a successful and wealthy businessman In 1966 is company was worth $350M, which would be $8B today. That is far more than Trump’s worth.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:23 am
Not sure what relevance this has, other than DRJ signaling her vote for Zuckerberg in 2020.
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:26 amConsidering how many Iranian nationals Obama have a pass on, who had been convicted or pled guilty ‘re the Iran deal, it’s worth examining,
Narciso (929b9e) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:27 am22. The relevance of DRJ pointing this out is that Schlichterites are constantly pounding on Trump’s non-existent business genius.
23. And Trump still looks like a Grade-A a$$hole. Change my mind.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:31 amIsn’t that a complete and transparent “SQUIRREL!” argument on your part?
Leviticus (efada1) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:01 am
I agree that it is. As is “putting aside the question of the tweet’s truth”. Is the story behind the tweet true? Who cares, Trump’s a bigot!
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:32 amWhat grants US Presidents the authority to bestow citizenship on groups of people, rather than on individuals who have passed background checks, examination procedures and pledged allegiance to our nation and no other?
When did the American people, or their elected representatives, agree to countenance such potentiality destructive powers?
ropelight (da1be9) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:34 am26. Immigration and naturalization powers are expressly granted in the constitution. In fact, it’s one of the few broadly defined powers that the federal government is given in the constitution. Whether the federales should have that power or not may be debatable, but you can’t call it unconstitutional.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:37 am27. …although worth noting, and hadn’t occurred to me, that CONGRESS is given the power to establish “a uniform rule of naturalization.” The president does not have that power. Which makes it even more curious to me that Trump would feel a need to tweet something like this.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:40 amI didn’t vote for Bush in his second term, rv. I voted for Perot. Nor have I ever argued that Trump will be a great President because he is such a brilliant businessman. Bush 41 was better but it gains him no points here, and it shouldn’t.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:43 amI don’t think the President can grant citizenship summarily. Only Congress can do that with a private bill. He can grant national security green cards to foreign nationals who assist the U.S. in foreign conflicts. For one example (that I know of), people who informed against terrorists in Iraq.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:46 am30. I do believe you are right, at least from a constitutional standpoint. Now, this being the case, Trump looks stupid for falling for some Iranian government official’s blather, and he looks like a jerk for how he responded to it.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:47 am“ The Iranian immigrants I know are among the most patriotic people I’ve ever met.“
This statement seems rather worthless unless you’re willing to also state which country’s immigrants you know are the least patriotic.
IOW it seems just as valueless as saying Mexican immigrants are among the hardest working or Russians are the most grateful etc.
harkin (ef4f0e) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:51 amI would believe Zolnour before I would believe Ben Rhodes.
random viking (741a28) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:53 amThey are asylum laws, ropelight. In the US, I think the operative law is the Refugee Act of 1980, written and passed by Congress and administered by the executive.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:54 am32. I think one could argue that Pat was given to a bit of weaselly language there, but I think it’s perfectly fair to say that most immigrants — regardless of where they hail from — love America far more than many of us who were born here.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:55 ama lot of your wealthier Iranians send their gay offsprings to America so they don’t get murdered in the streets (this is country with many homophobia)
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:57 amOr he knows specific Iranian immigrants who are strong believers in America and its values. I only know two but they, also, believe strongly in America and its values. Having lived in a country that does not care about those values, they and their families suffered and have first-hand knowledge of the difference our values make.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:59 am29 Bush was a better what
Nate Ogden (a97472) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:02 amAnd what standard do you base that on? Who ever has the highest stock price wins life?
38. Bush was a better president. Better-read, more of a gentleman, and less of a loose cannon. Any other questions?
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:04 amThere is no shortage of informed Americans who believe that President Obama sold out American interests to cultivate friends in Iran (Not that even the Mullahs were buying it!).. There is no Iran deal treaty, let alone any effort at the time to sell a treaty to congress, because even most Democrats understood Obama’s overtures to Iran were an act of national betrayal. I’m not certain how using his bully pulpit to publicize yet another aspect of that betrayal is anything but good politics, especially as election season draws near. Good politics only seems a-hole-ish to those whose ox is being gored – right?
Beyond that, I feel there is a conflation of what is anti-Iranian and anti-Mullah in this post. Obama worked to promote and enrich the Mullahs, at the expense of the Iranian people. He also supported the Mullahs during the popular Green Movement uprising in 2009. Trump, by contrast, supports the Iranian people in the current round of popular uprising against the corrupt and oppressive Mullahs. In the choosing up of sides, it is President Trump who is demonstrably the pro-Iranian CinC and Trump’s opponents who are the anti-Iranian/pro-Mullah faction.
You’re not exactly staking out the high moral ground with your “a-hole” comment, are you?
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:08 amAll the Iranian immigrants I’ve known are indeed very patriotic. I don’t inquire, but I gather most are political refugees and dislike the regime. I say that because many have told me as much.
There are immigrants from certain countries I won’t name, who come here as college students. They get that opportunity because they earned it but also because they are chosen, usually as a result of government/party connections. They stay and get green cards, etc. Many learn to love their adopted country, but results vary.
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:08 amHere is hoping that there is a good discussion with the usual nonsense. It seems to me that everything today is about Narrative—right and left—without concern about truth or consistency. Sloganeering.
Fingers crossed, Patterico.
You did catch the part in the OP regarding the word “asshole”, correct? Getting the conversation started off on the right foot and all.
Skorcher (b405cb) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:09 ami think you’re reading way too much into this tweet Mr. Patterico
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:13 amWhen I read the tweet what I heard in my brain was that the Obama administration let a bunch of unknown, unvetted Iranians jump the immigration queue, sending them straight from foreign citizen to American citizen. When I saw Trump’s mention of Government officials my brain heard that those admitted were not just unqualified line jumpers, they were maybe murderers as well.
Is that what happened and if so was it a crime by the Obama administration, but more importantly, how do those in the immigration line-up like that? I’m not in the line-up and I say it stinks.
Trump is often not a well or thoughtfully spoken man, but never Trumpers are also never give him the benefit of the doubters too.
Fred Z (05d938) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:14 amBush was a better president. Better-read, more of a gentleman, and less of a loose cannon. Any other questions?
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:04 am
By that yardstick, Obama was even better.
random viking (741a28) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:15 am35 — I hear that Mohammed Atta stood during the playing of the national anthem at baseball games, and even removed his hat.
Quite a patriotic guy.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:16 amSo I just did a quick Google search on, quoted: “has president trump ever publicly called someone an asshole”
Now I admit this isn’t very scientific at all, but I was expecting to get some sort of a hit of some kind, perhaps in the long past or even since the 2016 campaign. Yet every hit on the first page that I got back were references to other people calling Trump an idiot or an a-hole. Again, not scientific as I don’t have a lot of time to go spelunking (I’m avoiding real work now as it is), but I was rather surprised by this.
Skorcher (b405cb) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:18 amhappy,
For whatever reason, he’s baiting us.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:19 amHe needs to get the F off of Twitter, even the new 240 character kind, you lose the chance at context that Fred Z explains more thoroughly.
Also, somewhat OT and more fitting perhaps for the previous wall of posts, but I do find the timing a bit too coincidental . On the other hand, you thought they would have learned to not look to the wrestling discipline for congressional leadership:
http://deadspin.com/powerful-congressman-jim-jordan-accused-of-knowing-abou-1827316946
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:23 amGood point.
If these citizenships (naturalisations? Does he mean something else?) were awarded in the context of the Obama administration’s shifty negotiations with the Iranian regime it’s entirely possible to read this “reward” as a bribe to Tehran. It isn’t a stretch to think that among the 2,500 are a few harmless souls who just happen to go missing once they enter the US.
It’s not unfair to think that Tehran would be happy to arrange this and brutal enough to use ordinary Iranians (or other nationals) as pawns in the course of such talks.
Apropos 9/11, this is a regime that has been caught out helping the Taliban on numerous occasions and is now accused of plotting to bomb an anti-regime conference just outside Paris.
JP (b974e1) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:23 amGood politics only seems a-hole-ish to those whose ox is being gored – right?
Tillman (d34303) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:25 amNo, on the contrary, good politics aspires to rise above that brute, “me an’ mine,” savage mentality to have a larger tent than that.
45. Yup. Truth. But neither Obama nor Bush 41 did me any favors by way of restoring constitutional government and freedom. And neither will Trump.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:26 am43. Of course you do, you Trump-humping knob polishing Schlichterite. Tell us again how much you love Daddy Trump and everything he’s done for you…douchebag.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:27 amNate 38,
Here is my original comment:
Bush was a better businessman.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:29 am54. Bush was better all-around, in every measure accept one: Popularity.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:30 amTrump prefers a different but similar word, Skorcher.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:33 amIn fact there is a site that identifies the holding of Cuban regime princelings, mostly in Tampa some in miami, not to mention the property of Chavez regime apparatchik that apart from derwick partners, associates with fusion gps
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:36 amYou’re not exactly staking out the high moral ground with your “a-hole” comment, are you?
Bigots neither observe nor deserve political correctness. Like respect, you have to give it to get it.
Tillman (d34303) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:42 amspeaking of words i just learned a new one today did you know what a mezzaluna is
i thought it was just a restaurant name but nope it’s a real thing
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:43 amBigots neither observe nor deserve political correctness. Like respect, you have to give it to get it.
Tillman (d34303) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:42 am
Sounds like the same mindset Trump gets criticized for daily.
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:45 amTrump prefers a different but similar word, Skorcher
Most people use bad language at one time or another, DRJ. As I said above, consider the original post. My point was did he ever do so in a public forum? You know, kiinda like this one? Also to my knowledge, that quote has never been definitively attributed to him as others who were supposedly present denied hearing it. Not that the word did not apply to the places he referred.
Skorcher (b405cb) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:47 amNow there is activity from a live movement:
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/07/iran-reformists-pressure-protests-trump-hardliners-rouhani.html
https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2018/07/iran-reformists-pressure-protests-trump-hardliners-rouhani.html
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:47 amMichael may flip and Kim is cheating?!?!
What to do?!?! Look over there; change the narrative, PDQ.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:50 amBush 41 had a 90% approval rating two years after he was inaugurated, during Desert Shield / Desert Storm. I think he mistook that for support of him, instead of support for his decisiveness and policies and our troops. It led him to think Americans had forgotten his 1990 tax compromise.
I think it is easy for Presidents to confuse their personal popularity with support for their policies. I also think Americans are generally conservative and like it when Presidents do conservative things. That’s why the GOP polls dipped in March-April 2018 after Trump signed the Omnibus bill. They recovered, I think in part because Trump promised never to do that again. The public gave him a Mulligan.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:50 amThe Iranian regime, has not pit that 150 millionnto good use:
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:54 amhttps://www.dailysabah.com/mideast/2018/07/02/iran-protesters-police-clash-for-second-night-as-polluted-water-poisons-230
Have you ever heard about Richard Racehorse Haynes, Skorcher? I have a feeling youbwould have loved him, especially the story about the dog:
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:54 amThe funny part is, Trump supporters are arguing like Haynes here, not the lawyers.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:55 amIt is nice to finally have a president who is working effectively to free the Iranian people from the yoke of theocratic oppression and liberate the entire world from Shiite-sponsored terrorism and military adventurism.
Of course, I understand there there are some who beg to differ.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:56 amTrump’s public vulgarity.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:57 am54 DRJ
Besides your anti Trumpism what measure do you use to conclude Bush was a better businessman? To me it seams like an absurd claim. Bush isn’t known for building any successful businesses and those he was part of that had success he had a vwery minor role. like his 2% stake in the Rangers.Is there more to his career I’m missing besides the Rangers and this;?
“Bush began his industry career in 1979, when he established Arbusto Energy, an oil and gas exploration company he financed with his education trust fund surplus and money from other investors, including Dorothy Bush, Lewis Lehrman, William Henry Draper III, Bill Gammell, and James R. Bath, the last of whom represented Salem bin Laden, a half-brother and cousin of Osama bin Laden. In 1984, Bush sold the company, hurt in the wake of the 1979 energy crisis, to Spectrum 7, another Texas gas exploration firm. Under the terms of the sale, Bush became CEO. Spectrum 7 lost revenue and was merged into Harken Energy Corporation in 1986, with Bush becoming a director of Harken.”
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:58 amViking, he’s the POTUS, he shouldn’t pick fights with groups of people like that. It’s offensive. This isn’t the 1950’s when you can publicly
Tillman (d34303) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:58 amact likebe a bigot and get away with it.And here.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:58 amNate, please notice I said Bush 41, not Bush 43.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:59 amI tend to think this claim is dubious because the green card and citizenship process is very complex and anybody who is found to have possible links to terrorism or terrorist countries go through additional screening. Used to work for USCIS and the process for screening takes a long while; it basically adds something like 6 to 9 months onto the process because if somebody gets flagged, they get vetted by FBI, etc before they even get to the interview stage. Then if they can’t find any reasons other than terrorism to deny your application, USCIS tries to work with the IC community to use the info to deny someone that flags them as a threat; that takes awhile because the IC has to figure out if releasing the info will compromise sources and methods. Me thinks this is a mullah talking out of his rear end.
CygnusAnalogMan (9c66ec) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:00 amSorry. Trying to read along and stay in the shadows permanently but I need some help, so I broke silence. Since my credibility is already shot with the people who will complain that I re-appeared, all I can say to them is what did you expect?
Ok. My question. How did Bush take 8 billion dollars,in today’s money, and whittle it down to 25 million dollars, in today’s money?
All I can find on his net worth suggests that 25 million is close to accurate.
BuDuh (aa91eb) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:00 amI even provided a link regarding Bush 41’s business in my comment 17. I know you missed it. Others might have, too, so thanks for giving me a chance to clarify that.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:01 amSo there is a actaully a brushfire going on right across iran, a really as solidarnosc was in the 80s, perhaps a little bloodier.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:04 amBuDuh,
The company was sold in 1966 so he could run for office. His company was worth $350M but I don’t know if he had other invextors, loans, etc. He has said he didn’t use any family money to start the company so I assume his interest was far less than 100%.
Don’t be so prickly. We all get upset and leave now and then. Welcome back.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:08 amThanks for the link.
The link doesn’t say what year that peak occurred.
More on Zapata:
https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/1999/04/26/story2.html
Bush borrowed from his dad to start a company? I guess that criticism of Trump is off the table now.
BuDuh (aa91eb) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:10 amAlso, Nate, I voted for Trump. Granted, I’m not a believer and had other motives, but my problem with Trump is I want him to actually keep his promises and I fear he won’t. Eternal vigilance seems like a better approach to Trump (to me) than unwavering support.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:10 amShe’s talking about Bush 41, who founded and served as president of the Zapata Petroleum Company. Bush 43 was a part owner of the Rangers.
Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:11 amI wasn’t upset when I left, DRJ. I was enlightened.
BuDuh (aa91eb) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:11 amThanks, BuDuh, for giving me another reason not to vote for Trump a second time (just like I didn’t vote for Bush 41)! Trump and Bush 41 are both Northeastern Rockefeller Republicans. I hope a new Perot comes along.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:13 amDresser industries was eventually merger into pennzoil, by the time bush sr had become county party chair, he had ventured south into permargo and into a concession in the Persian gulf
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:13 amOk, glad you were enlightened but still sorry you are so prickly.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:14 amI figured you thought they were similar because they both lie.
BuDuh (aa91eb) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:15 amPrickly is in the eye of the beholder.
Glad we were able to catch up.
Back to the shadows.
BuDuh (aa91eb) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:15 amZapata, pennzoil eventually collapsed in the merge war in the 80s
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:16 amI don’t know them privately but publicly they seem very different.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:17 amTrue, BuDuh, only you know when you are offended.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:18 amAnother angle to the dispute from the Fox article:
I’ve heard similar complaints from Russians living in the US: that the children of oligarchs and those with right connections are able to flounce off to London for school or shopping while so many of their contemporaries are drafted into the Russian Army or have to deal with Russia’s grim economic climate.
JP (b974e1) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:21 amIt’s also good to know that not keeping a promise is a lie. So, according to BuDuh, Trump “lied” about ObamaCare and the Wall, but he has kept other promises. Right?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:21 amThis is true, with regimes south of the border as well
https://mobile.twitter.com/carterwpage/status/1014171964573970435?p=v
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:22 amAnd if we are using Bush 41 as the standard, then Trump should have sold his business to run for office, to avoid any conflict of interest.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:24 amSorry meant to say “UK” here
JP (b974e1) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:25 amNo Dick Cheney taught us the folly of that notion, the thing is the bush clan seem to have forgotten who they were pursue by the christics the Kerry committee wit al
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:31 amPresident Trump loves the Iranian people with heartfelt love and respect and a true appreciation for their struggle.
This is why he’s rated #1 above all the rest!
To the iranians back in Iran he’s definitely a pivotal leader and a welcome friend, and to the Iranian-American people he’s looked at as something of a protector and father figure.
Many Iranian-American families hang his picture in their humble but clean dining areas.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:43 amDRJ, sorry for the mixup, 41 is actually less impressive than 43. I still don’t see how anyone can logically claim he was a better businessman.
It was one business and he cashed out in 1966.Not even a successful business for a few decades according to your article.
“At its peak as a global conglomerate, Zapata collected as much as $350 million in annual sales, exerting itself as a formidable force in its various industries.”
Article doesn’t even state if that peak was during Bush ownership.
Trump has started dozens if not hundreds of businesses with total sales in the tens or hundreds of billions.
I just don’t see any measure that results in Bush being better unless you grade on fewest failures in business which is a terrible yard stick to measure on.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:44 amI just wish the President would stay off twitter for awhile. We could all use a break.
Rochf (877dba) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:47 amAfter years of betrayal by ostensibly conservative pols who strike the pose of gentility, it is not hard to understand why Trump’s crassness connects with “normal” Americans. That the cultural elite doesn’t like the language Trump uses to frame his public persona speaks to its effectiveness. Of course, his pitch isn’t directed at the elite. And, if anything, the bristling by the elite simply confirms Trump’s suitability (the enemy of my enemy . . . ) to the task. And now, 18 months in, we have an abundance of empirical evidence to serve as confirmation of his leadership skills. You may not like the terms on which President sells himself and his presidency, but it is hard to argue their effectiveness or his.
The anti-Trump outrage is nothing new. It is pleasant to think back to the Reagan years, when the candidate and then president was roundly criticized by the elite/MSM in terms very similar to those President Trump now confronts. I am reminded of Carl Sandberg’s adage, which I would like to amend: “If the facts are against you, argue the diction.”
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:48 am#84 (narciso) —
Dresser Industries was merged into Haliburton (not Pennzoil). This was before the days of Dick Chaney.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:48 amRead the Wikipedia entry on HRG https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HRG_Group
His company was started with a friend who left CIA and was considered a CIA front. Big name investors, missing SEC and other files, interesting foreign deals. Classic swamp business, reminds me why I don’t care for the Bush family and explains why they don’t get along with Trump.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:54 amFred Z (05d938) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:14 am
kishnevi (a6653c) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:55 amFred Z, I read the tweet as you did. But it seems the original source was an Iranian official speaking on Iranian TV, which then got filtered to Trump by being quoted on Fox News. I have seen no other source for this. I hope POTUS turned around and demanded his own people find out if it was true, and if so who and where these people are.
I just wonder if Fox also passed along this bit of Iranian TV
https://mobile.twitter.com/HillelNeuer/status/1013872387362869249
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:44 am
I think the best point of comparison lies in the fact that Bush did not make “I am a great businessman” part of his campaign (as far as I remember)
kishnevi (a6653c) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:57 amdresser was the one, that Zapata spun off from, Zapata merged with Pennzoil, I grew up in Miami, the Casablanca, or Marrakech of the Caribbean, that’s where Jeb cut his teeth, with a whole host of character you wouldn’t invite to dinner, roger stone, because he is a bit a doofus, chums those waters.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:00 pmit seems fusion gps, was planting those types of mines, like the doctored pic, otherwise why would Robert Blakey, not too much of a fool, would have bit.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:02 pmThe Guardian did a fact-check on Trump’s tweet and their conclusion is “unfounded”. Like Trump believing Putin over the Intelligence Community when it came to the Russian dictator’s meddling/disinformation campaign, this president chose to believe a Mullah-aligned Iranian hardliner over his own immigration service. If Obama were pulling this kind of crap, people on the conservative side of the aisle might just say that Obama was being unpatriotic or un-American or anti-American.
Paul Montagu (cbbfc4) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:10 pmit’s amusing they cite trita parsi, the regime’s paid flack, like leonid Krasin, in 20s London, as rebuttal witness, those who actually care about the facts, know what trump meant,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:22 pmAssuming this is a real thing, and not fake news, as pointed out (if it’s fake I don’t really care much) – let’s analyze.
Eh, if he is bigoted against Iranians, that’s a bad thing, vs biased against the bad Iranians like the mullah sand stuff. I agree there. Lots of people emigrated at the time of the Shah being deposed, and plenty are making fine American citizens today. Especially in So Cal, where a number gravitated too (because of the weather? I don’t know)
My views on the Iranian people that I know next to nothing about other than they are human beings: I am fan of the movie Persepolis, am sure I would regret it but am curious if a billion dollars of military hardware ended up in the hands of the Baloch people what it would mean for the mullahs. As long as I wasn’t paying for the billion.
Anyway, the tweet is ambiguous on the bias point to me, and the analysis a bit too literal to me.
1) He asks how bad it is
Suggests he is open to feedback, it’s a question not a statement that it’s real bad. He suggests it’s bad. And is it bad just because they are Iranians, or because he thinks there are some kind of sleeper agents or something vis-a-vis the “government officials” text, which suggests he distinguishes between the people of Iran and the government.
2) It’s wrong to suggest that admitting 2500 Iranians is bad, but it seems okay to question any deal Obama made as bad reflexively.
I admit I am biased against any deal made by the Obama administration. Open to the facts of any case, but I usually start from the bias (assumption) that they screwed up any negotiation, unintentionally or purposefully, who knows.
So, yeah, maybe it’s a bad tweet. But maybe someone is reading into a Twitter-short tweet with their own bias
At the end of the day, like a Rorshach test, everyone sees what they want to see. Confirmation bias. Objectively there is more ambiguity to the tweet and intent to me than this analysis, but your mileage may vary. I don’t need to reflexively defend this tweet, but I don’t see it as a racist or a racist dog whistle
If 2500 people were admitted citizenship as part of a crooked deal with any country (and the Iranian deal meets my definition of crooked), I would be curious as to the facts and details.
Hypothetically, if this hypothetical happened, 9 times out of 10 I would guess it’s well-connected people arranging for an exit plan for themselves and their family in case their shithole country turns really bad (see what I did there? Go ahead and pile on, but it can’t be racist to call ‘shithole’ a hypothetical people’s hypothetical homeland a bad phrase ) …
… but 1 in 10 it’s something worse. So let’s take a look.
Don’t feel as passionate about this as everyone else. It’s just a tweet asking if I think something is bad (if it happened). My answer is, I dunno. Let’s take a look.
But maybe I’m wrong and this Is the biggest racist attitude held by anyone in the White Housr since Woodrow Wilson. I could be wrong, I admit that.
PrincetonAl (cff40e) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:34 pmOn a day in which the headlines include a story about Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte’s reaction to the crassness of the White House press corps hectoring the President and many stories about a growing campaign of harassment and violence against anyone aligned with Trump, commenters, here, are criticizing President Trump for his occasionally vulgar and unwelcoming language. Seriously?
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:35 pmProbably better to wait a few days past Bastille Day to let it sort out before jumping to conclusions.
Just because Trump seems to have jumped to one, doesn’t mean I should, and maybe he has info I don’t.
Maybe I should watch more TV? But then I wouldn’t know to quote noted genius and all around honest gal Marie Harf.
Right now I’d say odds that Trump went off half cocked are about 5-1 in favor of premature firing
One quarter cocked? 10-1
Noodle Al dente? 20-1
Hope I’m wrong but maybe I’ll know more in a week or two… or not. Trump does own a lifetime pass on the crazy train and is clearly one of the most unique Presidents we have ever been blessed with
steveg (a9dcab) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:50 pm“(Remember his false tweets about how Obama wiretapped him, for example)”
Meh… his generation equates government surveillance with “wiretapping”.
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:55 pmI was more interested in being mildly amusing than I was in crafting the perfect comment… I don’t care really, but its a window into my world. I’d never make it as a lawyer
steveg (a9dcab) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:58 pm109, but thats how bad 2 presses diverge from each other. Yes there was the “press gaggle” comment as also reported by the Washington TIMES:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jul/3/mark-rutte-dutch-pm-amused-us-press-gaggles-behavi/
But go down the street, and Rutte is New Left Hero because he interrupted Trump mid-sentance about vehicle tariffs:
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:04 pmhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/07/03/trump-got-a-dose-of-dutch-bluntness-from-visiting-prime-minister/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9fcfd9649741
That is a disingenuous and totally dishonest reading of anything I said.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:11 pm40… excellent comment, Thor!
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:15 pmIf Obama were pulling this kind of crap
If Bush had used the Intelligence Community to surveil on Obama’s campaign, who knows? Obama might trust mullahs rather than Republicans to craft a nuclear deal deceptively — that kind of crap. All hypothetical.
random viking (741a28) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:17 pmThat is a disingenuous and totally dishonest reading of anything I said.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:11 pm
If the story behind the tweet were true, would it lend context? Or, would Trump still be bigoted?
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:19 pm“No, on the contrary, good politics aspires to rise above that brute, “me an’ mine,” savage mentality to have a larger tent than that.”
Yes, you lead by example, Tillman.
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:19 pm109… yes, they are cereal, Thor.
It’s important to note the stories that are covered… almost as much as those that aren’t.
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:22 pmPresident Trump isn’t bigotry on Iranians that’s for sure.
His arms are wide open and his smile, welcoming.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:22 pm“Twitter is a tool of teh Devil and tweets are teh Devil’s dandruff.”
—- Ras “Bumba Clot” Haiku
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:24 pmEvery dishonest, bigoted, racist thing he says makes his approval rating go up.
Why would he stop saying what his people want to hear?
Dave (445e97) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:29 pmok that cross-eyed scrooch what made a dirty stinky ass of herself in a restaurant with Mr. Scott Pruitt
does she teach at that fancy private school Obama sent his girls to?
They keep just saying Sidwell
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:30 pmso if you think about this article from this week
The myth of Obama’s ‘disappearance’
then reflect on how a cross-eyed scrooch from the school where the younger obama chick still goes just accosted a cabinet member
it kinda makes you see these people as even trashier than you maybe did before
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:36 pmDarnok at tanagra with arms wide*
Narciso (7bb9e5) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:43 pmFusion, crowdstrikes and Peter strzok Staple gun that’s authoritative.
Narciso (7bb9e5) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:45 pmThe PAN botched its chance to be the Solidarnosc of the turn of this century…both with their spritual tethering in Chicago’s bungalow belt, but little else in common.
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:45 pmVicente fox was first weasel, most azzuredly it was under his aegis thst they made contact with the confederation, their mob commission.
Narciso (7bb9e5) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:53 pm118. A better question is, is there any indication whatsoever that Trump knows the story behind that tweet is true? Or do you insufferable Schlichterites just want to believe that it is without any supporting evidence?
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 1:56 pmmaybe President Trump did a tweet just for to start a conversation
ever think of that
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:00 pmTrump’s wealth comes primarily from licensing his name, Nate. Maybe people only bought those steaks, ties, vodka, golf course lots, and NYC apartments because his name was on them, and they wouldn’t habe bought them otherwise. (Clearly that was the case with Trump University.) But I think those jobs would have been needed even without Trump, and his contribution to jobs was employing lawyers who write licensing agreements.
Bush’s company actually produced a product – oil and gas – and his partner continued to do that after Bush liquidated and went into politics. Their company became Pennzoil and while CEO of Pennzoil, they won a battle over Getty Oil that ended up bankrupting Texaco. That one deal arguably earned Pennzoil as much money as Trump’s net worth. Too bad Bush didn’t stick around, if not for the money than for the lesson that a man’s word is his bond.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:00 pm123.
I really don’t think this is going to hurt his chance at re-election. But if he does coast to another four years, it will be without my vote.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:00 pm131. And maybe you’re an idjit.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:06 pmLet teh virtue mincing begin!
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:06 pm135. We get it. You don’t care.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:07 pmi wish he’d do trumpsparagus for valentines day
it’s very low-carb you know and it’s a fun vegetable to share with someone you love
but they’d probably say he was doing emu liminents all up in it 🙁
people are no fun any more
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:09 pmoops *anymore* i mean
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:10 pmThank you, Haiku.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:10 pm@99.I just wish the President would stay off twitter for awhile. We could all use a break.
What?!?! And lose control of the narrative?!?! The Beast needs fed and he knows how to chum the waters and watch’em bite.
“I’m the straw that stirs the drink.” – [attribute to and denied by]- Reginald Martinez Jackson, 1977
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:11 pmHas anyone ever told you that you project like a lib?
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:11 pm@131. maybe President Trump did a tweet just for to start a conversation ever think of that
Gone fishin’… eh, Mr Feet.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:13 pm141… mince away, sphincterite!
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:15 pmleave the house Intel committee server unguarded, no problemo.
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/03/awan-cybersecurity-not-charged/
Taheri in nest of spies was illuminating in noting the hot war going on in exile enclaves like Paris, after the Iranian revolution.
Narciso (7bb9e5) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:15 pm143. Real original. Pbbbbbt!
Gryph (08c844) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:16 pmrefers to the question of the number of citizens of Iran (including dual nationals) naturalized during some vague period of time [during the terrible Iran Deal negotiation – how many years is that?]
It is perfectly reasonable to say that is bigoted regardless of what the number of Iranians naturalized was.
It is important to note that that would not be racism (for one thing Iranians are white) and it’s not really religious bigotry. It’s a relatively new thing: Geographicalism.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:28 pmPrincetonAl (cff40e) — 7/3/2018 @ 12:34 pm
That’s what it looks like Trump is trying to imply, (or what else does it mean?) and it’s total nonsense. I wonder who invented that trope and fed it to Trump.
It’s not racism. It’s geographicalism.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:33 pmIt’s an interesting opening gambit in the parlor game he is playing with Iran. I’m looking forward to how the rest turns out.
I’m sure SWC is paying attention, this is the exact way that the Notorious DJT started the Nork communication/negotiations. Let’s see where it goes before condemning the man.
Carlton (5ab75c) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:45 pmV Fox was high up in Coca Cola MX, I’m sure he dealt in transport of the original late 19th/early 20th paste between bottlers well before his presidency.
urbanleftbehind (0a50c8) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:48 pmwhen you condemn President Trump you condemn yourself
and in stark relief
your unbelief
your churlishness
it’s seen and noted
like shakespeare wroted
they do not love what do not show their love
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:55 pmSad. Culture war is real… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uec-H9gq_Pc
Colonel Haiku (de797c) — 7/3/2018 @ 2:58 pmReread the tweet. Isn’t it at least as natural to read Trump’s tweet as him having a problem that the admitted included Iranian government officials?
DWPittelli (55f6a2) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:01 pmWe need fewer Iranians, but more Japanese (to pick up after us):
After defeat, Japan’s World Cup team leaves behind a spotlessly clean locker room and a ‘thank you’ note
The Japanese compulsion with cleaning is very real. The airports in Japan are cleaner than a lot of hospitals here in the United States…
Dave (445e97) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:26 pmGreat story, Dave. Reminds me of the Tea Party.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:33 pmi love cleaning but i’m not nutso about it
just the kitchen
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:35 pmI know what could go wrong:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/07/merkel-strikes-deal-to-avert-government-collapse-agrees-to-tighten-borders/
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:40 pmthis seems implausible:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2018/07/iranian-general-accuses-israel-of-cloud-and-snow-theft/
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:42 pmOhhhhh yeahhhhhh… https://youtu.be/slO0Uzk6u_w
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:47 pmyup
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:47 pmthat made my day Mr. Colonel
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:49 pmhttps://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-belongs-to-all-nations-ex-iran-president-writes-a-letter-to-donald-trump/story-wtYgdky2DSNtcBde52AhVN.html
That’s Iran’s former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I do believe he would endorse this piece by Patterico.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 3:57 pmAhmadinejad also parroted Trump’s own attacks on the United States:
Isn’t it great that our president writes our enemies’ slanders for them?
Dave (445e97) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:06 pmYour first sentence is truthful. Ahmadinejad did parrot Trump. Your last sentence is false. Trump did not write “for” Ahmadinejad.
The fact that Sanders failed to get the Dem nomination was corrupt. Structurally corrupt with the super-delegates, as well as party officials pulling shenanigans to help Hillary, as in giving her access to party mailing lists while denying them to Bernie.
It worked out well for Trump. Sanders would have matched up better against Trump than Hillary. Not that he would have won, but he would have had a better shot than the corrupt Hillary.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:17 pmConDave will always have
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:32 pmParisTrump…Texan LBJ became POTUS after President Kennedy was assinated in Dallas, Texas. LBJ then escalated the Vietnam war and nearly ripped the nation apart.
Transplanted Texan George H W Bush almost became POTUS when a Bush family friend’s son tried to assinate President Ronald Reagan.
It may be coincidence, or bad Juju but it seems that having Texans for Vice Presidents is apparently dangerous to the continued life and wellbeing of America’s Commanders-in-Chief.
ropelight (da1be9) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:32 pmhttps://www.memri.org/tv/protesters-in-tehran-shout-america-is-not-our-enemy
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:32 pmCan we get Mike Pence to change his state of residency to Texas?
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:36 pmEvery word Dave writes destroys my faith in physics. See Faith In Physics was once, looong ago, a nightclub in south Orlando. Went there once. I think it was kinda gay. Didn’t really care for the place. But the name stuck with me for decades now. The one thing I truly believed that I could have faith in for all these decades was physics. But no. Dave had to ruin that. Thanks, Dave.
Skorcher (b405cb) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:38 pmDick Cheney changed his state of residence from Texas back to Wyoming in the year 2000. He had always been from Wyoming.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:38 pmAssassination “jokes”. Popular on the left these days, and always, really.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:39 pm@153 The Japanese compulsion with cleaning is very real. The airports in Japan are cleaner than a lot of hospitals here in the United States…
Meh. OTOH, they sure left a helluva mess behind at Pearl Harbor.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:39 pmI didn’t know the Tea Party caught on in Japan.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:42 pmThat Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was from February, 2017 (shortly after the first ban)
Now does Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hate the United States or not, according to that letter? Maybe the excerpts are too small to decide.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:42 pmAssassination “jokes”. Popular on the left these days, and always, really.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:39 pm
How is that an assassination joke?
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:44 pmI think it’s safe to say that he wishes us, The Great Satan, ill.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:44 pmThe assassination of JFK may have been a conspiracy, but if so, Eugene Locke did not tell LBJ and neither did he tell John Connally, who played a crucial role in determining the parade route. If a conspiracy, it fell apart, and then he had the luck of having someone contact Oswald and pretend to him a message came from the KGB
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:44 pmYour comment was in response to ropelight’s comment detailing the assassination attempts (and a success) on Presidents who had Texan VPs. You than wish Pence would change his residency to Texas. Pretty obvious.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:47 pmHe thinks you are talking about JFK, nk. I guess that’s all he knows about Texas.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:48 pmSee comment #165, then read #167 in that context. Then go ahead and tell me he wasn’t referencing that comment and that it was just a coincidence that he pickled that moment in time to wish that Pence would become a Texan.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:50 pmTo clarify, I guess that is all ropelight knows about Texas, not Mr Mous.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:51 pmAP also fact-checked Trump’s claim about the 2,500 Iranians and their conclusion: His words were “baseless”. My own conclusion is that Trump heard something that he wanted to hear–didn’t matter who from, no matter how uncredible–and decided to pull his best Ace Ventura and tweet out of his ass.
Paul Montagu (cbbfc4) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:51 pmI was very unclear, Mr. Mous. Sorry. But ropelight really, really believes in assassination conspiracies.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:54 pmSorry, DRJ. I thought you were directing that at me.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:55 pmMy fault, not yours. I was very unclear.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 4:57 pm132 Bush owned Zapata off shore which was not the same company as Zapata Petroleum.
“In 1959 Bush bought control of Zapata Off-Shore, funded with $800,000,[9] splitting Zapata Corporation into two independent companies with the Liedtkes still in control of Zapata Petroleum. Bush moved his offices and family that year from Midland, Texas to Houston for access to the Caribbean through the Houston Ship Channel.[10][better source needed] But although Zapata Offshore had only a few drilling rigs, Bush set up operations also in the Gulf of Mexico, the Persian Gulf, Trinidad, Borneo, and Medellín, Colombia, and the Kuwait Shell Petroleum Development Company was among the company’s clients.”
“In 1963, Zapata Petroleum merged with South Penn Oil to become Pennzoil.”
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:03 pmZapata Offshore and its corporate successor Pennzoil are not “swamp companies.” I assert that based on personal knowledge, having personally represented it in court, and having been at the law firm that did Zapata’s initial registration statement when it went public and all of its and its successors’ (including Pennzoil’s) deal structuring & documentation, SEC filings, and legal compliance. As a public company with required initial and periodic disclosures under SEC supervision, its operations were always conducted in the bright glare of public scrutiny, and it was highly and justifiably respected in the energy industry.
Not so Donald Trump, whose history has been almost entirely in non-registered, non-public companies, who have almost zero scrutiny by the SEC or any other public agency, who keep their profits and losses secret, and who collectively comprise the landscape that includes the swamp Mr. Ogden mentioned. The kinds of lies Trump tells constantly would have never been permissible for the CEO of a publicly held and traded company. And he, in turn, would never have been willing to submit himself to the discipline required of the CEOs and other top corporate officers of such companies, whose ill-considered remarks lead to massive shareholder lawsuits.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:03 pmWhy?
Paul Montagu (cbbfc4) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:12 pmTrump Org revenue Revenue
US$9.5 billion (2016)
“Trump’s wealth comes primarily from licensing his name, Nate.”
Do you have anything to back this up? All the numbers I see his name licensing pales in comparison to his development and real estate investments.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:15 pmTexas, Shmexus.
Dick Cheney (Wyoming) is only sitting Vice-President since Aaron Burr to actually shoot someone, isn’t he?
Dave (445e97) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:19 pm@ ropelight (#165): You left out of your conspiracy theory John Nance Garner III, aka Cactus Jack Garner, former Speaker of the House of Representatives and the 32nd VPOTUS, under FDR, from 1933-1941, of Uvalde, Texas. Garner famously opined that the vice presidency “wasn’t worth a warm bucket of s**t,” which the media helpfully reported as “spit.” Recollection of Garner’s effective fall from power and entry into obscurity upon becoming the Veep was LBJ’s main disincentive when JFK, after securing the 1960 Dem nomination, offered LBJ the vice presidency, but the lure of being the proverbial heartbeat away was too great for LBJ to resist. Perhaps Garner had something to do with FDR’s congestive heart failure and death in 1945, eh, ropelight?
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:19 pmBeldar, Zapata offshore is now part of HRG.
Zapata Petroleum became Pennzoil
HRG Group, Inc., (NYSE: HRG) formerly Harbinger Group Inc. and Zapata Corporation[1], is a holding company based in Rochester, New York, and originating from an oil company started by a group including the former United States president George H. W. Bush. In 2009, it was renamed the Harbinger Group Inc[2].
In 1959 Bush bought control of Zapata Off-Shore, funded with $800,000,[9] splitting Zapata Corporation into two independent companies with the Liedtkes still in control of Zapata Petroleum.
In 1963, Zapata Petroleum merged with South Penn Oil to become Pennzoil.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:19 pm176… dammit, Sammy, that was no time for a straight man…
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:21 pmSo in other words, just another day at the office in Trumpistan…
Dave (445e97) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:22 pmBeldar, know what happened to the missing files? Have a copy maybe?
The deal with Permargo is not mentioned in Zapata’s annual reports, and SEC records are missing. In 1988, a Bush spokesman claimed that the deal lasted only from March to September 1960. However, Zapata sold the oil-drilling rig Nola I to Pemargo in 1964.[citation needed]
Zapata’s filing records with the U.S.Securities and Exchange Commission are intact for the years 1955–1959, and again from 1967 onwards. However, records for the years 1960–1966 are missing. The commission’s records officer stated that the records were inadvertently placed in a session file to be destroyed by a federal warehouse, and that a total of 1,000 boxes were pulped in this procedure. The destruction of records occurred either in October 1983 (according to the records officer), or in 1981 shortly after Bush became Vice President of the United States (according to, Wison Carpenter, a record analyst with the commission).
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:22 pmThank you.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:23 pm181… AP for teh fact-check win! … wait… what!?!?
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:24 pmMr. Ogden, you’re embarrassing yourself, and becoming offensive. Please stop trying to “educate” me, from Wikipedia, about one of my former clients.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:24 pmAccording to a CIA internal memo dated November 29, 1975,[4] Zapata Petroleum began in 1953 through Bush’s joint efforts with Thomas J. Devine, a CIA staffer who had resigned his agency position that same year to go into private business, but who continued to work for the CIA under commercial cover.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:27 pmYou’re also shockingly ignorant, Mr. Ogden, about what Trump’s own financial disclosures reveal, and about his prior testimony, available on the internet, about how his net worth fluctuates based on the value of the Trump brand because of his licensing arrangements, which do indeed provide most of the revenue for the Trump Organization. Please give it a rest.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:28 pmWho was your client? Zapata Off-Shore Shore or Zapata Petroleum? Or do you deny they are two separate companies?
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:28 pm“That’s Iran’s former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. I do believe he would endorse this piece by Patterico.
Why?”
Paul Montagu (cbbfc4) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:12 pm
Because Ahmadinejacket thinks Trump is an احمق to.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:28 pmForbes estimates Trump is worth $3.1B, primarily in real estate and a relatively small amount for his brand. But Trump says that is ridiculous since he says his brand alone is worth $6B.
Thus, if we take Trump at his word, the bulk of his worth is in his brand, not his real estate. Should we trust him on this, Nate? If not, why trust him on anything?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:28 pmi’d pay trump six billion just to keep doing the good policies all up in it
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:32 pmZapata:
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:33 pmThis is good news! https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/301097/
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:34 pm“The Gorsuch appointment, the string of 5-4 SCOTUS decisions with him in the majority, and the Kennedy vacancy has left the never-Trump right standing on a shrinking sliver of ground. After all, they thought HRC would have been preferable.”
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:37 pm—- Brit Hume
Beldar, you might want to let HRG Group know they didn’t come from Zapata Corp, will probably be a shocker for them.
http://www.hrggroup.com/company-timeline#
July 2009
A majority interest in our predecessor company, Zapata Corporation, was acquired by funds affiliated with Harbinger Capital Partners. Zapata Corporation was subsequently reincorporated in Delaware under the name Harbinger Group Inc. At the time, Zapata’s sole assets were cash and cash equivalents.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:38 pmHappy early July 4th, all!
Be happy, proud and thankful you were blessed to live in the greatest country in the history of mankind!
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:40 pmBeldar maybe you will believe Houston Business Journal? Sad you can’t remember who your clients where. Sadder you attack others for not knowing.
https://www.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/1999/04/26/story2.html
Four decades after a young oil man named George Bush moved drilling company Zapata Corp. from West Texas to Houston, one of the city’s most colorful corporations has quietly moved on to Rochester, N.Y.
By 1959 Bush and the Liedtkes agreed to split the company and go their separate ways. Bush wanted to go into drilling and the Liedtkes wanted to stay in production. Bush bought out Zapata Petroleum’s 43 percent interest in Zapata Offshore and moved it to Houston.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:41 pm“Last week was especially glorious not just because we rejected the latest GOPe amnesty scheme, not just because we defunded the left’s union cash extortion machine with the Janus decision, and not just because Justice Kennedy is leaving to be the swing vote on his retirement community HOA. It was especially glorious because these enormous victories — these latest enormous victories –were the direct result of normal Americans giving the gimps, grifters, and geebos of Never Trump the George Costanza treatment by doing precisely the opposite of our alleged betters’ political instincts.
Everything they told us was wrong. If we had done what they demanded, we would not be revelling in the joy of conserva-victory. We would be resigned to yet another defeat. “But Gorsuch” indeed, you never-been-kissed band of losers.
If we had listened to Never Trump, we’d have voted for Felonia Milhous von Pantsuit and we would not only have Merrick Garland (or worse) on the SCOTUS but now she’d be picking another pinko who agrees with the lib bloc that the First Amendment has hitherto unknown asterisks that prevent conservatives from using it, that a bunch of other rights that aren’t in the Constitution actually are, and that the Second Amendment stuff about not infringing on our right to keep and bear arms really means libs can totally infringe on our right to keep and bear arms. Let’s leave aside our booming economy and crushing ISIS and pulling out of the climate scam and maybe peace with North Korea. Just these two Supreme Court picks makes Trump the most important and successful conservative president since The Big R. And we wouldn’t have any of it if that nattering pack of insufferable sissies had had their way.
But even today, this dwindling band of bow-tied nimrods still whine despite these manifest conservative triumphs. And their numbers grow fewer as the evidence grows in support of an undeniable conclusion: The election of Donald Trump was a conservative triumph of a magnitude we are only beginning to fully appreciate.”
—- Kurt Schlichter
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:47 pmYou are he one who said Zapata Offshore had nothing to do with Pennzoil, Nate. Comment 185. Beldar was responding to that. You only changed your mind in later comments.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:47 pmI’m glad things are going well for Kurt and Instapundit, Haiku. I won’t need to read Instapundit.com again as long as you are here.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:49 pmMath test for Beldar and DRJ
What % of $362 Million is $2.4 Million? Is that most?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-trump-brand-empire-20180413-story.html
“By 2015, when Trump entered the presidential race, some of his more far-out ideas – steaks, urine tests and vitamins – were already kaput. But, according to his financial disclosures, the 19 remaining licensees were still paying him a combined $2.4 million-plus per year, just to put the Trump name on their goods.”
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/donald-trump-election-2016-trump-organization-revenue/2016/05/19/id/729620/
“Trump’s disclosure form filed last July showed his holdings brought in revenue of $362 million in 2014 and the first half of 2015, the campaign said in a statement, the Washington Post reports.”
“”Crippled America,” his book published in November, made between $1 million and $5 million in royalties.”
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:50 pmDRJ I’m still staying and linked to multiple sources that Zapata Off Shore doesn’t have anything to do with Pennzoil, I haven’t changed from that claim. Beldar falsely claimed they were the same.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:53 pmMy client was Pennzoil Co., the corporate successor to Zapata Offshore, which now no longer exists as such. The law firm at which I represented that company, however, Baker Botts, had represented it and its corporate predecessors, affiliates, and ultimate non-public principals (including Bush-41 and Hugh Liedtke) going back to the early 1960s. James Randall was the Baker Botts corporate partner who worked most closely with Bush-41; his ex-wife is the Fifth Circuit judge for whom I clerked, who hired me in part on the recommendation of the Baker Botts lawyers I’d worked for as a summer clerk. As a summer clerk in 1978, one of my tasks was “going to the printer” with the corporate lawyers who needed more eyes to help proofread some urgently important SEC filings, so I’ve literally proofread all the fine print about this entire corporate history. I later personally represented Pennzoil in court on a number of cases, including one arising from the crash of a crew helicopter en route to an offshore platform, during which I became more familiar with the then-current operations of the company in the early 1980s. And although I did not help try the famous Pennzoil v. Texaco case, my mentor John Jeffers did, along with another Baker Botts partner, Irv Terrell, and more famously, Liedtke’s personal friend Joe Jamail. I watched large chunks of the trial, and would have worked on it with Jeffers but for other preexisting commitments.
There is nothing shady or swamplike in this history.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:54 pmCould be, but my question was directed to Anon.
Paul Montagu (cbbfc4) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:55 pmOh, bullsh!t. I haven’t falsely claimed anything, and I resent that, Mr. Ogden.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:55 pmAnyways the real story is what is going on in iran, I have to consult Turkish, Lebanese Saudi sources because the lead broadsheets have tuned out. The rial is going the way of the previous venezuelan currency, people are still out in pitched battle with the govt
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:56 pmNot much, Nate, but Bloomberg estimates Trump’s licensing take is up to $55M/year. Who kniws? No one but Trump really knows what he has. That’s why I used Trump’s estimate of the worth of his brand.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:57 pmMost?
“Bloomberg Politics, on the other hand, estimates Trump’s net worth at $2.9 billion, but it primarily takes into account the real estate he actually owns. Bloomberg’s report estimates Trump’s licensing take at between $32 million and $55 million.”
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 5:59 pmBeldar, I have given you multiple links from multiple sources including from HRG Group which is the successor of Zapata Off Shore.
“My client was Pennzoil Co., the corporate successor to Zapata Offshore”
Your client was the corporate successor of Zapata Petroleum which was split off from Zapata Off Shore.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:03 pmWell they can believe in unicorns if they like:
https://mobile.twitter.com/rich_goldberg/status/1013969824823889925
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:05 pmBeldar, would you believe the National Archives?
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/10480871
“In 1953, George H. W. Bush and John Overbey formed a new business with Hugh Liedtke and Bill Liedtke named Zapata Petroleum Corporation. The corporation was based in Midland, Texas. Hugh Liedtke became president, and George Bush became vice president of the new business venture. In 1954, the parent company formed Zapata Off-Shore Company, of which Bush was named president. In 1959, the company was split, leaving the Liedtkes with control of Zapata Petroleum Corporation and establishing Bush as the head of Zapata Off-Shore.
In 1963 the Liedtkes merged several oil companies, including Zapata Petroleum and South Penn Oil, to form the Pennzoil Company. Hugh Liedtke was the first president of Pennzoil.”
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:05 pmZapata Offshore was a subsidiary of Zapata Petroleum, which ultimately merged with South Penn Oil to become Pennzoil. Zapata Offshore had been sold to Bush before that happened, but Zapata Offshore was still part of the Zapata Company’s history and thus part of Pennzoil’s history.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:08 pmall of that history is in the past now DRJ
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:13 pmThis was just one fellow:
https://www.ft.com/content/25055a2a-6332-11e7-91a7-502f7ee26895
narciso (d1f714) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:14 pmTrue, hf. History is so yesterday.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:16 pmMr. Ogden, I can’t tell what you think you’re trying to prove. I do know that you’ve made several statements here that you attribute to me — statements that I have not made. I highly resent that, and I’m unwilling to play those games with you.
You appear to harbor some deep conspiracy theory about the Bushes, and I’m not interested at all in conspiracy cranks, much less willing to waste my time debating them. How about we agree to ignore each other going forward?
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:17 pm212… no you won’t, DRJ!
Here’s another tidbit: after a month of the media calling Trump Hitler over his immigration policies, his approval ticked up and disapproval ticked down. Interesting!
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:20 pmHyatt, Hilton and other big-name hotels make a considerable portion of their profit from licensing. That the Trump organization does as well is to be expected.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:22 pm216… perhaps it was, but it was in just about everyone’s wheelhouse. Low-hanging fruit.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:23 pm230… expected but ridiculed, Thor. It’s how they roll.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:24 pmI must apologize… I just wrapped up a big project, I have the next 5 days off and am in teh grips of a Cadbury milk chocolate- fueled sugar high!
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:27 pmBeldar, I see you do this frequestly;
“I do know that you’ve made several statements here that you attribute to me — statements that I have not made. I highly resent that”
“You appear to harbor some deep conspiracy theory about the Bushes”
No idea where that came from but if you don’t like people attributing things to you you didn’t say, specific example would be nice, then maybe don’t do it to others?
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:31 pmThey say history repeats itself.
But then they’ve said that before…
Dave (445e97) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:33 pmI began this conversation to respond to what I thought was an unfair slur against a former corporate client and people connected with its history — your #102, in which you wrote:
Soon enough, you were asking me this, in #194:
I read this as an insinuation of criminal conduct on my part. I resent it. You continued, addressing me in #209:
You’re in no position to lecture me about my clients, sir. I take offense at it.
In #214, you claimed I said something which I did not say and do not assert. Please stop that.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/3/2018 @ 6:44 pmLike I say I take the long view, how far back Jeff gerth started out insinuating mob ties about Nixon, forty years ago in aid vicious little collection of screeds the politics of gunplay he gave Phillip aged a coathorship of the introduction.
Narciso (2cb936) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:06 pmHaiku@229
The anti-Trump faction has lost it. They’re grasping for issues that give them traction, including issues like immigration on which, as polls tell us, there is anything but unanimity on the left, let alone the middle. You can see the red wave coming. I couldn’t be more delighted.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:08 pmWhy should I answer that? You claimed I suggested that there is no reason to care whether the tweet is true. That was disingenuous and dishonest. Your question is a distraction from your dishonesty. I made no such suggestion. What I said was, here are reasons to believe it’s not true. But regardless of whether it’s true, it’s an obnoxious and bigoted and ignorant tweet. Absolutely nothing in what I said justified your dishonest claim that I implied there is no reason to care. Take it back. I’m not spending 24 comments debating this. Take it back.
Patterico (0869a7) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:09 pm238… i’m diggin’ it teh most, Thor.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:14 pmProgressives have to follow the currents of their most hoped for prospects.
Narciso (2cb936) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:16 pmTake it back, take it back, take that thing right out of here
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:19 pmRight away, far away, take that thing right out of here
Occasionally they get things wrong, but how,often does the rizzotto presscget things right deliberately
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/07/how_to_read_the_news_a_guide_for_truthseekers.html
Narciso (2cb936) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:25 pmBush was already deep into CIA’s efforts against Castro’s Cuba during his time with Zapata. Armed raids were launched and recovered from Zapata’s off-shore platforms, and Bush acquired 3 ships (he named one for his wife: Barbara) that were refurbished and converted into raider launching vessels. George H W Bush was CIA and a major operative in the attempt to overthrow Castro.
ropelight (da1be9) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:29 pmHe was also the youngest pilot (and officer?) in the U.S. Navy in WWII. I don’t know if skydiving on his 90th birthday makes him the oldest skydiver, but by any measure he has led a manly man’s life.
nk (dbc370) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:33 pmYou have to have grown up in Miami, ropelight, to see the company is not nearly as competent aa you attribute to it,
As for the names of the ships it could just as well have st. Barbara, whose Santeria analogue is Ochun Yoruba goddess of war, Houston could be anything, agency digraphs were strange Pluto was the name of the incursion, originally the site was trinidad near thr escambray mountains, the heart of the underground.which persisted for four years.
Narciso (2cb936) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:37 pmAssuming Bush and his company were helping the CIA, are you criticizing Bush for doing that?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:00 pmMeghan McCain Teases Mom Cindy over Gigantic July 4th Water Slides: I’ll Need ‘a Few Beers First’
lol need a few beers first!
need some beers from mom the beer distributor wench
wait wait just teasin’ you mom
man those slides are BIG huh
and super-wet and slippery-looking
ok no seriously mom go get me a goddamn beer
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/3/2018 @ 8:45 pmDepends what he was helping them do. I don’t have nearly the blind faith in our intelligence services that I use to.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:04 pmBeldar, the missing files was a joke and a dig at the all to common occurrence of important files coming up missing in the swamp. In no way did I mean to insinuate you had anything to do with that. I apologize for that.
Your other points I still disagree with but that isn’t going to change.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:13 pmLater:
Which source is more accurate?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/3/2018 @ 9:27 pmTake it back.
Patterico (0869a7) — 7/3/2018 @ 7:09 pm
No, I won’t take it back. The post title is “U.S. President Donald Trump: It Is Bad to Have U.S. Citizens from Iran”
Had his tweet swapped out “Iranians” for “foreigners” or “persons”, it wouldn’t have caught your eye. No, without that, you wouldn’t have composed a post about whether the tweet had a measure of truth behind it, because it would no longer “merit” that title and your charge of bigotry — and, let’s skip the BS, the whole point of your post was to level a charge of bigotry. It served no other purpose.
I’m to believe you would’ve posted about it anyway, because absent the bigotry angle it was an item of significance? This, when you couldn’t muster a single post about, say, the IG report or the IG hearings before congress? LOL
So, no, you don’t care about the truth of the tweet. I take nothing back. Unleash the banhammer if you wish. It’s your site.
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/3/2018 @ 10:13 pm@247. DRJ, there’s may be something to that, and no, there’s nothing wrong with it at all. Context of the times and such. But you know, these things are kept on the QT and so forth or just left in the grey area of shadows. My late father, through his oil firm, mentioned once or twice of doing a deal or two w/or through GHWB many, many, many years ago, but didn’t elaborate. Can’t really say much more other than to note corporate oil types who travelled and dealt in those circles in that era sometimes were asked about areas they had access to in the course of business that were otherwise closed off to others. A curious case in point- my late father did a great deal of work/travel back and forth from Libya to London during the period Gaddafi had just taken power and nationalized the oil fields. Security and such was pretty tight as you’d expect given the then young Colonel’s flamboyant and quirky nature. At the time, those fields were the best source for LSC and it was in high demand by a big customer, the U.S. gov’t, chiefly to refine as jet fuel for the war. Usually Dad would make these trips and remain fairly tight-lipped about them, beyond the passport stamps through Tripoli and so forth. But on one particular trip he made a point of taking the family movie camera, which at the time, seemed odd. My father had no sight in one eye, hence no depth perception and never was a camera person at all; he had zero knowledge of them. Hence the family camera work was done by other family members for snapshots, movies and such. Those old Super 8 cameras had 50 ft. cartridges of film, too. And on just this one occasion, before a trip to Libya, he asked me to film a leader of about 5 feet of him just walking around out along the sidewalk in front of the flat. Simple, mundane stuff. A few days later, he tucked the camera in his briefcase and was off on the trip. Upon his return there was about 5 feet left and he asked me to film him again to end the cartridge. Because he wanted to take it in to get it developed. He never did that before – it was always some other family member. So, finished the cart up and he took it to work. It was developed in a day -two copies- which was unusual for a ‘home movie’ back then- and he kept one copy and the other was ‘taken to the office’ and we never heard about it again nor gave it another thought. Fast forward three decades and about six months before he passed, we began transferring old home movies to videotape. And, surprise, there in the bottom of the box of movies was this ‘Libya’ film reel none of the family had ever seen. So we screened it and after that leader ended there was all this detailed imagery of Libyan ports, oil facilities, tanker terminals, guard locations, military checkpoints, pipelines and so forth. Clearly not tourist stuff at all. Not even certain he filmed all of it, given his vision issues, either. Brought to mind the whole episode and recall asking him why he did this and all he’d say was he was ‘asked’ and passed the other copy along to those who ‘did the asking.’ That’s all he’d say. Go figure. Different era. These things come to mind this time of year w/t family anyway- July 2 would have been his 89th birthday.
____
Tip of the cap to all on the 4th of July and the Original Thirteen… and have a safe Independence Day there in Texas. too.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:02 pmWhen the President of the United States puts out a statement that suggests that it’s a bad thing to have U.S. citizens who hail from Iran, he sends a message to U.S. citizens here who come from Iran: you are not welcome. It is a bad thing that you are here.
So we are supposed to pretend all the nations of the world are equally desirable as a source of immigrants?
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/3/2018 @ 11:13 pmNo, we are supposed to treat people like individuals.
To condemn someone based on circumstances of birth that they had no control over, and without reference to their actual deeds and character, is the very definition of bigotry.
Dave (445e97) — 7/4/2018 @ 2:45 amFunny you should ask that, on today of all days:
What was once self-evident to the founders now appears to be subject to ridicule.
In certain quarters, anyway.
Dave (445e97) — 7/4/2018 @ 3:07 amBeing created equal never meant we made equal decisions. Those decisions cost people Life, Liberty, and pursuit of happiness every day.
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:55 amWell that is the promise of America, but men don’t believe in the former, so they can’t appreciate the latter.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:37 amWell sorry about that:
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/03/trump-dnc-hacking-693965
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:40 amOne of the differences is the French aspired to brotherhood and equality, goals that can’t be achieved by man unaided by gods guidance, if at all.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:42 amAnd this i think was the problem in many Latin American countries, they aspired to unattainable goals, and hence they ended up with strongmen like Santa ana or Rojas.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:49 amThe Iranian revolution was embarked among by a small cadre, mostly supporters of the late missadecq, but it was the mullahs and the merchants that gave it power.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:57 amso how does one solve a problem like iran, or Venezuela or Afghanistan, inattention, appeasement is not the answer, neither it seems is military intervention,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:51 amsomething happening here:
https://twitter.com/johnson_carrie/status/1014145643164598273
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:03 amBuDuh, the first time I said “the company” we were talking about Zapata Petroleum and Zapata Offshore, and I provided a link that said this:
The second quote involves family money given for his first business venture, Bush-Overbey, so I think those statements are consistent. The family helped him in his original business but after he was “established in business,” he used his own money, bank loans and/or investor money to start Zapata Petroleum and Zapata Offshore. His family may have invested in Zapata entities but, even if it was because he is related, that doesn’t make it a gift.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:07 amA more complete quote from the link you provided:
Did Bush not get “seed money?”
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:13 amDCSCA 253. Awesome comment. I read it three times, and carefully. Your Dad is fascinating and a patriot.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:15 amthis is entirely the wrong prescription:
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/07/arab-democracy-lebanon-iraq-tunisia/564317/
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:18 amthe fascinating thing, that I discovered from schlaes biography, was that much like Reagan he had originally progressive sentiments:
http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/03/listen-coolidge-douglass-tocqueville-american-independence/#.Wzwr772Nbeg.twitter
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:20 amI think he was talking about Zapata when he said he did not use family money as seed money.
Bush-Overbey was a two-man firm. It was a big risk for a young man with a family, but it was still a small venture with two guys, a desk in an office, and pounding the pavement doing what is called landman work in the oilfield. Basically they researched the oilfield records in county courthouses and tried to sell ideas for ventures to oilfield drilling and production companies.
The Zapata companies were drilling and production companies. They drilled wells and managed production so they needed expensive equipment and many employees. That costs big money, and Bush has always said he did the Zapata ventures without family help.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:23 amdo progressives think all men are created equal, do they understand why?
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:25 amI was thinking “never” meant never.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:28 ammaybe it’s just beyond them:
https://reason.com/blog/2018/07/03/facebook-algorithm-flags-removes-declaration-of-independence
e pleb nista,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:32 amWords do have meanings, but if you believe that then it seems strange you are ignoring his other words. He qualified his statements by saying he did not take family money after he was “established in business.”
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:39 amMaybe Bush 41 took family money his whole life, BuDuh. Maybe he is exactly like Trump in that way. Maybe he is immoral and vulgar, too. Trump and Bush 41 can be exactly alike in every respect for all I care, but I try to analyze things as I see them based on what I think the facts are. IMO this is what the facts point to here.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:44 amAlso, to me, seed money means money for a project or venture. It does not mean money to support your family, which is probably what Bush initially got from his family.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:49 amFour Pinocchios from the DDID, and his administration has provided no information to back up his completely baseless claim. So yes, Trump is un-American for taking the word of a Mullah-aligned regime hardliner, and bigoted, too. It’s also un-American for Trump to align with Putin on the Crimean region of Ukraine. Putin’s interests are not ours. These are two examples which show that Donald Trump’s primary loyalty is to himself and his ego, not to the United States of America, IMO.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:52 amthe Russians are not giving up crimea, it would be like us giving up Texas, actually twice that because it was contested that many more times,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:58 amDa fack o’ da matter is that Bush 41 was shooting down Kamikazes when he was nineteen, jumping out of airplanes at ninety, and drilling for oil and running the CIA in-between, while the riskiest thing the orange-skinned baboon ever did was cruise gay bars on 42nd Street with Roy Cohn. It’s a Trump habit and a Trumpkin trait to denigrate everybody who is a better person than Shortfinger, and that’s almost everybody who ever held a high position in the government, in order to make the OSP look less bad by comparison.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:02 am272… BuDuh? It’s on you, bro’… https://youtu.be/4x0fPZrPV3M
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:04 amYou don’t know what Putin would do wrt the Crimean region of Ukraine, and the TX analogy is bogus. The Russian Federation signed both a memorandum and a treaty where Russia would respect Ukrainian sovereignty in exchange for Ukraine giving up every single one of its nukes, and Putin welshed on that deal. And let’s not forget, Putin’s taking the sovereign territory of another nation is the first time that has happened since Saddam Hussein took Kuwait. Funny how the reactions to the respective invasions have been so different from the conservative side of the aisle. I’m only irritated that Trump would say something stupid about 2,500 Iranians becoming US citizens, but and I’m genuinely and fully pissed off that Trump would even think about caving on the Crimean region of Ukraine.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:44 amI was trying for a more elevated conversation, but nitpicking more the order of the day.
Narciso (dfe933) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:44 amFour Pinocchios from the DDID, and his administration has provided no information to back up his completely baseless claim.
“We asked Ben Rhodes…”
LOLOLOL
random viking (6a54c2) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:46 amIt’s as if no other sources were used, Ad hom noted.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:59 am255 256
Do you believe in open borders?
If not immigration into the United States needs to be limited in some way. Would you do it by lottery since you believe everyone is equal? Or would you attempt to select desirable immigrants who are likely do well and exclude undesirable immigrants who are likely to do poorly? Or perhaps you don’t believe there is any such thing as desirable immigrants and undesirable immigrants?
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:00 amAd hominem is a perfectly legitimate form of argument. Witnesses in court are routinely impeached with prior convictions for felonies or other crimes involving dishonesty and moral turpitude, including litigants and defendants in criminal cases if they testify. When considering whether to take somebody’s word for something, their history of honesty and dishonesty matters.
Now … let’s look at Trump’s history of honesty and dishonesty.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:06 amLawyers have to be the most dishonest law breaking jockeys in the universe.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:14 amCalled as seen. Ben Rhodes is suspect because he is already on record that his job was to reflect the views of the president, so he’s a hack. But, he’s only one of multiple sources in a credible article which makes a persuasive case that Trump was expelling that tweet from his backside. And note that the Four Pinocchio rating was conditioned on Trump furnishing evidence that would corroborate his tweet. Since Trump has not been in the habit of corroborating or correcting his 3,000-plus falsehoods since he took office, so it’s a safe conclusion that he was telling another another one of his whoppers.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:23 amI agree that ad hominem can be legitimate when the testimony of a source has no credibility, but it can also be a lazy excuse to avoid or dismiss an otherwise legitimate point, because Ben Rhodes!
About time the House sergeant at arms gets ready to use the power of inherent intent and hold these crooks accountable. Yes, lock them up and throw away the key until they squeal. The house republicans need to step it up on making obamas herd accountable.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:27 amAnd it’ll only get worse… http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/07/the-patriotism-gap.php
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:28 amCan you imagine the Washington Post running an opinion piece that asks “why can’t we hate black men?” ?
Neither can I.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-cant-we-hate-men/2018/06/08/f1a3a8e0-6451-11e8-a69c-b944de66d9e7_story.html
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:36 amHappy Independence Day. Let’s take a day to be thankful we still live in the greatest nation on earth and that we will come together to stop tyranny and communism from gaining a foothold at home.
NJRob (1e2270) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:40 amHow about the DOJ basically sweeping the Awan Bros/Poodleman-Schultz crime-coverup-disappeared server stuff under the rug?!?!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:45 amindeed, njrob, I think it’s the propositional nature of this country, unlike most others that has kept us in good stead, has it made mistakes, most assuredly,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:46 amHappy July 4th!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:47 ama topical point:
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 10:18 amhttps://babalublog.com/2018/07/04/the-fourth-of-july-and-the-ladies-of-havana-george-washingtons-supporters-in-cuba/
Awan/Poodleman-Schlitz. Is another doj-lawyer scam against the American tax=payer. Our government is completely corrupt.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/4/2018 @ 10:23 amBlame Trump.
Smoked chicken wings and jalapeños stuffed with cream cheese is what I’m bringing to the party.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/4/2018 @ 10:25 amchorizo stuffed burgers, with cheese,
http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/02/factual-comparison-watergate-russiagate-shows-theyre-mirror-opposites/
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 10:38 amas one of the sharpest minds on the subject, odd they didn’t ask him, sarc
https://twitter.com/Doranimated/status/1014475170365485058
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 11:02 am293 it amazes me how little of a deal missing evidence and missing government property is. What’s even more frustrating is why would Republicans in charge let this get buried?
Nate Ogden (223c65) — 7/4/2018 @ 11:17 amYou said:
The color of someone’s skin, or where they were born, is not an indicator of their desirability as an immigrant.
Dave (445e97) — 7/4/2018 @ 11:24 amTrump to aides: “Hey, let’s invade Venezuela!”
Dave (445e97) — 7/4/2018 @ 11:28 ammaybe she should have been more skeptical,
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/iran/2013-11-27/saved-deal
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 11:30 amNate, here is another perspective on the source of Trump”s wealth.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 11:37 amOK. That was the last straw. Goodbye.
Patterico (c77cc2) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:05 pmI recently said:
The new rule is in effect and random viking is the first ban. This did not occur in a vacuum; he recently made a bullshit accusation against me and it took about 30 comments and several emails from me to get him to apologize and retract. Then I made it very clear that I might ban people for persistently mischaracterizing others’ words when they clarify that’s not what they meant. Then random viking did it to me yet again. I told him I’m not spending 30 comments waiting for him to retract it; that’s not what I meant and I expected him to take it back. He refused, understanding that persisting in mischaracterizing my view could lead to a ban.
This sort of thing does not contribute to discussion. Eliminating random viking from the forum will improve the general level of intellectual honesty and reduce frustration on the part of those who care about honesty. Win win.
Anyone else who wants to push me on this is welcome to. The result will be the same.
Patterico (c77cc2) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:14 pmAnd now, to go add random viking to my email filter, so that I will not see any whiny emails from him about this. Also, I am putting his comments into the “straight to trash” filter and not the moderation filter, so I won’t see those either. He is now cut out of my life for good.
Patterico (c77cc2) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:16 pmSo those who rightly critical of the Iran deal , see that its not out of the question that some such deal could have happened.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:17 pmI’d like to add that random viking’s history is relevant to the speed and irrevocable nature of the ban. Anyone else with a persistent need to mischaracterize others’ posts should be paying close attention. History matters.
Patterico (c77cc2) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:19 pmHappy 4th of July! May you enjoy family, friends, and good food and remember to count your blessings for the good fortune of living in America!
And for godsakes, be extra careful with teh ordnance!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:24 pmOne thing I’d like to emphasize here is that it’s not just random viking’s refusal to accept my own interpretation of my own words that is infuriating and bannable; it’s also the fact that his argument was so absurd to begin with — because his reading of my words was so implausible.
My post, fairly summarized, says this:
And random viking summarized it in this way:
You can’t plausibly read what I wrote and get his interpretation from it. The very first thing I did in my analysis was to cast doubt on the truth of Trump’s claim. To claim that I was saying “who cares if it’s true?” is not plausible.
This is part of a pattern on his part.
I never got around to saying this before, but I’ll say it now. random viking’s claim that I approved of George W. Bush’s hypocrisy on nation building was not just baseless. It was wrong, and the argument he used to reach that conclusion was stupid.
It was wrong because I know that Bush’s hypocrisy on nation building bothered me, and I remember that I had discussions with people in the early to mid 2000s in which we rolled our eyes about how we were supposed to never be involved in nation building.
It was stupid because the logical premise of his argument was so absurd: because he could not readily find a condemnation online from me of Bush’s hypocrisy, therefore I was fine with it. But presidents take literally hundreds or thousands of actions in their presidency, and even a prolific daily blogger such as myself can’t comment on them all. Beldar came up with commentary that showed that I had indeed recognized the hypocrisy, but random viking discounted that because it was not the main point of the post. But let’s say I had never said anything online (although I had) or to anyone in oral conversations (although I did). That doesn’t mean I approved of it, given that there were hundreds or thousands of Bush actions that I might have approved or disapproved without actually saying anything.
Similarly, Trump has lied easily hundreds of times during his presidency and hundreds more during his campaign. I can guarantee that random viking has not explicitly denounced all of these lies explicitly. Is it therefore fair for me to clalim that he is “hunky dory” with any lie he has not taken the time to denounce in writing? Obviously not, and to make such an argument would be stupid — just like his argument was stupid to begin with,
So what have we lost? Someone who persistently makes stupid arguments, persistently mischaracterizes others’ words, and is persistently pigheaded about standing behind those mischaracterizations even after being called on them.
It’s not a loss. And should I ban others with a similar history, it would not be a net loss either. Fairly warned be thee says I. I’m done with having my words mischaracterized. Part of seeking real conversation is avoiding, and perhaps driving from the nearby scene, people who actively try to derail it. It’s not necessarily enough to avoid having a real conversation with such people, if they’re going to stand next to me while I have such a conversation with others and persistently throw us off track with mischaracterization after mischaracterization. If you think I’m talking about YOU, I probably am. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Patterico (c77cc2) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:46 pmthis is how you pronounce makgeolli (very easy to pronounce) I’m a do a little tour of the korean foozles in the next week
it’s a cloudy happy little rice wine and they serve it in these darling little peasant bowls like this but don’t be misled by that pic – it’s almost always served chilled so that little kettle’s probably just for serving
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 12:52 pmIts translated to makolli, how is it different from saki
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:01 pmI think you are being unfair in terms of RV’s characterization.
You wrote, “I don’t even think what he claims is true, and here’s why.”
So, you don’t think it’s true that 2500 Iranians were granted citizenship in connection with the Iran deal. So you discount the reason Trump gives for why it would be outrageous, because you don’t think it happened.
But, you next write, “Even if it was true, what Trump says would still be ignorant and bigoted.”
So, your alternate hypothesis is that even if 2500 Iranians were given citizenship in connection with the Iran deal, Trump’s statement about “Iranians becoming citizens” would still be ignorant and bigoted. Those are your words.
So, I do not see how you can fault RV for characterizing your comment as saying “Who cares if what Trump says is true” — based on your own words, whether the allegation is true or false doesn’t effect your conclusion that Trump’s statement criticizing Iranians becoming citizens is ignorant and bigoted.
He’s equating “Whether its true or false doesn’t change his statement” with “You don’t care if its true or false”, his statement is still bigoted and ignorant.
How you get to a conclusion that he has mischaracterized you is difficult to discern.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:02 pmIf the commentators here are locked into only using your specific words (or Beldar for that matter since he often makes the same complaint), without being able to take your words and draw conclusions for purposes of comparison or enlightenment, then you are stamping out discussion of the thoughts and analysis of the participants here.
You regularly are critical of what Trump must be “thinking” based on the words he employs, and regularly recast his words into a narrative that fits your perspective on him.
Yet you are quick to take issue with anyone who employs the same tools of analysis you use in the posts and comments you write.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:06 pmIt’s super easy to discern. I didn’t say who cares, or anything like it.
It’s a dishonest and disingenuous reading that only someone looking to dishonestly score points would give it.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:13 pmI am asking that people give words a plausible interpretation. If the first thing I do is cast doubt on the truth of the claim, only a hack would cherry pick my other words to assert I don’t care about the truth of the claim.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:15 pmThere was a similar effort by you to justify what Beldar wrote a couple nights ago about Buduh that I took issue with.
I claimed that Beldar called Buduh intellectually dishonest and a bigot, and you rode in to defend Beldar and said “No he didn’t, and here’s why you (swc) have mischaracterized what he said again.”
But the crux of Beldar’s comment was that Trump’s public comments appeal to bigots, Trump likely knows this, and only the intellectually dishonest deny that to be a fact.
Beldar then asked Buduh to acknowledge and agree with him (Beldar) that the propositions advance by Beldar were true. Then he said that if Buduh couldn’t acknowledge that, did that mean that Buduh was one of those people — i.e., intellectually dishonest and/or a bigot.”
So he set up the exchange by saying that Buduh had to agree with the premises he set forth, and if he didn’t agree that was an acknowledgement that Buduh was intellectually dishonest and/or a bigot to whom Trump’s comments were appealing.
So, did Beldar say “Buduh, you are intellectually dishonest and a bigot”?? No, he didn’t.
So you are correct in that regard.
Did Beldar construct an exchange where, unless Buduh agreed with Beldar, the Buduh would be labeling himself as intellectually dishonest and a bigot for purposes of any continuing dialogue??
He absolutely did.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:15 pmSo, would it be implausible for me to take your two posts at 317 and 318, and conclude that you have called someone “looking to dishonestly score points”, i.e., “dishonest”, and a “hack that would cherry pick” your words, even though you did not write “SWC is dishonest and a hack??
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:17 pmThat’s not how I read it, swc. P made the case that Trump’s claim is false, but even on the off chance that Trump backed it up, it was still ignorant and bigoted. That’s a long ways from “you don’t care if it’s true or false”.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:18 pmNo I do not.
Nor am I interested — at ALL — in your thoughts about what I regularly do. If you persist, do so in moderation for a month. There is literally nothing to be gained from that in terms of real conversation. Did you somehow miss that you are the other prime offender I was warning?
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:18 pmI think the track record related to this rhodes road show, I didmt check if the post put forth cirincione or rozen as rebuttal witnesses, should make one not dismiss this allegation out of hand.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:19 pm320 should read … that you have called ME someone …”
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:19 pm322 — LOL. Did I miss it?? I think only a “hack” would have missed it.
So you decide.
shipwreckedcrew (56b591) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:20 pmHe absolutely did not. Ask him. This is just another attempt to mischaracterize.
You can’t stop yourself. Do it in moderation for a month.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:20 pmWho else wants to tell me what I really mean even though my words are inconsistent with the claim and I repeatedly say so?
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:23 pmhow is it different from saki
good question
i’ll circle back on this after i try it
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:25 pmWhat America Was Really Like in 1776
By Thomas Fleming
Published by New Word City, Inc., 2011
Copyright Thomas Fleming
Highlighted Notes from Book:
-Benjamin Franklin expressed the prevailing wisdom during the French and Indian War, 15 years before the Revolution: “The scum of every nation is to be found on their frontiers.”
-In the northern colonies, the wealthiest 10 percent of the population owned about 45 percent of the property.
-Some 40 percent of 1776 Americans were small or medium-sized independent farmers, who largely supported themselves from their own land.
-On a per-capita basis, the Americans of 1776 were the richest people in the civilized world. They were also the lowest taxed.
-It took about 500 pounds a year – about $40,000 – for a family to feel well off. Skilled workers, such as carp[enters, earned around 90 pounds – about $5,000 – annually. Schoolteachers made little more than a landless laborer.
-At the top of the economic pyramid were lawyers, who made as much as $3,000 pounds a year.
-The ultimate sign of wealth, similar to the ownership of a private yacht of airplane today, was an “equipage” – a coach drawn by four matched horses, with servants in livery riding outside.
-By 1775, Americans were producing one-seventh of all the iron in the world. By 1787, the 13 colonies had an economy that was two-fifths the size of England’s.
-The British felt enormously threatened by the dynamism of American growth, both in wealth and people.
-The first federal census in 1790 reveals that of the total white population of 2 million, only 60.9 percent were English and 14.3 percent were Scotch or Scotch Irish.
-On the frontier or “back country,” as most people called it, things were very different. There, dress was heavily influenced by American Indian fashions. In the 1770’s, many young men adopted the indian breech clout for summer wear.
-Backcountry young women were soon imitating the men in their own way. It’s probably not surprising that almost every woman on the frontier was married by the age of 18. The pace was a bit slower in the settled part of 1776 America.
-Practice of bundling, which was popular in New England and the middle colonies. To give a courting couple some privacy during the winter months, the young man was invited to share the young woman’s bed – with a stout board down the center of it. Studies of birth records have inclined historians to conclude that more than half the brides were pregnant when they went up the aisle. Most churchmen found little or no fault with this trend.
-A woman in 1776 had little or no opportunity to be independent.
-Apple cider was the common drink of most men, rich and poor. A barrell was always on tap in the cellars.
-In New Jersey, the Revolution turned into a civil war that pitted parents against sons and vice versa.
-Medicine was mostly guesswork, backed up by a few powerful drugs, such as calomel, opium, and quinine.
-Life expectancy was 54 years for men and 56 for women.
-Loyalists – more than 60,000 – 100,000 people fled to Canada, the West Indies, and England. That was almost 10 percent of the 1776 Caucasian population.
-By 1780, one in seven men in the Continental Army’s ranks was black.
Here’s to apple cider and bundling! Happy 4th to all.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:28 pmIt seems like living in Trump’s world makes escalation likely, maybe even necessary. Doesn’t Trump have a rule that you always have to be tough and get even? If people like those things about him, are they more likely to do it themselves?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:28 pm302
The color of someone’s skin, or where they were born, is not an indicator of their desirability as an immigrant.
Actually it is in a statistical sense. That is there may be individual exceptions but on average immigrants from some countries will do better than immigrants from other countries.
In any case do you agree that some people are more desirable immigrants than others? And if so is it legitimate for the United States to prefer desirable immigrants?
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:30 pmwhy do the sleazy trashy men and women of the corrupt and useless fbi persist in thinking the law doesn’t apply to them
Anti-Trump FBI Agent May Ignore Congressional Subpoena, His Lawyer Says
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:31 pmIt could be argued that Obama’s collusion with the Iranian regime, shows evidence of animus toward the people, seeing as those millions of dollars did nothing but enriching a small clique. Hence the protests since this winter.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:33 pmOur host reads comments and participates in discussion far more than any blogger popular with the Trump fans. Does anyone at Instapundit or Powerline care about what you think, let alone bother to talk to you? No, they don’t.
And to then suggest that Patterico “stamps out discussion” when he not only participates but provides the forum is reprehensible.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:36 pmBreaking- CNN reporting protestor[s] climbing Lady Liberty in NY harbor.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:38 pmit’s too hot to climb a stupid statue
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:43 pmugh looks like a nevertrump bimbo ruined a lot of people’s day
that sucks waiting with all those nasty sweaty people to get on your ferry and then you have to turn right around cause of some trashy nevertrump bimbo
summer bummer womp womp
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:47 pmYes and I used collusion deliberately, of course one might suggest sympathy on Obama’s part to an oppressed people, but it doesn’t work out that way.
Venezuelans disemboweling has impacts on the price of crude, on the political stability of Brazil and Colombia, so what is the solution, Ben sasse last August seemed to skip the whole question.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:48 pmstormy’s pimp wants to run for president Mr. narciso
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 1:51 pmThey don’t notice the irony, of protesting on Ellis island.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 2:00 pmSo that’s what’s called fundraising now?
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/04/thousands-dollars-stormy-daniels-strip
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 2:03 pmcan our dirty tranny-trash mattis military get any trashier?
here’s 33 people what say yes yes!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 2:29 pmswc sees me ban someone for persistently mischaracterizing my writing. He sees me wanrning others who persistently do the same. He knows I consider him to be a prime offender. What does he do? Reinforce the deliberate misreading that was the final straw for the other commenter. Make an argument that acknowledges the words in my post that show I care about the truth of the claim — showing he knows those words exist — and yet immediately proceed to argue in a way that ignores those words, ignores my repeated statements that I do care, and conclude that it’s beyond understanding how I could think it’s wrong for someone to deny that I actually meant what I said I meant. Then he moves on to a generic accusation that would be unresolvable without days of pointless frustrating argumentation about how I typically have allegedly behaved in the past. And tops it off by repeating a mischaracterization of Beldar’s words.
He’s ASKING to be banned.
All this from the most persistent employer of strawmen arguments in this blog’s long history.
Like Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, I will see to it that swc learns by the numbers. I will teach him. He will one day either learn to phrase others’ arguments in a way that they would agree is accurate, or his commenting streaks will last only days or even hours, sandwiched between moderation periods lasting weeks or months.
His days of arguing by attributing false positions to others without consequences? Those days are over, beginning today.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/4/2018 @ 2:47 pmPatterico, I *do* think that some people want to push the envelope to see just how offensive they can be…to find out where you will draw the line.
It’s not freedom of expression. It’s a matter of civility when they push like this.
Your blog, your rules. It’s simple.
You put up with a lot of nonsense; this must be pretty frustrating.
I hope you and your family have a lovely 4th of July.
Simon Jester (79a3c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 3:29 pmIt reminds me very much of those yahoos who say something offensive, then when called on it, reply that the other person “shouldn’t take it personally.” Especially when it was meant personally.
Not only do you have odd trolls, you have self appointed martyrs, too. Sigh.
Simon Jester (79a3c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 3:31 pmWell simon i was trying to be philosophical about my adopted country, which is run by a brutal Camarilla as much Iran revolutionary guard.
Narciso (df7e72) — 7/4/2018 @ 3:53 pmNarciso, I seldom understand your threads (I do get many of your obscure references, however). But I have never tried to label or fight with you.
Simon Jester (79a3c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:06 pmswc got a vacation for expressing how I felt after reading Beldar’s non answer to my question to Bored Lawyer? I appreciate the effort swc.
The thought experiment was never pursued into whether or not Bored Lawyer’s entire statement would have survived if his one sentence, within that statement, was rendered false. Bored Lawyer never approached the debate, which should have been telling enough. The opposing vitriol that ensued made no sense to me considering how useful a practical debate would have been.
I’m not sure how to have a debate here anymore. Please employee a lifetime ban on me, Pat. I may still be tempted to offer a considered opinion from a different perspective and I now clearly see that it would be unwelcome.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:14 pmhere was my original question to BuDuh, quoted in full; it is 143 words long (typos corrected):
swc’s now written a large multiple of those 143 words, in a long series of comments over many days. Today, for instance swc wrote (in #319):
I did not write that it is intellectually dishonest to deny that Trump intends to appeal to bigots. swc mashed two different things together, which I was quite careful to keep distinct.
I wrote that my own inference, based on circumstantial evidence, is that Trump so intends. Can someone else decline to draw that same inference, and still be intellectually honest? Yes, if you credit Trump with being as great a caring humanitarian as he claims to be, that’s the inference you’d probably draw. I think it’s a misjudgment, but it’s not intellectually dishonest. Regardless, that was not my point — not, as swc says (falsely), the crux of what I was saying at all.
The crux of what I was saying was that regardless of whether Trump intends to incite them, there are indeed actual bigots who his words do excite. That was what I said it’s intellectually dishonest to deny.
Does BuDuh deny the existence of bigots who are excited by Trump’s words about immigrants and immigation? We don’t know. He never answered.
Does swc? I didn’t ask him directly, but he didn’t answer either.
swc can’t make his case by quoting me. He has to make up words which he then pretends I said — not fair paraphrases, but stuff he just fabricates from his own imagination, often putting them in quotes as if I’d said them. And then he attacks the straw-man me.
I’m perfectly happy to have anyone point to — and quote accurately — anything I’ve written here, and to then ask me, “Would the following be a logical extension of your argument: _______?” Or: “… a fair paraphrase of your argument: ________?”
I get hearily tired of seeing the strawman version of myself lose arguments to swc, though.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:17 pmLet me put it like this, removing as much of the proactive language as I can.
Is that inaccurate?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:23 pm343
… He will one day either learn to phrase others’ arguments in a way that they would agree is accurate, …
This seems like it is basically impossible. A more realistic goal would be to rephrase arguments in way that a neutral third party would agree was a plausible interpretation of what was said.
More generally I think that getting into extended debates about whether a comment was worded optimally is unproductive and should be avoided when possible. Better to argue about the substance.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:25 pmIt would be accurate to say I asked you a question about your beliefs, BuDuh.
(Which you still haven’t answered.)
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:35 pmbecause I don’t use invective, simon, now I do note when the narrative was this modest pause, was a muslim ban, ELEVENTY? I was skeptical, and as they say I don’t have the wide experience, but shipwrecked who has handled these issues, thought similarly, just like I would defer to our host on the matters of criminal prosecution, we were both vindicated by the text of last week’s decision, particularly page 34, I dismiss Pikachu because he is david spade, others are just conducting the argument clinic,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:37 pmIt is my belief that there are subgroups of groups that will believe anything whether it was said, implied, or imagined, Beldar.
That answers everything you asked, Beldar, without their being any animus suggested between you and I. Correct?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:39 pmOf course, no one — BuDuh, swc, or anyone — is under any obligation to answer a question from me.
The reader may, however, draw his own inferences when someone writes as much as they both did about my question, without ever answering it.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:41 pmThat is the answer to a different question than I asked.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:42 pm349
I find the mindset illustrated by this comment really annoying. The implication appears to be that Trump (and presumably everyone else) should take great care never to say anything about anything that might appeal to bigots. This is political correctness run amok and makes rational discussion impossible.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:46 pmWould you write out the confession that I need to sign so we can move on to Bored Lawyer’s claim?
IOW, “I, BuDuH, agree that…”
I am seriously confused by your proposition. So much so that I honestly took it as an insult. But I am hopeful that understanding how I am supposed to answer the question will help me out.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:48 pmdavid spade
roe v wade
green eyeshade
preference cascade
hand grenade
pro free trade
every day
in every way
i’m a betterandbetter
lieutenant junior grade
david spade!
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:50 pmOk. If I leave out the intellectually honest/dishonest portion to be resolved after answering what I believe is the question.
I believe that genuine bigots do indeed take Trump’s statements as supportive of their bigoted position.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 4:55 pmDuly noted.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:11 pmGreat!
Beldar, what percentage of Trump’s base do you believe to be genuine bigots?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:14 pmJames 351,
I hope this is a misunderstanding but it sounds like you believe it is impossible for one person to understand a second person’s argument well enough that they can restate it in their own words and also in a way the first person would think is accurate. That is what Patterico is saying when he says:
This does not mean the two people have to agree about the topic, only that they have to understand what the other one thinks. Surely we are not so far gone as a commenting community that most people believe we can’t understand what other people are saying and we won’t even try?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:18 pm363. This is what naturally happens when people are so disinterested in honest debate that they continue to talk right past each other.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:19 pmWas that for me, Gryph? Help me understand it, if so.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:22 pmI am continually reminded of discussions here 5-7 years ago with people (no longer here) who were upset with being asked questions about their beliefs. They felt their positions were clearly stated and it was insulting to ask questions or give anything but Yes or No answers.
I think they were acting in good faith. I think in their professions and lives, most problems could be resolved by clear Yes or No answers.
I don’t think politics or political consensus is one of those things … and now we see both parties and most partisans working to make Winning, not consensus, the rule.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:30 pm365. It wasn’t directed towards any one person, or really any group of people. It’s just the way the body politic is here in America. People look at politics like a game anymore. On both sides of the aisle, even.
You nailed it. “Winning” is so important that people don’t seem to stop to think about what it is that they stand to gain by winning.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:42 pmHow about facts, considering the many side deals to the Iran deal, one has to wonder if this was possible.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:45 pmThe OP is just another example of why I’m convinced that Trump’s victory was hollow and meaningless at best, pyrrhic at worst.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:47 pmI don’t mind losing, if that helps calm everyone down. Anyone else want to take a crack at what percentage of Trump’s base are genuine bigots?
I think it is less than 5% after quick research. I have no desire to ask for homework for other’s opinions, so it should be unnecessary to stall the discussion by demanding how I came to my conclusion. Just gut feel.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:53 pm370. Again, this is what I mean when I talk about people talking past each other. This is a mischaracterization of the question which you were asked, BuDuh, but acknowledging that would mean losing face on your part.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 5:55 pmBeldar said he duly noted my answer after I made the effort to respond specifically to his question, Gryph. That is now settled business and to imply that it is talking past each other denies what Beldar and I clearly communicated between each other.
Please go back and see so you don’t inadvertently start an altercation that is unnecessary.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:00 pmMaybe, Gryph, you think I am mischaracterizing my own question that is yet unanswered. Is that the misunderstanding?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:02 pmThanks, Gryph. I was afraid you thought I was talking past James, and that wasn’t my intent. I want to understand him. I think he believes the best we can hope for is consensus on general ideas. I think other people only care about the bottom line, and don’t care how we get there.
That’s how it used to work 25-50 years ago when America was decentralized and most politics was local (especially before the internet). How politics worked in state capitals and DC was not something most people knew about, at least not in detail, but now we do. I don’t see how we can agree on anything if we don’t understand what other people think.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:05 pm372. I just noticed that. I don’t usually follow threads as lengthy as this one in their entirety. You did acknowledge that irrespective of Trump’s bigotry (or supposed lack thereof), bigots could view his statement as bigoted.
When I speak of losing face, this is exactly the sort of thing that I mean; I feel as though I can let this stand without further comment on my part. I will just say that from where I stand, either Trump is being bigoted here, or he is being dishonest in order to whip up his supporters into a frenzy. It’s a simple binary either/or proposition. And any attempt on your part to convince me otherwise is wasted keystrokes.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:06 pmI thought Gryph was talking to me, BuDuh.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:06 pmNever mind, as Emily Litella used to say. I missed 370 et seq.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:08 pmWhen he wrote “370” I assumed it was me. Are the numbers getting jumbled again? This happened several weeks ago when someone was banned.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:09 pm374. We would be a free nation if politics were still local. It’s called “subsidiarity,” and as much as I’ve fallen away from the Roman Catholic Church, I still believe in Jethrite government. We stopped being free when we gave up our freedom to the 545. And until we figure out how 545 individuals can exercise force over a nation of 330+ million, we’ll never be truly free.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:10 pm🙂 DRJ.
Just for giggles, Gryph. What percentage of Trump’s base, in your opinion, are genuine bigots?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:11 pm378. I spoke of people talking past each other in at least two different posts. But as I said upthread, and will repeat again for clarification, neither side has a monopoly on this. It happens all the time.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:12 pmBigot is defined as:
Is that how you define it? Is that different from a “genuine bigot”?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:12 pmI agree, Gryph. No one has a monopoly on understanding or misunderstanding. I also agree about Congress. I’d like to see power returned to the state and local governments, but the federal government doesn’t want to let power go.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:16 pmWe have millions of regulations that proscribe what the congress the court and the president can do,
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:18 pm380. His base? I dunno. I’m not engaged enough with modern politics right now to even venture an intelligent guess at that. The best I can say is that it’s a small, but non-zero percentage.
Apropos to nothing, I’d simply point out that Roseanne Barr claimed to have voted for Trump, was quite proud that she did, and paid dearly for her vote although she had no other indication of being or even considering herself conservative. Likewise with Scott Adams of Dilbert fame. He’s no political conservative. He voted simply out of fear of Hilary and strict self-interest. I know this because he flat-out said so.
To me, that would be a better question ask: What percentage of Trump voters and supporters self-identify as liberal-progressive?
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:18 pm384. And most of them are ignored, or the regulations are written with loopholes the size of a small moon so that favored constituencies can ignore them (e.g. Tax law). Getting congress to follow their own laws would be a good start, but it would really only be a start.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:21 pmNeil young voted for reagan, so did Dennis hopper, yes they weren’t particularly conservative either, Adams is more a free thinker rather than any self styled conservative.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:22 pm387. Dunno about Hopper, but Neil Young has said he regretted his vote for Reagan.
And this doesn’t change my central thesis. I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that while Trump’s liberal supporters are likewise a non-zero number, they were also a large enough bloc to ensure his victory in 2016. His liberal supporters will likewise most likely ensure him a second term. Without libs throwing their vote to Trump, Hillary would have won. I’m sure of it.
I’m not so sure that Reagan depended on crossover votes in 1980. I know he did not depend on them in 1984.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:26 pmLiberals as in blue collar voters, especially in the Midwest? Those are the Trump voters that I picture when you say that, Gryph. The Roseanne demographic.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:32 pmIf so, and you may be right, then are we no longer a predominantly conservative populace? Probably not.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:34 pm389. When I say “liberals,” I mean self-identifying liberals. Exit polling in 2016 suggested that most self-identifying “liberals” who voted for Trump hadn’t ever voted for a Republican before. And even of those that weren’t first-time Republican voters, most of those still had voted for Obama twice.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:35 pmThat is a good question. When Beldar used “genuine bigot” in his question I assumed he meant “one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.”
I agree with the definition you linked, DRJ.
I will clarify:
What percentage of Trump’s base do you consider to be bigots who regard or treat the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:37 pmI haven’t looked at that much. Do we have any idea why they voted for Trump? Is there any common theme?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:37 pmDemocrats who voted for Obama, I think has delivered reasonably conservative results on foreign and social policy don’t you think?
narciso (d1f714) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:38 pmThe most common theme I see in Trump’s supporters of all political stripes, is fear of Hillary. The healthy smattering of loathing for the Clenis can not be overstated, also.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:39 pmWhat does you gut tell you, DRJ?
Gryph and I think it is pretty small but not zero.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:40 pmI think it was the racial aspect, too, BuDuh. I guess it is more like 10-15% but I also don’t think it is solely a GOP issue. I think Democrats have bigots, too.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:41 pmFine, could we stop recycling every left wing trope, unaffiliated persons have seen their wages and their jobs fade or disappear for 25 years. Cops were falling like nine pins, terrorist attacks were occurring in a state of denial,
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:45 pmThank you DRJ.
So if we apply the rule that we phrase others’ arguments in a way that they would agree is accurate, and we take Bored Lawyer’s question:
And solve it for those that assert that innuendo, that genuine bigots will see whether it was intended or not, is the actual event that Bored Lawyer claimed existed. Is this a fair rephrasing?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:51 pmObviously I meant Bored Lawyer’s statement.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:57 pm399. I don’t think Trump is intelligent enough to analyze what percentage of his base he caters to with the stupid crap he says. Giving him the benefit of the doubt in assuming he is intelligent enough, it’s pretty clear that he doesn’t care as long as he can get people to cheer for him.
I really do believe that his goal was to enact a muslim ban in a way that his advisors could make legally palatable. His own words damned him.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 6:58 pmWell, first, I think 10-15% of Americans may be bigots according to the dictionary definition, but that doesn’t mean they act like bigots in their lives. To me, thinking in a bigoted way us not the same as acting in a bigoted way.
Second, I don’t know what percentage of them make up Trump’s base but if all of them did, it would be more than 15% of his base.
Third, I would have agreed with your statement before we discussed this in such detail, but then I saw Trump’s press conference announcing the first travel ban where he said “We all know what that means.” That changed my mind. I see no reason for him to say that except to convey he meant it as a Muslim ban, and was keeping his promise to ban Muslims.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:00 pmI do, too.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:01 pm402. And further, his effort to ban muslims can be attributed solely to the fact that Trump believed it was what the audience at his rallies wanted to hear. What percentage of his base ate it up is immaterial to the fact that Trump clearly believed that his audience would, in fact, eat it up.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:02 pmDo you now think that Trump’s base is made of more than 15% bigots?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:03 pm405. Split hairs much, Schlichterite? Trump believed that his supporters wanted a Muslim ban. Trump apparently also believes that his base does not want immigrants from Iran. Change my mind, Trump humper.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:05 pmGryph, his “Muslim ban” could only cater to bigots. But you and I agree that bigots make up a small, but greater than zero, of Trump’s base.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:06 pmOh ohhh. 406 goes straight to insults. Too bad.
Later gators.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:06 pmI have no idea. I don’t know any way to tell how many people have bigoted thoughts or opinions. Reading online makes it seem more common than I hope it is.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:07 pmIf you think this is impossible then you don’t understand what I am saying.
DRJ summarized it pretty well.
In order to have a real discussion, each side must be able to understand what they are actually responding to. The ideal way is to start by phrasing the other person’s argument in a way that he would agree is a fair characterization of his argument.
This is, actually, over half the battle in a real discussion. Maybe more than half. If each side can do it, it provides a basis of respect and the conversation can continue from there.
On the Internet, far more often people mischaracterize the other person’s position as a starting point. swc is the undisputed king of this method of debate. He has slain more arguments he thinks I made that I never made than I can count.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:09 pmI thought BuDuh had self-deported. Are we going to have to prosecute you for illegal re-entry?
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:11 pmHow do you define “Trump’s base”?
If you mean his most devout followers, I’d be surprised if less than 1/3 aren’t prejudiced against latinos, muslims, blacks and/or Asians in some way. It could certainly be more.
That is, as you say, entirely a gut feeling and I disclaim any intention to provide hard evidence in support.
Dave (59a371) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:12 pmI said from the start that I thought there are bigots in both parties, BuDuh, but I can live with a guess of 15% of Trump’s base. I don’t know how we can know but assuming that is true, do you think it is too small a number to matter? Is your argument that politicians would never focus on 15% of their base?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:13 pmWell considering that obama was pushing to expand immigration from Syria despite actual evidence.
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:14 pm407. Which has absolutely nothing to do whatsoever with who Trump believes he is speaking to. You’re giving him way too much credit in assuming that Trump isn’t speaking directly to the bigot contingent of his base. It doesn’t have to be a lot of people in order for Trump to believe that a Muslim ban will play to his base!
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:15 pmThat’s it in a nutshell. So very simple.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:15 pm408. I do get like that when I lose my patience with disingenuous arguments.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:15 pmI think most politicians wouldn’t. Trump isn’t most politicians.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:17 pmSurprised if less than 1/3 *are* prejudiced…
Tied myself up in syntactic knots with that sentence, sorry..
Dave (59a371) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:19 pmPlus, this comment illustrates another point you’ve been making: Paul summarized your position in his own words and in a way you could agree was accurate. It shows an understanding of your position, whether or not he agreed.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:21 pmOops. Wrong quote. I meant to say this:
Plus, this comment illustrates another point you’ve been making: Paul summarized your position in his own words and in a way you could agree was accurate. It shows an understanding of your position, whether or not he agreed.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:22 pmYes wonderful now admit it wasn’t a Muslim ban, and we can move on to other things.
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:22 pm422. Legally it wasn’t. But Trump wanted a way around a muslim ban that the courts would accept. Ready to move on now?
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:24 pmI have experienced this countless times.
It’s no way to have a discussion.
He justifies this by saying I do it all the time to Trump. To litigate that false and ridiculous assertion would take days and the original point — that swc should not twist our words — would be lost in the intellectually dishonest morass of whining about what I write about Trump.
I’m not going to tolerate it. Should swc return in a month, my patience for strawmen will be non-existent. How I’ll handle it, I’m not sure. I think I will start by insisting that each and every time he wants to criticize my position, he first has to state what my position actually is, to my satisfaction. If he refuses, or persists in getting wrong in a way that suggests to me that he is not trying but just trying to make me look bad, it will be another significantly long vacation.
He will learn by the numbers. I will teach him.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:26 pm419… interesting. I would be surprised if less than 50% of public and private university professors and administrators are prejudiced against white people… Caucasian people.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:27 pmLawyers care about process, narciso. Our Founders realized government can’t promise specific things, like justice and equal results, but we can try to provide equal/due process. I understand the desire to ignore the details and get to the substance, the bottom line. But it doesn’t work in a nation where government works by consent of the governed instead of force.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:28 pmNo just those who commit fragrant thought crime, which can be anything, when the declaration is,considered thought crime?
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:30 pmI think you meant flagrant thought crime but I can’t get past “fragrant thought crime.”
DRJ (15874d) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:32 pmLike the tarp Bill, like Sarbanes oxley, the stimulus dodd frank, it doesn’t appear So, they never solve a problem. They just enable other ones.
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:33 pm428. A fragrant crime is what happens in my bathroom on a pretty regular basis, IYKWIMAITYD. 😉
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:33 pmAromatic perhaps pungent, you never what is the leading edge of crazy,
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:35 pmIt depends on how you define “Trump’s base”. If it’s the 14 million who gave him the primary, I’d say almost all of them are bigots with a small percentage who are mentally disturbed.
Of the March violets, the ones who supported him after he got the nomination, I’ll take most of them at their word that their reason was #NeverHillary, with a handful of opportunists who would have just as cheerfully sucked up to Hillary.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:50 pm432. I didn’t vote for him in the primaries, I didn’t vote for him in the general. I am not going to vote for him in 2020. It’s just that simple.
And before you Schlichterite simpletons even ask, no, I did not vote for Hillary.
Gryph (5efbad) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:54 pm363
I hope this is a misunderstanding but it sounds like you believe it is impossible for one person to understand a second person’s argument well enough that they can restate it in their own words and also in a way the first person would think is accurate. …
I think it is unreasonable to expect people to successfully do this every time. Sometimes people say things that really are ambiguous, they could mean A or B. Perhaps you meant A but your listener thought you meant B. When this happens it isn’t fair to put all the blame on the listener and demand that they apologize for twisting the speaker’s words.
Note like visual illusions (such as the blue dress or gold dress) it is sometimes hard to understand how someone could interpret what you said as B when it is obvious to you that you meant A. And vice versa from the listener’s point of view. This problem is exacerbated of course when the speaker and the listener seriously disagree about the subject under discussion.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:56 pmOh not unsubtle Nazi comparison for 1,000, Alex. Yes I read Phillip kerr.
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 7:56 pmNice catch. But just because Phillip Kerr used it to describe the post-1933 Nazis does not make it an exclusively Nazi reference. March violet is another way of saying late bloomers or Johnny-come-latelies because violets are famous for blooming in the winter.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:03 pmHe’s unsubtle in many ways, that scene in field Gray i had forgotten his depiction of 50s Havana was over the top
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:09 pm409
… I don’t know any way to tell how many people have bigoted thoughts or opinions. …
There are numerous public opinion polls which address this question. I believe the answer is pretty close to 100%.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:14 pmJames:
Perhaps, but not every discussion degenerates into namecalling or hostility. Maybe this is an alternative in those cases. <blockquote>… I don’t know any way to tell how many people have bigoted thoughts or opinions. …
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:20 pmThere are numerous public opinion polls which address this question. I believe the answer is pretty close to 100%. But we were talking about racial/ethnic bigots. I agree everyone is bigoted (intolerant) about some things but I don’t think everyone is a racist.
Strange. I don’t know why that code didn’t work. The code looks right but it didn’t post right. Hopefully you understand what I meant.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:21 pm@434 Well said, I agree.
Dave (445e97) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:22 pmJames:
Perhaps, but not every discussion degenerates into namecalling or hostility. Maybe this is an alternative in those cases.
But we were talking about racial/ethnic bigots. I agree everyone is bigoted (intolerant) about some things but I don’t think everyone is a racist.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:22 pmIt looks like you’re missing a closing blockquote.
Dave (445e97) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:25 pmI went back to him and have now read all of the Bernie Gunther novels except for A Man Without Breath which I could not find handily, and Berlin Requiem which bored me about a third of the way through. I’ve come to the conclusion that Kerr meant Gunther to be Nietzsche’s superior man, the man of pure metal, the kind who “that which does not kill him makes him stronger”.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:26 pmI think you have this backwards. This is something you do when you want to try to understand someone is saying. It isn’t the listener’s job to understand but it is his job to try, to make an effort. Try to restate the argument or ask questions. But if the listener doesn’t understand someone, how can they be sure the speaker is wrong?
The problem comes when listeners proclaim a speaker wrong without really understanding what he was saying, or even trying to understand enough to restate or question the speaker’s argument.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:27 pmWhat the hell was that damn Canadian doing voting in an American election?
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:27 pmI did. Sorry. I have a pet trying to help me type and he isn’t very good at HTML.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:28 pmWho No we hes meant to be an every man, a soldier a professional policemen in a continental abbatoir, if nate heller lived In Berlin he’d be Bernie Gunther, I found a copy of ‘breath in a second hand store.
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:32 pmHis stories are watered down compared to the reality. And I don’t mean only things like the four million killed at Auschwitz alone. I read the first Nuremberg indictmen. The Nazis were accused of the Katyn massacre of Polish officers, now known to have been committed by the NKVD. Because the Soviets were our *allies*.
nk (dbc370) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:47 pmAt this point, if Y insists X meant A, then we have a problem. It’s appropriate for X to ask Y to state what X actually said.
It’s needed here because misinterpretation happens so often.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:47 pmnext time won’t u sing with me 🙂
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:56 pmMax Boot joined George Will on Independence Day to throw his lot in with the socialists this November.
NJRob (588fb5) — 7/4/2018 @ 8:57 pmWhat did I say a continental abbatoir, he,seems to paint the Croatian zone in a,particularly vivid shade of crimson.
Narciso (6ff44f) — 7/4/2018 @ 9:07 pm452… they can take their neoconnery and bow tie and take a flying roger at a rolling donut, NJRob.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/4/2018 @ 10:21 pm442
Perhaps, but not every discussion degenerates into namecalling or hostility. …
I believe Patterico has stated in the past that he posts anti-Trump stuff just to annoy Trump supporters and that he isn’t trying to change anybody’s mind. Or words to that effect. So discussions here aren’t degenerating into hostility, they are hostile from the start.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/4/2018 @ 10:45 pmgeorge f will’s a dirty bow-tie-wearing prostitution-w-word (banned word)
he pretends to like baseball cause it’s his pitiful attempt to identify with a masculine signifier
not fooling me george f
dirty bow-tie-wearing prostitution-w-word
you’re just a waste of bow-tie is what you are
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:14 amwho wants to go to work tomorrow yeah not me
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:17 ambut it’s gonna be so dead tomorrow
speaking of dead
illinois bombshell betty white
she’s gonna turn 90 goddamn 7 come next january
i love that
phyllis only made it to 95 you know (gold standard)
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:23 amwhere i came from?
there’s a place called heaven!
that’s the place where all the good children go
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:32 amTrump brags about what a great writer he is, insults the press, and proves he’s an illiterate by misusing a simple word.
This guy makes Barbara Boxer look like an intellectual.
Dave (445e97) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:42 amwhatever i still love him
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:45 amJames 455, can you give me a link for that? I doubt Patterico feels hostility for “Trump supporters” if that means anyone who voted for Trump or wants to see him succeed.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:58 amBuDuh,
It occurs to me that how much of Trump’s base want a Muslim ban isn’t as important as what Trump thinks his base wants.
We see this with conservative judge nominations. Trump campaigned on it and knows is important to his base. So far, he has gone to great lengths to make it happen.
Ditto re immigration and the travel ban, which was one of his first acts as President and that he presented as a Muslim ban in the campaign. Would he think his base wants a Muslim ban as much as it wants conservative judges?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:09 amhow can anybody feel hostility for “Trump supporters”
they’re the sweetest pickleheads ever and they love America so blatantly it’s like omg you’re so sweet
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:20 amSince he apparently doesn’t resort to clandestine innuendo (like where he says “radical Islamic terrorism” minutes before saying code words that bigots hear as “Muslim”) when he speaks about conservative judges, I would believe that they aren’t on equal footing.
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:56 amThen you don’t believe what Giuliani said the day after the travel ban was announced, that Trump was told he did have to be “clandestine” so he was?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:01 amIs that what Giuliani said?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:07 am#450 Patterico:
I appreciate your effort to calm things by banning those who misstate others constantly. However, I think the rule that emerges in your #450 is going to be easy to abuse.
For example, our tweeter in chief is often ambiguous in his statements (including the one that was the subject of his post.) I think he often (if not always) does this deliberately — he likes to imply the ugly things that make some of his fans happy — while denying that he, in fact, said such an ugly thing, and how dare you FAKE NEWS suggest that.
Trolls being trolls, they will want to annoy a conversation out of existence. They will use this tactic. And they will cite this rule. Ultimately, you are going to have to make judgments about posters good faith, and will probably end up tossing your rule in the ashcan. It’s a good thing, as the arbiter of all things discussed on this blog, you can do that.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:38 amNot really.
We can dismiss his rule the same way so many on here have dismissed President Trump’s reasoning on a travel ban. Patterico used the hypothetical that if he banned a few of the loudest Trump supporters, would that be a Trump ban? He’s done just that with his bans, suspensions and having his loudest supporters run off another Trump supporter.
He set the stage and followed through.
Patterico, why do you want us to hold you to one standard, that your ban is based on people abusing what you say and not personal animus and bigotry, but not hold the President to the same standard?
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:20 amBut be didn’t draft the document, look at the relevant statute or not, Dana ward is an ass, shipwrecked is an experienced prosecutor in matters of immigration and civil rights, who happens to be have been right on the law.
A Jd notes disco is his own corner of Doolittle menagerie his ridiculed the suffering of those in Texas during hurricane Harvey, I didn’t see any admonishment there.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:22 amI think that Trump has the right to “ban” (the Twitter term is “block”) people who misstate his tweets on his Twitter.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:25 amAs for Glenn Reynolds, he does not follow the narrative, he was even penalized for doing so, discus allows for many more nazguls which one can ignore.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:26 am#471 (nk):
Actually, Trump can’t block users until this ruling is overrruled.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/23/business/media/trump-twitter-block.html
Appalled (96665e) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:33 amAnd can we please, please, please stop the Revisionism that Trump never called for a ban of all Muslims entering the United States? He did, he did, he did! Here’s the video from December 7, 2015. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/video/2015/dec/08/donald-trump-calls-for-complete-ban-on-muslims-entering-the-us-video It was not something he said in passing. He went on and on and on about it. It was what put the traction under his wheels with the 14 million bigots and nutjobs that gave him the primary win. Revisionism is what Commies do, you know.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:36 amCan you imagine Brendan Sullivan do this re Oliver north.
Yes another judge ignorant of the law, maybe they got their degree at the university of Chicago in the 90s
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/04/strzok-skip-subpoena
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:37 amAppalled at 473, I know about that case and I disagree with that so-called judge.
And I’m not sure she entered an injunction. I think she just made a declaration and said “I expect the President to follow the law” or something like that, the sneaky New York liberal.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:40 amDo you use this squirrel argument in all your motions,nk the question was whether that statement had anything to do with the eo, just like no matter what Obama said, his bill would nit lower prices or sustain competition.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:42 amIt’s one thing to say that it’s irrelevant as the Supreme Court did say and I agree with; and it’s another to have a thousand comments (it feels like that anyway) from Trumpkins here claiming he never said it.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:45 amAh yes operation cassandra, remember how that story went into the memory hole
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270643/did-obama-grant-residency-sworn-enemies-america-ari-lieberman
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:45 amSo you gotta explain this collusion fooferaw:
https://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2018/07/04/caroline-glick-trump-meets-a-weakened-vladimir-putin-july-16/
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:52 am#476 —
Your characterization of what the judge said (who seems to be one, whether she is called one or not) is correct. She didn’t order the President to unblock the annoying people; she declared the blocking unconstitutional, and announced she expected the Federal officers to comply with the law.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:54 amActual federal law goes unforced, some prog whim is diktat.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:01 amI’m sorry you failed to understand my example. Read it again?
Where did I announce a total and complete ban on Trumpalos until we can figure out what the hell is going on?
That would be never.
When did Trump announce a plan to ban Muslims?
During the campaign.
There is a double standard here, but not the one you claim.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:07 amNot a single person has ignored what was said in 2015. So you are tilting against windmills. What was disputed was Bored Lawyer’s incorrect statement that after the ban was passed, Trump bragged to his supporters that he banned Muslims. That’s factually incorrect and no amount of parsing, dissembling or rambling can change that fact.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:09 amYou used a hypothetical about doing the act. You did the act. You say the act is different than your hypothetical and the hypothetical is not applicable. Same fact pattern.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:10 amSo far we’re targeting repeat offenders. One is just vacationed because he often says interesting things. One is banned because his arguments were rarely interesting, just whiny and lacking in logic.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:10 amIn other news:
https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/669861?unlock=KAUSQTFQV9QBKC1M
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:12 amif President Trump said it then I stand behind it 100%
if we know one thing it’s that he doesn’t just say random stuff he doesn’t mean
He’s redoubtable, and he holds to his convictions that’s for sure.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:12 amGiuliani after Trump announced his first travel ban:
It was a ban that accomplished the same thing as a Muslim ban, but in a legal way that targeted danger instead of Muslims. And it was legal, Giuliani was right about that and the Supreme Court agreed (as do I — what matters is what it says on its face). But that doesn’t change that Giuliani said Trump wanted” a “legal” Muslim ban.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:14 amThe “Trump supporter” you refer to left in shame (and rightfully so) after his fraudulent claims about military service were revealed as such.
To suggest that Patrick “had his loudest supporters run off another Trump supporter” is an egregious lie.
Dave (445e97) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:14 amAnd yet the actual law, hasn’t mattered for a year and a half, in that interval an actual terrorist may have slipped through from one of those countries
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:20 amTrump challenges people, often quite rudely. Surely he can withstand some pushback, especially when it involves the way he runs our government.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:23 amWhat a bunch of clucking hens. Get a grip.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:26 amLegal permanent residents and visa holders were also impacted, narciso. I don’t want terrorists here but Trump knew it would be a problem. That’s why he asked Giuliani to find a legal way to do it — because Trump’s campaign promise to ban Muslims made his travel ban more difficult.
And, NJRob, I understand you think Bored Lawyer was wrong. I don’t think that is so clear cut.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:28 amYou ok, Haiku? That is kind of grumpy.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:29 am“Having” people run someone off?
That implies I encouraged people to run off Hoagie.
You should really clarify that, since I had nothing to do with that and you know it.
Have you gotten the impression I am less tolerant than usual of false claims about me?
If not, perhaps I have not been clear enough.
It’s not because false claims against me are worse. It’s because they are the easiest for me to judge. And this implication is false. Your whole comment is baseless, actually, and your comparison to Trump vacuous and illogical.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:33 amBullshit. What act did I do a hypothetical about and what did I actually do? Be specific. VERY specific. Do not ignore me. You now have my full attention. Time to back up the absurd claim you just made or retract it.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:35 amYes and have their been any terrorist who were legal residents or green card holders, think back now.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:36 amSorry, Patterico, I missed the “having” part.
Anybody with half a brain who actually read that thread should know that Patterico did the exact opposite. He told us he did not like what was happening and to stop it and that if he had seen it earlier he would have stopped it earlier.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:37 amRob,
Were you talking about Hoagie or someone else when you said he was “run off”?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:37 amNJRob, Before you post again, read your comment and ask yourself if it was specific enough. Then try again. I want quotes and specific actions listed.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:38 amBecause if you meant Hoagie, Patterico stopped the conversation. He said, Please stop it now and ultimately he closed the comments.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:40 amNJRob, I promise you that if I have to spend time explaining to you the variance between your claim and what has actually happened, you will pay a price for it. I hope you recognize that variance on your own before I have to explain it, because having my time wasted in such a way is bo longer something I will tolerate without imposing consequences for it.
Patterico (adad0d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:41 amI’m doing fine, DRJ, hope you are as well. Some others are apparently not. Let the playground taunts continue. Have a nice day.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:46 amThe sad part about all this is that Patterico pretty much let anyone say whatever they wanted within reason on HIS site.
But it seems that some people have trouble with this concept. I continue to think of all this as a “virtual party” at Patterico’s place. Some people are more forgiving of their guests’ antics than others. Some folks don’t like the other guests. Some don’t mind.
It appears that some people just had to push the envelope. I still don’t understand the energy spent, but I can appreciation the frustration that Patterico feels defending himself against incorrect statements—especially after several warnings. The latter is symptomatic of our New Reality: people throughout politics appear to care most about narrative, rather than substance.
If it helps with bringing back discussions from which I can learn, and reduces name calling and nonsensical trolling, that’s a positive to me. YMMV.
Simon Jester (79a3c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:47 amAnd yes, it can be complicated. I have seen the Colonel be very rude. But he has always been pleasant and polite enough to me.
Simon Jester (79a3c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:49 ami feel super-independent this morning to where i think i might order breakfast
i had the most disgusting avocado toast in ny btw from fuku (momofuku chicken concept)
it had these pickled-ish carrots on top (carrot slaw?) and the toast wasn’t toasted it was just bread and it took 20 minutes for them to make… during which i sipped on a chocolate slushy thing that they were super-sweet about re-filling every time i put it down
but i put it down cause i was kinda over it really fast
this is the one they call “frozen hot chocolate” if i remember right (so no alcohol)
they have a soju one too and i think a lot of people don’t realize soju is alcohol
but that’s not really my problem
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:52 amThe reality is Facebook finds the declaration offensive antifa can attack activists at will, the Iranian regime has been emboldened by London and Paris, they can plot assassinations on their soil, policemen are being poisoned with fentanyl laced leaflets
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:55 amGood morning, Simon. It’s often a battle to adhere to the old “if you don’t have something good to say…”, but I’ll do my best.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:58 amdid we know edamole is a thing
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:07 amNow as I say, hunting down dissidents is not something unique to the fmr east bloc operation condor conducted similar activities in the 70s, but the Iranians seem to operate with the acquiscences of those capitals
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:09 amIf it’s gotten to the point where one really doesn’t care what others say or think about the president or his supporters – be they reluctant or full-throated – one can find other, more healthy ways to spend one’s time. In my case, working on my cars, lounging by the pool and taking my wife out for lunch or dinner. Extra loooong weekend!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:10 amI just hope the Colonel honestly switches up the “h” and “e” while typing the and that its not some appropriation of hip-hop speak.
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:19 am“Only the working man appreciates leisure.” — Richard Boone
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:22 amBut NBC news told us so:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/05/jim-jordan-accusers
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:27 amWell, I appreciate it, Colonel. There is often so much unpleasantness I dislike posting. I hope you have a good weekend. I’m still trying to keep up with my sons and my students. Slow but steady…well, at least gets me where I need to be.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:27 amSo targeting the same handful of dangerous Muslim nations that Obama targeted while excluding several dozen Muslim nations equals a “Muslim ban?”
Of note, Giuliani specifically said that religion was not a metric used in crafting the travel ban. Do you not mention that because you don’t believe him?
BuDuh (e098db) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:39 amI did mention religion. It was in my quote at 489. Giuliani said they started with a Muslim ban and turned it into a danger ban.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:43 amI see, so if you start with white paint and end with black paint, “bigots”, through inuendo, know that we are really looking at white paint.
BuDuh (e098db) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:48 amThe house sergeant at arms should prepare for implementing the power of inherent intent on crooked Pete if he fails to testify.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:53 amLike the Iranian general fearing the stolen snow:
narciso (d1f714) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:54 amhttp://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/07/in-the-concord-management-case.php
Trump promised them raw meat and gave them meatloaf because that’s all the health inspectors allowed, is the way I see it, DRJ. Now they’re saying: “Raw meat, what raw meat? That’s ketchup, man!”
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:54 amnarciso, time to find out where these prosecutors for mueller eat, sleep and drink so we can abuse them in public.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:00 ami can understand people being skeptical about President Trump but it’s so unnecessary
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:02 amOk. Or we could say he took an illegal idea and made it a legal idea, and that’s a good thing. But we all know what he originally promised.
The real question (to me) is what is his travel ban accomplishing? My guess is that it targets people from specific countries, most of them predominantly Muslim, and hopefully ones that have ties to terrorism. I also hope they successfully target the radicals.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:06 amThat’s sad, mg.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:07 amThat sounds like a great way to enjoy the weekend. I hope you enjoy it.
P.S. Tried to respond to Patterico, but got placed in the filter. Too many links I guess even though I tried breaking the link.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:08 amWhat is with your compulsion to re-write other people’s words, BuDuh?
You are clearly capable, when you choose, if making passionate arguments that refrain from doing that. But your go-to response when you disagree with what someone’s written is to re-write it into something snarky and, usually, not quite fair.
You might actually be an interesting person if you could restrain that impulse. I would actually love to see more Trump supporters participate in civil conversation here; they’re well represented in numbers already, but it would be far more stimulating and educational to have someone who’s defending him bring more substance to the discussion than does, for instance, happyfeet. I know the snarky strawmanning is nearly universal on the internet, because it’s easier to joust with strawmen.
But re-writing your opponents’ views to suit your rhetorical purposes really does rub people the wrong way, pretty much in exact proportion to how carefully they themselves try to express their views. And the proprietor of this blog, and some of his long-time commenters who’ve been engaged in a running civil commentary at a pretty detailed level going back to 2003 or 2004, tend to be people who try hard to express themselves carefully.
I’m rooting for you, sir.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:10 amIf I were to make a single sentence out of your statement would it be fair to say that “you hope that it targets specific people from specific countries?”
BuDuh (e098db) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:12 ampatterico. com/2018/06/28/all-we-have-is-conversation/#comments
patterico. com/2018/06/13/gop-cult-of-personality-ousts-another-heretic/
patterico. com/2018/06/02/patterico-in-quillette-the-redstate-firings-and-viewpoint-diversity-on-the-right/#comments
patterico. com/2018/06/02/on-being-at-peace-with-all-men-in-an-era-of-hypocrisy-and-bullshit/#comments
patterico. com/2018/05/27/this-open-thread-does-not-exist/#comments
patterico. com/2018/05/25/your-daily-trump-open-thread/
I put a space between “.” and “com” because the filter spams multiple links. All to this site.
I’m just showing, based on anti-Trump’s own reasoning, that previous animus can be used to tar the current position. It doesn’t matter if that’s the reason for the restriction, it is used to throw doubt upon it.
The difference is, I give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that you ban and suspend people for the reasons you say. You don’t give that same benefit to the President. And the reason seems to be personal because to you he is a liar and everyone who supports him is a dupe, a troll, someone lacking in logic, a rube, etc.
Where is accepting that people can look at the same information and come to a different opinion upon it? There is a reason we have juries. How often do they reach unanimous opinions? Do we accept those decisions or just insult them?
Now before you dismiss this as not relevant, just put yourself in my shoes and ask how I interpret information. If I see someone constantly hostile to my thoughts, insulting someone who I agree with, how am I going to react? Look at how rapid people come to each others defense on here, irrespective of the conversation, because they care for and want to support that person. So we look at their remarks in the best possible light and their adversary in the worst possible way.
And no, I didn’t say you ran off Hoagie or even encouraged others to run him off. I said your loudest supporters did so. This site has become very hostile to people who aren’t anti-Trump and your supporters see that so it seems that as long as they bash Trump, they can get away with more acrimony towards his supporters.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:12 amWhen starr was investigating they hastled him at home with Fitzgerald they competed to have his baby, male and female wrong way Mueller has been so abysmally incompetent in the past, it’s not even funny anymore
Narciso (bbe94c) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:14 am*of making passionate arguments, I ought have said — and your spelling’s pretty good too!
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:14 amWhat is with your compulsion to re-write other people’s words, BuDuh?
I am trying to phrase others’ arguments in a way that they would agree is accurate, Beldar. Exactly what the host requested.
Do you have an example of one of my rephrasings that was grossly inaccurate or is this a blanket accusation that isn’t open for debate?
BuDuh (e098db) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:15 amIt would have been nice if Trump had introduced his travel ban by saying,
But he could never say this because it sounds like he made a mistake talking about a Muslim ban.
Sometimes I think Trump just can’t bring himself to do or say anything that makes it look like he made a mistake. Other times I think Trump doesn’t think he ever makes mistakes, and instead he reinvents statements with each new day.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:23 amhere we find Debbie Harry singing with not just one frog but actually several frogs (chorus frogs)
frogs are amphibious which means they’re very good singers
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:25 amI think some here are unwilling to admit that they judged wrongly:
https://babalublog.com/2018/07/05/lopez-obradors-presidential-win-in-mexico-is-a-win-for-iran-and-russia-as-well/
Narciso (bbe94c) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:25 amThanks for asking me this, BuDuh, and for letting be more clear. What I said was I guess this is what they are doing, not I hope. I hope they are targeting specific people from specific regions.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:29 amAnd voila! Civil communication has ensued, clarity has been furthered.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:37 amDRJ – time to put a stop to this radical left b.s. before someone get
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:39 amLess and less binding us together, more and more tearing us apart…
And who is behind this? Who has been waging this cold civil war?
A clue: it hasn’t been conservatism.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:39 amGets hurt.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:39 amLeftist tr
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:40 amLeftist trash will only understand when getting kicked in the nuts.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:41 amPeople do dumb things, mg. Don’t be one of them.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:42 amWe’ll the Ford Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations were the point of the spear, along with outliers like the Mott foundation.
Narciso (bbe94c) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:42 amFutile Gesture of the Day:
To quote another president: “Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won. So I think on that one I trump you.”
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:20 amOf the very long list of things I am grateful for President Trump having accomplished, at the top of the list is his use of Twitter and, especially, the language he uses on Twitter, to goad his opponents. For a very long time, the Left has been engaged in a campaign of hate, but it is in response to Trump and his Twitter account that the President has provoked his self-avowed enemies to amp their hate up to 11. No longer is there any real attempt to hide the hate for a President and all other normal Americans who speak in anything but the parlance of the collegiate coffee house. We now clearly see just what a nasty and unhinged bunch of condescending bigots he is confronting and exposing. It should come as no surprise that a growing number of moderates and those of the Left are now turning away from the sneering elitists. What is surprising is how many remain who share a disgust for the common man and their choice of a President.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:44 amWell said,Thor!
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:58 amThank you, Haiku.
Car collection?
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:00 amThis thread got out of hand
JP (b974e1) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:02 amGiven the content of the post up top, I think that was Patterico’s intention, JP.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:07 amThor – DJT is the oblivious exorcist.
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:11 amI have work keeping me busy, DRJ.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:14 amNot much, Thor, more detailing than maintenance these days:.. just an ‘81 Fiat X1/9, ‘01 Toyota Highlander, 2012 Fiat 500 Abarth and a 2013 MB E350 BlueTec.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:17 amPlease explain that, ThOR.
DRJ (d18ca6) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:18 amTrump was no more the choice of ordinary, decent, honest Americans on November 8, 2016 than choosing to drown quickly or choosing to freeze to death a little less quickly was the choice of the passengers of the Titanic.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:21 amNo, it seems that the real problem here for Trump is that we admitted people from Iran. And apparently Trump thinks that Iran is bad and therefore U.S. citizens who come from Iran are bad.
And this is both ignorant and bigoted. The Iranian immigrants I know are among the most patriotic people I’ve ever met.
There’s lots of great people from Iran.
The Iranian gov’t is a State sponsor of terrorism, including anti-US terrorism
The idea that the Obama Admin would let anti-Iran gov’t Iranians into the US as an inducement to the Iranian gov’t to sign a deal is absurd
So, if the accusation is true, it exceeds all bounds of credulity to believe the people let in were the kind of Iranians we want (the kind that hate their own government).
So there’s clearly some bigotry and stupidity going on here, but it doesn’t look like it’s coming from Trump
Greg Q (327ae0) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:24 amClassic line from my wife a few minutes ago. She’s been focused on swimming laps in the pool, tries to do it for a good 45 minutes each day. As she walked by me, I said, “hey, babe, looks like that pool work is making your sweet behind smaller.”
She responded, “meh, the only thing getting smaller on me these days is my mind.”
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:33 amGreetings from the Land of Cocoon…
“In this interview with Vox’s Sean Illing, Princeton sociologist Robert Wuthnow discusses his new book about the trials and tribulations of rural America in the 21st century. It’s a classic. The reader who sent it to me, himself a Princeton graduate, writes: “I don’t necessarily disagree with everything they say, but they’re shockingly patronizing. Give me small-town America over its cultured despisers any day.”
Excerpt:
Sean Illing: Fair enough. The title of your book, The Left Behind, rubbed me the wrong way. It seems to me that many of these people haven’t been left behind; they’ve chosen not to keep up. But the sense of victimization appears to overwhelm everything else.
Robert Wuthnow: I make it very clear in the book that this is largely a choice. It’s not as though these people are desperate to leave but can’t. They value their local community. They understand its problems, but they like knowing their neighbors and they like the slow pace of life and they like living in a community that feels small and closed. Maybe they’re making the best of a bad situation, but they choose to stay.
They recognize themselves as being left behind because, in fact, they are the ones in their family and in their social networks who did stay where they were. Most of the people I spoke to grew up in the small town they currently live in, or some other small town nearby. Often their children have already left, either to college or in search of a better job somewhere else.
In that sense, they believe, quite correctly, that they’re the ones who stayed in these small towns while young people — and really the country as a whole — moved on.
Let’s stop right there for a second. “They’ve chosen not to keep up”? I guess not, preoccupied as they are, clinging bitterly to their guns and their religion. Believe me, the questions are almost all like this. Interesting, too, because Sean Illing is a native of Biloxi, MS, and a graduate of LSU. He’s not writing as a total outsider to the rural South.
It won’t surprise you to learn that I believe Illing’s question is extraordinarily ungenerous, to, and even hard-hearted towards, rural people. I imagine that he and I would agree on some things that they do to get in their own way, but I wonder if he would remark to a sociologist writing a book about inner-city black people that their sense of victimization overwhelms everything.”
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/voxsplaining-rural-america/
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:48 ammg,
It is frustrating but I don’t want any of us to be this guy.
DRJ (d18ca6) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:50 am“America is a sick myth. Every liberty you value is built on sand and dormant authoritarianism. There is little to nothing stopping us from descending into cannibalistic hellscape as our tribal impulses absorb us wholesale.
Happy fourth, vote trump.”
— Asawin Suebsaeng (Daily Beast, frequent MSNBC contributor) on July 4, 2018
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:00 pmI believe I did at #48, in response to happy.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:01 pmyes yes i understand what you mean
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:13 pm#555, nk, you speak with a forked tongue. Sane, ordinary, honest Americans gladly and gratefully voted for Trump (and they’ll do it again in even greater numbers if given the opportunity).
It was the sour-grapes #NeverTrumpers who were caught on the horns of a dilemma – not Trump supporters, our man won the nomination, our path was a one-street leading straight to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Cruzers and #NeverTrumpers had gone so far overboard during the Primaries there was no way back without admitting how wrongheaded, unhinged, and obnoxious they’d been toward Trump and his supporters.
But instead of swallowing their loss, and facing up to their many mean-spirited transgressions, they doubled down on stupid. Yet, even after their Texas Titanic went belly-up 2 years ago flat-earth #NeverTrumpers are still attacking Trumpets and pretending to have knowledgeable insight into political events when they not only missed, but actually denied the greatest political upheaval since 1864 and the consequent restoration of the right of American voters to select their own leaders.
This is messy business and a clear example of electoral democracy at work. The Founding Fathers would be proud of their creation based on individual liberty. Now as the bright lights of Trump’s accomplishments validate the Founders’ farsighted wisdom, the flotsam and jetsam of yesterday’s overheated passions threatens to obstruct the ability of conservatives (across the spectrum) to unite and build on Trump’s momentum in order to dominate in the Midterms.
Conservatives united can never be defeated!
ropelight (f5c771) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:47 pmThat could not be more wrong — not the part about Trump being a liar, but your claim about my alleged views towards “everyone who supports him.”
Certainly I think — in fact, I *know* — that he is a liar. And not just any liar. One of the most prolific liars we have ever seen in public life.
But for you to say that I claim “everyone who supports him is a dupe, a troll, someone lacking in logic, a rube, etc.” is so absurdly, laughably false, it makes me wonder how in the world you could dare to utter such a recklessly false accusation when I have specifically said I don’t want to see false accusations coming from you (or anyone else).
I can’t tell you how many times I have made a distinction between Trump’s most loyal fans, or Trunp superfans, and other people who support Trump. I do this very deliberately, so that people will not say the outrageously untrue thing you just said.
You can’t come up with any evidence that I feel that way. Even in the cherry-picked quotes in your long comment, I limit my criticism to “his most die hard loyal fans” or “some people who defend Trump.”
swc recently made the same mistake, giving a very clear statement in one of my posts an absurdly twisted meaning to impose on me the very accusation you just made. He retracted that, and I think it’s fair for me to ask you to retract this.
If so don’t get an apology from you for saying in the above comment that I have claimed “everyone who supports him is a dupe, a troll, someone lacking in logic, a rube, etc.” then I want you to back up your assertion, which I assure you that you won’t be able to do because I have never said such a thing.
Assuming I get the apology, I want you to never ever say anything like that again. Because having wasted some of my valuable day explaining this to you, when I shouldn’t have to, I’d really like not to have to do it again.
I think these are very simple and reasonable requests, which are really nothing more than a request that you be intellectually honest and show basic human decency and respect.
The era where I tolerate false accusations made persistently without apology has now come to a close, and readers should either adapt to the new era or find a new blog.
I don’t see how I can put it any more plainly.
Patterico (f966f2) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:48 pmGreg Q,
Did you read the part of the post where I addressed this argument? Or did I just waste my time writing those words?
The very cleric who is the source of the accusation believes the immigrants are working against the interests of Iran.
So perhaps you could do less baselessly suggesting that I am bigoted and stupid, and more explaining how you believe the cleric that this happened but disbelieve him concerning the type of people allowed into the U.S.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 12:54 pmBreaking- EPA Adm. Pruitt resigns.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:00 pmDirty Scott Pruitt just resigned. Should have happened months ago.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:04 pmBraking- Former Fox News exec., Bill Shine named Trump Admin. Deputy Chief Of Staff.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:05 pmGood, now dont appoint a new EPA head fold it into the Department of the Interior, just like with the recently proposed folding of Dept of Labor into Dept of Education.
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:05 pmWas Shine (god that would be funny as hell if he were…) a Gretchen Carlson crusade victim?
urbanleftbehind (5eecdb) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:06 pmBuDuh asked me, in #533 above:
One such example is BuDuh’s comment in #519, when, referring to DRJ’s comment in #518, BuDuh wrote:
Compare that to Buduh’s question in #529, which asked if an attempted paraphrase by BuDuh of what he understood DRJ to be saying was accurate. By refraining from snark, and by asking a question that DRJ could reply to, BuDuh avoided giving offense and indeed got a responsive answer, a clarification from DRJ that she freely offered without any snark and without taking any offense.
Questions from BuDuh such as the one he asked me in #533 (which I’ve now tried to answer as directly and civilly as I can) and the one he asked DRJ in #529, are constructive, and I for one will try to stick to that kind of question.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:13 pmSome bloggers are take a somewhat laissez-faire approach to their blogs. Others favor a more authoritarian approach.
Their domain, their blog, their choice.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:17 pmTo finish answering BuDuh’s question to me in #533: No, of course I don’t assert that BuDuh or anyone else must accept my blanket assertions about BuDuh or his past arguments, in general or in particular.
And I don’t think that would be a fair inference from what I’ve written; to the contrary, as I took the effort to point out, I think BuDuh may have very interesting things to contribute to civil discussions, if he can refrain from the common tendency (not limited to him by any means!) to re-write and then straw-man the positions of those with whom he’s arguing. But since he asked me if I intended that inference, rather than accusing me of having made it, neither am I offended by his question about “blanket assertion[s].”
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:18 pmAnon Y. Mous wrote in #573:
I agree with every word of this, so far as it goes. I would assert, however, that there are also bloggers who are involved in curating their blog’s comments without necessarily taking an “authoritarian approach,” which might connote either arbitrariness or content-based restrictions. I don’t think a persuasive case against Patterico can be made for either of those two things, nor would I ever use the phrase “authoritarian approach,” even comparatively (versus laissez-faire management, which is effectively no management at all), but your mileage may vary. The fact that he does set and enforce standards, even subjective ones, are among the many reasons I’m pleased to have been a participant in this blog’s comments community going back to 2003.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:24 pmLet me ask you this. Do you think it would be permitted for me to opine that Patterico’s new approach to his blog was authoritarian, or would that result in a demand for an apology backed by a banning threat?
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:27 pm@571. He was named in the Tantaros-Dox sexual harassment lawsuit as one of Ailes’ slap-and-tickle-go-along-to-get-along-team who ran Fox like Playboy, per Tantaros’ lawsuit. Since our Captain was an avid reader of same and known to wander the Executive Mansion in his robe, and do-love-them-Tee-Vee-Fox-foxes, he’ll fit right in. The interns will get coffee, no questions asked.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:27 pmYes.
On the other hand the Fox article quotes another commentator who asserts that many Iranians would disagree with the cleric’s estimation of these alleged immigrants as being ideologically adverse to Iran’s national interests (presumably “interests” meaning those of the Iranian government).
In fact the commentator suggests that at least some of these purported persons are closely connected to regime elites and that a lot of ordinary Iranians who cannot enter the US would not mind seeing these politically-connected persons deported.
JP (b974e1) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:27 pm@577. Typo: Dox=Fox
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:29 pm#576 —
If I understand our host correctly, he is enforcing a standard that his arguments shall not be mischaractarized without risk of penalty. If you believe that is authoritarian, and say so — you aren’t really violating that standard. You continue to be entitled to your own opinion and even your own facts. You just need to be sure you present the host’s arguments correctly, when you decide to address them.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:38 pmAnon Y. Mous asked me (#576):
Of course I don’t speak for our host, so I’m guessing.
My guess is that our host would first ask you for specific examples to support your assertion, and that what happened next would depend upon your answers.
My further guess is that his self-restraint would far, far exceed mine when I was curating the comments and commenters on my own blog, back in the day, for I’ve seen Patterico tolerate far more insults directed personally at him than I ever did when I was in a comparable pair of shoes. I admire his self-restraint and have told him so, privately and publicly, many times over many years.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:41 pmIf you re looking for a resolutely-pro-Trump comment section, Just One Minute has a good one, and various posters there will keep you up to date on the goings on here. I had to leave from there, because my anti-Trump viewpoint was so non-supported by pretty much anyone who was left, that it began to look like trolling.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:44 pmThat’s very interesting, Appalled (#582). Back when I was blogging regularly, I read Tom Maguire’s blog frequently, and linked him many times, and he was always gracious in our discussions. I still occasionally visit Just One Minute, but I don’t often read the comments, or leave comments there. I wish he’d comment here more often, but that would inevitably be at the expense of tending his own garden.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 1:57 pmReally? Of course, I’m not privy to what you said in private, but my impression of what you’ve said publicly is that you are frequently pushing him to take actions against various commenters that you disapprove of. Happyfeet comes immediately to mind. Your prescription for Patterico has been to be less restrained.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 2:05 pm#583
Maguire moderates with a very loose hand, though he did eventually ban the guy who was Ben Burn over here, and with good reason. The result was that everyone left was very pro-Trump, because certain parties made sure other voices were attacked pretty relentlessly. And, after all these years, I found that being one lonely voice was not contributing a thing to that comment section, and was making me unpleasant as a writer.
Appalled (96665e) — 7/5/2018 @ 2:06 pmThank you, but your advice is unnecessary. I have not expressed any interest in finding an alternate site with a “resolutely-pro-Trump comment section”.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 2:07 pmAnother Beldar War-Story™*:
Back when I was a BigLaw partner with clients whose legal fights made trivial, by comparison, the litigation fees & expenses associated therewith, my firm represented a group of five banking clients who were codefendants in a big lender liability lawsuit. It was a difficult representation because of our disparate client group, one of whom was foreign, one of whom was in FDIC receivership, one of whom had just been taken over by a much bigger bank, and two were simply conventionally stodgy. They could agree on almost nothing except that they needed to have common counsel with the expense split five ways.
They also managed to agree, at our recommendation, to engage a jury research firm to help us do some private opinion sampling. We decided not to do a full mock trial, but instead to do a series of video opening statements, which we’d then show to focus groups to get their reactions. It was actually a three-cornered case, with the borrower-plaintiff in one corner, our five banks in another, and someone (I’m wracking my brains now to remember who) in the third corner; I think maybe they’d been co-investors with the borrower-plaintiff, putting them somewhere in the middle, because in a bankruptcy and foreclosure of secured assets situation, they’d be wiped out. Anyway, I do recall that there were were three different, competing opening statements to be written, and then videotaped, before we could have the consultants recruit the survey participants (which they did from among shoppers at a local mall).
Including both the legal fees for our lawyers’ time and the cost of the jury consulting firm, the whole project probably cost the client group something around $300k in early 1990s dollars, all for something that would never be seen outside our privileged-protected circle of lawyers and client decision-makers.
My job included writing the three opening statements and picking the lawyers from our firm to perform them in the videos. And for the entire exercise to be meaningful, and for our clients to have a reasonable hope of getting their money’s worth for it, I had to be absolutely scrupulous in identifying our legal team’s own inevitable, natural biases, and then preventing our biases from skewing our presentations when our lawyers were acting in the roles of the other two sides’ lawyers in these videos.
It was one of the most challenging pieces of work I’ve ever undertaken. I had to assess two years of pre-trial discovery results so far completed, and make projections from there about what further discovery was likely to show. I had to organize, paraphrase, and summarize three competing views of that evidence. I had to take into account the known idiosyncrasies and strengths and weaknesses of the three sides’ respective lawyers (including my own colleagues).
I tried to ensure that when I erred, it was in the direction of overestimating our opponents’ capabilities, particularly those of the borrower-plaintiff’s lawyers (who were very shrewd). And after we’d gotten script approval — after considerable input of the in-house lawyers from each of the banks, who inevitably took the opportunity to fight with each other some more in the process — I took for myself the role of the borrower-plaintiff’s lead lawyer, since I was the most experienced by far of our “cast.” If my relatively greater experience and credibility (and, frankly, charisma) gave any side an advantage, I wanted that advantage to go to our clients’ principal opponent, lest we later being accused of having cooked the exercise to make our side’s presentation unduly powerful.
Cutting the videos was quite a bit of fun. It’s the first and only time I’ve ever used a TelePrompTer, for one thing, and the three resulting videos, at about 10 minutes, were genuinely entertaining. The consultants acted in the Frank Luntz-type moderator role, then, with three mock juries who’d seen all three opening statements, in about another 45 minutes were of discussion — and we videoed those discussions for playback, at their leisure, by the in-house lawyers and executives for each of our five bank clients.
The clients ended up being highly pleased with the process, not just, or mostly, because the results were generally encouraging, but because watching the opening statements also ended up resolving a lot of the friction and tensions between our own clients. Seeing themselves in the same pretend (metaphorical) foxhole, under fire from common opponents, brought home to these very bright and experienced people their genuinely common interests in a way that none of their previous efforts to deal with one another had ever managed. And with the resulting unity, we were able to herd the cats in the same general direction, enough so that when the other sides finally got serious about settlement on the courthouse steps, we could get rapid and unanimous reactions from our clients, and ultimately we found a settlement everyone could live with.
Being paid, handsomely and by the hour, for trying to make your opponents’ arguments for them, as well or better as their own lawyers could, was a wonderful luxury, as was the entire exercise of standing back from the case and trying to condense each side’s position down into a compelling and accurate 10-minute opening statement.
Alas, no one pays blog commenters to similarly invest the time, thought, and effort in trying to really get inside the head of other commenters with whom we seem to disagree. But it’s still worth making an effort to do that, because it results in more light, less heat and smoke.
—–
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 2:42 pm*not a real war, and Beldar has never served in any uniform (other than for the Boy Scouts and his junior high, high school, and college bands).
I don’t think it’s all that authoritarian to bamstick commenters who mischaracterize the host’s words and views on multiple occasions. It’s like being invited to a friend’s house and then urinating in his front closet. It’s kind of rude, and it should be no surprise when this friend tells you to leave and not come back.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/5/2018 @ 2:45 pm“*not a real war, and Beldar has never served in any uniform (other than for the Boy Scouts and his junior high, high school, and college bands).”
– Beldar
LOL
Horn section?
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:03 pm587. Trump’s a liar. He is a consummate politician, and 2 + 2 = 5. It doesn’t take getting into Schlichterites’ heads to know that they leave me with the same bad taste I had in my mouth 20 years ago while the Dems were defending Bill Clinton because “it was all about sex.”
Gryph (08c844) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:09 pmReread Patterico’s #565 and see if you can spot where Patterico mischaracterizes NJRob’s words.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:11 pmI would, but you owe me an answer (link). First things first.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:16 pmI’m reminded of a story wherein a college freshman approached the football coach to try out for the team.
The coach asked, “Where did you go to high school, son?”
“West High, sir.”
“West High? Didn’t your school go to the state championship last year?”
“Yes, they did. I was there, playing for them.”
“Huh. I don’t recognize your name. What did you play?”
“Second clarinet, sir!”
Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:20 pm590 — Hear, hear.
Chuck Bartowski (bc1c71) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:20 pm“It’s like being invited to a friend’s house and then urinating in his front closet. It’s kind of rude, and it should be no surprise when this friend tells you to leave and not come back.”
So… it would be okay if one urinated in a back closet? Please… help me understand.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:27 pm“LOL
Horn section?”
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:03 pm
Cowbell.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:30 pmTrumpet, ThOr, yup. Still march & play at halftime with ~800 or so other Longhorn Alumni Band members at halftime at one Longhorn home game each year. This fall will be my KKY pledge class’ 40th reunion.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:34 pmTriangle
mg (9e54f8) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:34 pmThey won’t let us take cowbells into DKR-Texas Memorial Stadium anymore, Haiku. Back in my day, KKY pledges would hand everyone in the LHB a cowbell to use in the stands, and we cranked them up to 11, I assure you.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:35 pmIt’s great that they invite the band alums back to perform. What a fun day that must be for everyone.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:41 pm#591
I can see where you can make the argument you are trying to make, through the magic of grammar. But NJRob, based on the context of the remainder of his comment meant exactly what Patterico is taking issue with. The one thing I see though is that NJR is utterly sincere in his comment. What he wrote is what he thinks is reality.
Appalled (1a17de) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:43 pmThat’s the sort of stuff that elevated the college football experience over the pros, Beldar.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:44 pm@ Chuck Bartowski (#593): But check out Shawn Izadi, Texas Longhorn linebacker & tenor sax.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:47 pmPatterico,
if the only thing you take from my comment is that you have an issue where I said everyone instead of using a hedge word, I apologize for my absolutism.
But I’m quoting your history because it shows a trend of utter contempt and hostility towards those who don’t hate the president the way you do and it comes across in your writing and interactions with those individuals.
Do you think I’m writing this to troll or because I’m trying to speak to you as I would to any friend who I see is acting harmfully?
And it saddens me that all you got out of my remarks was one word that you focused on instead of your repeated attacks against those who don’t see things the way you do. How can we have a conversation if you neither side is willing to engage?
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 3:58 pmAppalled,
is reality.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:00 pm@ ThOr: LHAB also raises hundreds of thousands of dollars in scholarship donations for LHB members. They aren’t just being nice to their elders (although current members are, in fact, always very nice to us; we boggle their minds, actually). Many LHAB members (alas, not including me) are traveling at their own expenses to Normandy next June to play for the commemoration of the 75th Anniversary of the D-Day invasions. Here’s video of the joint LHB/LHAB halftime from the most recent year that I was able to attend, 2016; LHAB starts at about minute 6:00.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:13 pmNJ Rob,
Do you think Patterico hates me? Do you think he has contempt for me? I voted for Trump and I told him that long before I mentioned it online, but he has never acted like he is upset about my vote or my opinions. Maybe his opinions are more nuanced than you’ve convinced yourself they are.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:20 pmDRJ,
I was trying to be respectful by not using your name as the exact example of someone who is excluded from contempt. You voted for him, but you don’t support him and you disapprove of him unlike most of the people who have been outspoken in support of the President on here.
If that’s what it takes to not be held in contempt, I will pass. The left is trying to destroy our nation. They have stated their end goals. To replace the USA with the USSA. No thanks.
And no I’m not saying you support the socialists.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:25 pmThat’s a lot of band members, Beldar, and it was fun to watch.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:28 pmNo, I disagree. I voted for him and I support him when I agree with what he does, but I criticize him when I don’t. It is criticism that some Trump supporters can’t seem to accept. That is not on me, that is on them.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:31 pmIn fact, I left a positive comment about Trump today. I get no credit for it from Trump supporters, who say I “don’t support him.” But that doesn’t fit your narrative. Maybe your narrative is wrong.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:35 pmTrump’s tweet makes about as much sense as the following one would:
“Just out that the Obama Administration granted citizenship, during the terrible negotiations with Cuba, to X number of Cubans – including to government officials. How big (and bad) is that?”
Government officials from Iran (or make it Cuba) granted citizenship? Now it may depend on how you define official. It could happpen to defectors and it could happen to people who once held some sort of government post.
Sammy Finkelman (02a146) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:37 pmDRJ,
my quotes listed above stand on their own. What issue do you have with them?
Going back to a previous thread where you must’ve missed my question to you:
DRJ,
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:40 pmAs for your positive comment, it was left on a thread that hadn’t had a comment in 20 hours. Likely it just wasn’t seen. I certainly hadn’t noticed it.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:42 pmSimilarly, Patterico is not always negative about Trump, but he gets no credit for the times he has supported Trump. How hard is that for Patterico to say something positive when he doesn’t like the man? But that’s not enough, and we end up with revisionist history like ropelight’s comment that portrays Trump as the victim of “wrongheaded, unhinged, obnoxious” primary opponents and their supporters.
IMO i isn’t enough for Trump to win, everyone else must bow down to him and his supporters, too. Especially conservatives.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:43 pmAs far as that particular comment, I think the reason that most wouldn’t give you credit is that most would not have seen it. It was a dead thread. It petered out on Tuesday night. Beldar then added one comment yesterday afternoon, and then you finished it off with your positive comment this morning.
But, I have seen you say positive things about Trump on occasion. Not often, but once in a while. I just don’t think that particular comment is a good example of your point because of where it was hidden away.
Disclaimer: not saying you deliberately hid it away, just that it is.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:45 pmI did not see them but I will review your comments and question when I can, NJRob.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:45 pm462
James 455, can you give me a link for that? I doubt Patterico feels hostility for “Trump supporters” if that means anyone who voted for Trump or wants to see him succeed.
An example which says in part:
I enjoy making the most extreme Trumpalos cry and wail and gnash their teeth. Your overdone outrage makes me smile. Your tears of anger taste delicious to me.
It is true he limits his statement to the “most extreme Trumpalos”. But on the other hand it seems fair to infer that either he doesn’t care a lot about collateral damage in the form of offended less extreme Trumpalos or that he thinks anyone offended qualifies as an most extreme Trumpalo.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:46 pmI try to post comments on threads that have the same subject matter. My comment was about the Supreme Court, and that was the most recent thread about the Supreme Court.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:48 pmIt’s fair to infer he didn’t mean what he said? Really?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:49 pmTexas Fight! is such a great song with such awesome history behind it. I’ve never had an opportunity to see a game at DKR. I would also love to see the Aggies at Kyle Field (I know, we cant be friends anymore:().
One of my very favorite moments when I lived in the SFV was to be at Universal Studios Hollywood when the Showband of the Southwest marched/played prior to the glorious vanquishing of the Trojans in the Rose Bowl. I met so many fantastic Texans (and a bunch of the band members, all of whom were great) that day.
I am envious of you that you were a “bugler” for March Grandioso. What a magnificent piece for brass, but especially the trumpets! It was pretty hot in Hollyweird that Noon hour, but danged if I did not get chills when your band took over the joint with that particular song.
By the bye…do you know how many football games TAMU has lost in their history?
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:52 pmI don’t disagree or criticize your choice in commenting where/when you did. I’m just saying that most of the readers are not, on 7/5, looking at the comments from a post that went up on 7/2.
It’s like hiding your light under a bushel. You should let it shine! 🙂
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:54 pmThe link I posted in 619 isn’t working. Trying again.
See here.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:54 pmThat’s not an accurate statement. It’s hyperbolic to the extreme. If you were accusing others of saying such a thing a demand for an apology without which serious repercussions would occur.
Do you not see that?
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 4:59 pm605… yes, it is reality, NJ Rob. And I must add that I’m appalled that Appalled would leave that appalling comment. If they’re not asking about your health, they’re questioning your grip on reality.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:00 pm621
It’s fair to infer he didn’t mean what he said? Really?
My inference is extending what he said not contradicting it. What part of my inference do you think is unfair?
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:00 pmAnyone else notice how the Left – formerly champions of privacy, free speech and due process – are now leading the charge against civil liberties. One would have to be blind not to notice.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:11 pmWhat I see is Trump supporters only liking positive comments if they are left where everyone can see them. As for my “inaccurate” statement, I clearly stated “IMO — In My Opinion.” Please feel free to disagree.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:12 pmNo problem.
Thank you.
Going to go out for a bit myself.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:13 pmIt is not “extending” his statement to say “less extreme Trumpalos” would be offended, even though he specifically said he was talking about “most extreme Trumpalos.” That is a contradiction.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:14 pmIs that directed at me?
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:19 pmFor the Trump supporters, posted earlier on another thread and now here, too:
But I will not call this “letting my light shine.” I will not use Biblical or Christian images when talking about Trump.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:19 pmIt is directed at anyone who thinks positive Trump comments only matter when people see them. Is that you, Mr. Mous?
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:20 pmI, too, have to go out. I don’t know when I will be back. It may be awhile.
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:21 pmThe Left wants to grant citizenship to millions of undocumented (IOW illegal) immigrants, creating millions of new Democrat-leaning voters.
“Republicans have always feared that immigration would change the character of American society. Democrats should reward them with their very worst nightmare.” —- David Faris, Politico
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:23 pmI think that’s an evasion. I think it is possible you did direct it at me, but rather than assuming that’s the case, I figured I would just ask you straight out. I guess you prefer to talk in circles.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:25 pm@636 =Haiku!= Gesundheit!
“I want rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, azz-kickers, sh-t-kickers and Methodists.” – Hedley Lamarr [Harvey Korman] ‘Blazing Saddles’ 1974
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:30 pm#626 — I wan’t qustioning NJR’s sanity. I was going out of the way to appreciate that he believes Patterico thinks Trump supporters are awful, based on the tone he takes with the more extreme members of that fraternity.
I think it’s a debate Patterico should allow. The sharp tone our host takes with Trump supporters from time to time introduces some ambiguity, evn though he has devoted a lot space to the idea he doesn’t think that way.
Appalled (1a17de) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:35 pm@ Ed from SFV (#622): Thanks for the kind words and memories about the Longhorn Band. That Rose Bowl game was indeed magical; I wish I’d been there, but I still remember the TV broadcast vividly.
I have many Aggie friends, even an Aggie cousin (vet school), and we generally get along okay. I marched with LHB at halftime at Kyle Field in 1975 and 1977, the latter one of Earl Campbell’s best days in his Heisman Trophy season, carrying the ‘Horns (with half the Aggie defense on his back) to a 57-28 victory that secured #1-ranked Texas’ Cotton Bowl berth against #5-ranked Notre Dame (wherein, alas, Joe Montana et al. ended our national championship hopes). Kyle Field is indeed a fun place to watch a game, and I’m very sorry that A&M ended that storied Thanksgiving Day tradition.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, I’ll bite:
How many games has TAMU lost in its history?
I feel like Ed McMahon. 😉
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:38 pmThat was great, Beldar. There must have been close to 1,000 musicians on the field.
I particularly liked watching the Quads (multi-tom) players having to turn sideways to squeeze through when the band was marching back and forth.
Too bad you can’t make the trip to Normandy.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:42 pmYour idea of “fair” leaves a lot to be desired. If I didn’t care about collateral damage — i.e. not offending the Trump supporters who *aren’t* superfans — then why would I constantly make the distinction? And why would it trouble me so much to have people mistakenly label me as
You are being completely unfair here, James B. Shearer — but frankly, for you, that is par for the course. You seem to exist for no purpose other than to spout opinions that are consistently disagreeable or wrong. I am not responding to you in order to convince you, because I am under no illusion that you and I are ever going to have a meaningful conversation. I respond *only* for the benefit of other readers. Frankly, I think, based on long observation, that your main purpose in being here is to troll me in a disagreeable fashion— one that might fool the casual reader as ostensibly polite, but which is actually quite nasty in its essence. I’ve never once seen a comment from you that dispels this longstanding view of mine. Not once.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:52 pmA fair person would notice two things here.
First, these days I am trying (perhaps foolishly and quixotically) to try to have real conversations rather than succumb to the frustration with unreasonable hypocrisy I have felt for some time now.
Second, your example sucks because (as you admit without acknowledging that it undercuts your whole point) it is totally 100% unresponsive to the question, which asked for evidence that I am hostile to “anyone who voted for Trump or wants to see him succeed.” I do not feel that way, and you will never find me saying that — and that’s why you answer a question like DRJ’s, not by saying “gee, you’re right, he never said that” (you know, the way an intellectually honest person would) but by providing examples of my resentment towards the Trump superfans, which I have always felt and never ever denied.
That’s what a fair person would notice. But you, James B. Shearer, are decidedly *not* a fair person.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:54 pmAbsolute nonsense, NJRob. And until you get this through your head, we’re not going to be able to move on to whatever it is you want to talk about. Because you still don’t seem to recognize the importance of this issue to me. I am going to keep on you until you do.
HOW can I say this in a way that will make you actually pay attention? Type it in all caps? Say the same thing again and again and again? Use a bunch of profanity that I don’t want to use? Threaten to ban you until you acknowledge how important this is to me? I don’t want to do any of these things, but I really really don’t want you to keep minimizing the seriousness of what I’m saying. Tell me. Tell me what it’s going to take to get you to take seriously what I’m trying to say here. For now, I’ll settle for bold print.
I do not feel contempt or hostility towards people who don’t hate the President the way I do. Your saying that is, in my view, an almost unforgivably unfair claim.
First of all, objection, assumes facts not in evidence. I have tried hard to move away from feelings of “hatred” towards anyone. I’m almost nervous to say this, because you’ll cherry pick that one statement out of my whole comment, ignore the rest, cite a bunch of nasty stuff about Trump and statements I made in the past about hating him — and if you do that I swear I will moderate you. I will. So it makes me nervous to say this — but I think it’s important to say anyway. Yes, I believe Trump is as immoral a person who is not a convicted criminal as any I have seen in public life. But I’m trying not to hate him. But that’s not even the important point.
The important point — which I am now also bolding because I don’t want you to ignore it is that I have said over and over and over and over and over until I am blue in the face that I do not hold in contempt people who voted for Trump as the least bad choice. I do not even hold in contempt people who have warmed to him since he got in office, because — while they are willing to recognize his moral failings — they are pleased that he is governing in a mostly conservative way. I have carefully distinguished between those people, on one hand, and on the other hand people who actively love the man, even to the point of praising his immorality and/or engaging in furiously desperate efforts to minimize its importance. That latter group, I hold in contempt. Yes, I do. If that describes you, I hold you in contempt. But I don’t think it does. And if it doesn’t? Then it’s just not fair to me to claim that all it takes to earn my contempt is that you not “hate” the President the way (you claim) I do.
Ask DRJ if she “hates” the President the way (you claim) I do. She will tell you, quite credibly, that she does not hate Trump. And unlike me, she has never said she did, and she is not a liar, so when she says this you can take it to the bank.
And I don’t show her contempt or hostility. I don’t.
So, far from being some petty little failure to use a weasel word, your bullheaded insistence on mischaracterizing my attitude as being one of contempt towards literally anyone who doesn’t “hate” Trump the way (you claim) I do is a very, very serious matter to me — so much so that I’m about to write you off because you seem incapable of understanding how much it means to me. And if you can’t show me the decency to pay attention to something that obviously concerns me a great deal, and take it seriously, and be decent and reasonable to me about it, then you’re not who I thought you were.
Yes: if you constantly defend his lies and try to minimize his immoral behavior, I’m going to feel negatively towards you. Is that horribly unfair of me? I think it’s not. And yes, people can disagree about whether this action or statement of his is immoral or dishonest, but those who show a pattern of defending him every time know who they are. I find those people repugnant. That does not mean that anything you has said about me above is remotely fair. It’s not. You ignore distinctions I have spent (wasted?) a LOT of time and energy trying to make, and if you get the idea that I find it frustrating that all that time and energy has been essentially been wasted on you, then you’re starting to get it.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 5:59 pmYep.
And not just James. And notice that, when you start insisting on things that are important to you, the trolling increases. Heck, I have seen you go after people for being jerks…and yet they continue to post and be jerks.
Ugh.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:00 pmDRJ, you have been properly chastised, repeatedly, by the ever-reasonable Anon Y. Mous for leaving a comment on the relevant thread. I hope you’re ashamed of yourself. 20 Hail Marys and promise never to do it again.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:02 pmRight Hoagie goes and Dave stays, what is one supposed to take from this?
Narciso (dba109) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:05 pmOoooh! I figured it out! Nowhere!
OK, Anon Y. Mous, now YOU have my attention. Lay out in chapter and verse how I mischaracterized NJRob’s words, convince me, or apologize for it. Fail to do any of these things and you risk going bye bye for a while to think about what you did wrong. Now we see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, you’re being repressed!!
LOL no. I don’t ban people for excessive melodrama. However, it is NOT permitted to claim I mischaracterized NJRob’s words when I didn’t, unless you can mount a good argument that I did. Again: you have my full attention. Frankly, of the people around here who regularly distort my words, you’re the last one who springs to mind who needs a virtual whack across the snout to get your attention. So while I won’t ban you for a dumb opinion that I am being authoritarian, I *will* consider buying you a week-long (minimum) ticket to Moderationsville if you fumble the response to my demand that you substantiate your absurd claim that I mischaracterized NJRob’s comments.
The floor is yours.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:07 pmBeldar – They are the ultimate HRC…they claim to have NEVER lost a game. They simply ran out of time. 🙂
That was a great broadcast of the Rose Bowl. The producer got his start at ABC the exact same year as I did. Good guy, who is now the executive producer for golf on Fox. It was one of Keith Jackson’s best calls, and he would say it was among the most satisfying games (he looooooved Darrell Royal) he’d ever experienced. He also really liked John McKay and the Trojans.
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:07 pmYou accused me of “having” them do it. But I’ll accept your representation that you did not intend to accuse me of being behind it, as the words arguably suggested.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:08 pmRight Hoagie goes and Dave stays, what is one supposed to take from this?
Narciso (dba109) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:05 pm
Hoagie was not banned.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:18 pmHoagie was not moderated.
He is staying away of his own free will.
If anybody can be said to have free will after a century of Commie infiltration, Commie indoctrination, and the international Commie conspiracy to pollute and impurify our precious bodily fluids.
He did not say that you said that. Rather, he said it of you.
I can’t speak for him, but what I’m reading is NJRob’s view of what you are thinking or what your motives are. But, he most assuredly did not claim that you said those words. But, you said he did make that claim.
Why does it matter? Well, you have been treating those who you say have mischaracterized your words as if they have bad intent. Not that they are perhaps making what they think are reasonable interpretations of what you have said, but that they are doing this deliberately.
Bad intent? Or maybe just an all too understandable misreading where you confused what he was saying about your thinking with the words he was attributing to you.
Now, will you admit that my “absurd claim” is accurate?
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:21 pmYes, you’re right: instead of saying I explicitly said that, he said that I believe that (obviously based on what I said). It’s a distinction even if it’s one without much of a difference.
Patterico (f966f2) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:29 pmIt ignores what I have consistently said but whatever.
Patterico (f966f2) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:30 pmI would not take his side in a debate if it’s about what you are thinking. I know there are people you respect who support Trump. You may believe they are wrong (I’m not even sure about that), but I don’t think you believe they are all dupes, etc.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:34 pmI can vouch for Patterico, he’s usually quite fair, and demonstrably so, his long record proves it. However, he’s understandably picky about his words being twisted, misquoted, inaccurately paraphrased, or taken out of context.
Haven’t we all wasted time attempting to explain “…that isn’t what I said” after some jerk distorted our plain words to mean something never intended.
But it’s also necessary to point out that when it comes to Trump and/or his outspoken supporters Patterico was shocked and somewhat disappointed when some few but vocal commenters here declined to follow his firm support for Ted Cruz and instead supported Trump, a candidate that Patterico held in contempt.
So make a note to yourself, our gracious host just isn’t ready yet to bury the hatchet. Maybe the upcoming SCOTUS nomination combined with Trump’s long list of astonishing accomplishments and the upcoming Midterms will eventually persuade Mr Hardhead to quit pissing against the tide.
ropelight (559f0e) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:46 pm#635 DRJ
CMD (88e9b1) — 7/5/2018 @ 6:46 pmGreat use of a scott of the antarctic reference (specifically the incredibly brave Captain Oates)
Maybe you ardent Trump supporters just aren’t going to convince Patterico to like Trump the way you do, and you should start coming to grips with that.
It’s really not the end of the world. I, for one, will happily piss in Trump’s tide for as long as it’s coming in, but I don’t expect anyone to get too worked up about it.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:24 pmThat’s fairly irrelevant. NJR made a declarative statement about Patrick: “…to you he [Trump] is a liar and everyone who supports him is a dupe, a troll, someone lacking in logic, a rube, etc.”
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:35 pmThis is fairly basic. When a commenter makes such an assertion, then it’s on him to back it up. If he can’t or won’t defend his comment, then it’s on NJR to retract and apologize. I’m really not getting why this is so contentious.
No, he was not wrong.
I have no idea what relevance this has to anything we are discussing or have discussed, but you and ropelight have both referenced the Civil War. My only thought is that you both think we are living in similar times and, apparently, advocate similar solutions. I am not interested in discussing that.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:36 pmnk, I’m glad I wasn’t replenishing my bodily fluids as I read your #651, or I’d be needing a new keyboard. Thank you for the belly laugh, my friend.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:38 pmAlso, I don’t have time right now to search for your earlier comment or to discuss it.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:38 pmDammit, Patterico, why all this emphasis on Trump — when the real issue is fluoridation!?!
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:42 pmWe’ll Leviticus you think Anthea butler’s mallifucum malorum has some kind of import.
Narciso (dba109) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:42 pmI can think of at least eight or nine regular commenters on this blog who I’d trust to play draw poker with over the phone, with them as dealer. Some of them are regular commenters, some old regulars who mostly keep their powder dry. But there are some astonishingly smart, stable, wise people who weigh in here from time to time. Thank you all.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:44 pmAt the very least, understand that a few of his astonishing accomplishments are not positive ones.
I have retained my Democratic registration mainly because it lets me vote against Debbie Wasserman Schultz in both the primary and the general election. (For those that don’t know me, I live in her district.)
But I will probably switch in 2020 so I can vote for the most feasible opponent of Trump in the GOP primary. Because I think Trump is a lousy POTUS: incompetent and incoherent as well as wrong on immigration and tariffs. And not too great in foreign affairs.
kishnevi (4777d8) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:45 pmNow that she got away as the den mother of the awan gang, what difference does it make?
Narciso (dba109) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:47 pmNarciso, nothing. Reports are Canova hasn’t raised as much money as he did in 2016.
kishnevi (4777d8) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:59 pmBut at least I have the psychological satisfaction of voting against her as often as possible.
#660, DRJ, see the second paragraph of my comment at #656.
ropelight (559f0e) — 7/5/2018 @ 7:59 pmBeldar, speaking of cards, have you seen Richard Turner? He is a “card mechanic.”
Such a story!
https://youtu.be/UWcm2JDT4lQ
Simon Jester (a4a9de) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:11 pmI understand. You mentioned 1864 (which is during the Civil War) but you were not mentioning it for that reason and you are not advocating that solution and, furthermore, you have been wronged by me distorting your words like a jerk. But you are too much of a gentleman to point that out, plus you think TRUMP HAS FINALLY PREVAILED so you are feeling magnanimous.
I honestly hope you are right. I will be thrilled if every day just gets better and better for America with Trump as President. But I also hoped that for Obama and I hope it for Trump’s successor.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:11 pmIt was my pleasure, Beldar. For my part, I stepped out in the real world this morning and I was reminded for the (roughly) 18,250th time that the American Common Man* is a very decent human being. Which is why I don’t consider Trump to truly represent the American electorate, ThOR and ropelight.
*And Woman, ladies, no slight intended. Man embraces Woman grammatically as well as literally.
nk (dbc370) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:16 pm643
That’s what a fair person would notice. But you, James B. Shearer, are decidedly *not* a fair person.
My original statement (455) was:
“I believe Patterico has stated in the past that he posts anti-Trump stuff just to annoy Trump supporters and that he isn’t trying to change anybody’s mind. Or words to that effect. So discussions here aren’t degenerating into hostility, they are hostile from the start.”
It would have been more precise to say:
“I believe Patterico has stated in the past that he posts anti-Trump stuff just to annoy some Trump supporters and that he isn’t trying to change anybody’s mind. Or words to that effect. So discussions here aren’t degenerating into hostility, they are hostile from the start.”
Are we now on the same page or do you have further objections?
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:30 pmVery cool video, Simon Jester, and I see why the “playing poker over the phone” metaphor made you think of it.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:40 pmDRJ, thank you, and Best Regards.
ropelight (559f0e) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:51 pmJames B Shearer, I think our host makes clearer when he posts stuff he intends to pull Trumpniki’s chains, he is aiming at the more extreme types and has his tongue in his cheek when he does so. There are a few who might be thought to qualify here, but even they have moments of sanity, so I won’t annoy them by saying who I think they are.
kishnevi (4777d8) — 7/5/2018 @ 8:57 pmBut to the normal person who voted for Trump because he at least was not a Democrat, they should not have offended.
Why did you mention 1864?
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:23 pmFunny a guy would take such offence at people twisting his words when the whole point of this post is to twist Trumps tweet to mean it’s bad to have citizens from Iran, when it’s obvious it’s about a unethical faux treaty back deal.
Normal people get this, people of the resistance (or whatever they want to call a rose) want to pretend its bigotry.
Your BS isn’t fooling anyone except those that want to be.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:27 pmI do, and I stated them, and you ignored them.
Shocka!
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:31 pmhttp://townhall.com/columnists/austinbay/2018/07/05/irans-internal-clash-n2497554
Narciso (dba109) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:34 pm676
But to the normal person who voted for Trump because he at least was not a Democrat, they should not have offended.
It is possible to be offended (or in my case be annoyed) by abuse directed at others.
James B. Shearer (b1ca04) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:37 pmFrom the post:
That’s interesting. From the Homeland Security website:
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:40 pmCountry 2014 2015 2016
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:41 pmIran 8,894 9,074 9,596
Oh, here is where it comes from —
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:48 pmAnd yes, I am one of Hillary’s (and Patterico’s) deplorables that voted for Trump in the primaries. Because he came out at the start with “build the wall” when everyone else was on board with the Chamber of Commerce and handing out soccer balls and teddy bears to illegals, and signaling their superior virtue preaching about the the children. Actually being used as pawns.
So according to Patterico, I’m deserving of contempt because I don’t hate Trump but voted for him for a reason other than I hated him less than Hillary.
Some virtue.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:50 pmThe irony here there is no deal with the Iranian de facto theocratic regime that has anything to do helping 2,500 Iranians become citizens. Talk about twisting.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:50 pmPlus this:
DRJ (46c88f) — 7/5/2018 @ 9:50 pmSo Paul, may I call you Paul? No, I’m a deplorable that voted for Trump because I actually like and bought what he was campaigning on.
So, Mr. Montagu, it’s your contention that Trump is a bigot being his text featured in this post meant he thinks Iranians in general should never be or ever have been permitted to become US citizens?
That’s your takeaway?
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:05 pmHi, lee (#685)! I don’t recall seeing a comment in your name here before, so if I’ve missed your prior comments, I’m sorry, but if you’re new here, then welcome.
Since you say you were a Trump voter in the primaries and were drawn to support him by his “build the wall” theme, I’m curious if you could help me get to know you better, toward which end I have two questions. First (this is the long question, which needs an agreed factual predicate before it can be discussed productively, I think):
The wall hasn’t been built yet, nor funded by Congress, nor funded by Mexico. In the attempts that Trump’s made to get funding from Congress since he became POTUS, he’s been unable to strike any deals with the Dems, nor to create circumstances in which the GOP leadership could strike any deals with the Dems, nor even to lead his own party’s congressional caucuses in either chamber to unify around legislation for funding. It’s unclear whether he, or the GOP House or Senate leaders, even intend to try again before the next Congress convenes in 2019, and of course that next Congress might still be in GOP hands, but also might not be. Also: No progress has been made toward having Mexico pay for the wall; Mexico’s reaction to that suggestion has been consistently, vehemently negative.
(If you think this factual recital is mistaken, I invite you to suggest corrections needed to make it factually accurate as a premise for my question to you.)
Given this, has Trump’s failure to deliver on his campaign promise that drew you to him in the primaries shaken your support for him? If not, why not? If so, how so?
Thanks in advance if you choose to answer. If not, no offense will be taken by me.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:12 pmThat Dave didn’t peddle up a bogus story about his military service, and therefore has nothing to be ashamed of, while Hoagie did, and does?
Dave (445e97) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:12 pmOH! In #689 above, I completely forgot to ask my second question of lee, which is simpler.
Regarding this tweet from Trump:
Do you believe that there is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea?
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:16 pmHi Beldar, pleased to meet you.
Yes, I’m disappointed the wall is not under construction. I have little blame on Trump for the failure though. If you remember the circumstances back in W’s first term, the outrage then, the minute men on the border, the legislation to build the wall in 2006, you have to know the fact of its absence is on the shoulders of congress. The GOPe. Paul Ryan and the turtle in particular. They are bought and paid for buy the Chamber of Commerce and the Koch brothers.
I had no illusions about the separation of powers and the snakes of the GOPe. I do know Trump has exerted tremendous pressure on the issue, and the open borders crowd has been laid bare thanks to Trumps commitment on the issue. The war us being fought, and in today’s reality, that’s to be appreciated.
As for Mexico paying for it, I always understood that was about savings in government subsidies to illegals, and reduced remittances to Mexico that actually stopping illegal immigration would entail.
In short, I never believed Trump was a miracle worker. What he is, is leading us in the right direction and putting the POV of his base front and center. To this middle American shafted by our so called conservative leadership over the last 20 years, it’s a very welcome change.
As important to building the wall, I hope Trump crushes the GOPe and salts the earth where they stood, selling out the American right. It’s always been a long shot in a country that elected Obama twice, but at least it is real hope and change.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:41 pm@ lee: Your #692 is a responsive and civil answer to the first question I asked. I have a follow-up question for you, but I’ll hold off on that to see if you’ll similarly give a responsive and civil answer to my question in #691. Again, thanks in advance if so, no offense if you decline.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:47 pmNot true, as you would have known had you paid attention.
Cite me the proof that Cruz fits the description you give here. Did you know Cruz talked about a wall before Trump did?
Do I blame reluctant Trump voters in the general? No. Are Trump voters like you in the primaries to blame for the worst missed political opportunity of my lifetime? Yes. Yes you are.
Next time do your research or don’t vote.
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:56 pmHe promised hundreds of times, from his very first campaign speech to his very last (I checked the videos), over a period of 15+ months, that Mexico would pay for 100% of the cost of the wall.
How is it that Trump deserves no blame for failing to accomplish that?
How is it Paul Ryan’s fault instead?
Dave (445e97) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:57 pmAh, my #694 crossed with your #693, which is civil, but not quite as responsive, or perhaps I’m confused.
I certainly agree that there are nuclear threats from other countries besides North Korea, and have been, continuously, since the Soviets got their bomb in 1949. The Chinese are now an additional nuclear threat. The Iranians are trying to become one, much helped in that direction by Obama.
But the North Koreans have detonated several atomic bombs, and even while their delivery systems for them remain unproven, they could certainly strike targets in South Korea, as best I understand our current assessment of their capabilities (e.g., by slipping a bomb into the Port of Pusan in a cargo container transhipped via a neutral carrier). I read your comment to suggest, perhaps, that you think other nations present a much more serious nuclear threat than North Korea (which I would agree with you on, if so). Or perhaps you were suggesting that other nations (e.g., China, I presume) have so much influence over North Korea that they should be considered Kim’s puppeteers, such that those countries should, again, be considered to present a more serious nuclear threat.
Or perhaps you meant neither of those two things, but something else entirely. Do you really believe there is zero nuclear threat from North Korea now, and that there never has been?
I really don’t want to put words in your mouth or misinterpret you, so help me out if you’re willing.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 10:59 pmI’ll give that advice all the due consideration it deserves.
Yes,that’s a pretty fair take on what I meant.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:07 pm@ lee: Thanks for your clarification regarding the Chinese influence. Again, we agree on that, I think. Let’s so stipulate, for purposes of this discussion, that Chinese influence is an important consideration in assessing whatever nuclear threat (to the U.S. and its allies like South Korea) may have ever existed from North Korea. Okay?
Set that aside for a second, though. Great or small, and certainly subject to heavy influence from China, do you think there no longer a nuclear threat from North Korea since the Trump summit with Kim in Singapore?
FWIW, and again, not to put words in your mouth, but many other Trump supporters who I asked that question of here when the tweet came out answered, in essence, that they still believe that there’s a threat, so they don’t believe the threat literally ended with the summit, and that Trump was exaggerating, but they didn’t hold it against him if so, because they thought he was moving in the right direction. But I’d really rather hear your take, in your words.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:16 pmI thought I made it clear what I thought was intended by the reference to Mexico paying for the wall.
The deal is the wall must be built before the savings on payments to Mexico and Mexicans can be applied.
The wall was supposed to be built in 2006. Trump is trying. How can you maintain congress (republican majority) isn’t to blame?
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:17 pm#677, DRJ, I wanted to emphasize the magnitude of Trump’s victory, I consider it represents such a dramatic change in the status quo as to constitute a paradigm shift in our electoral politics.
My mention of 1864 was intended as a reminder of the last time a change of comparable significance occured. Admittedly, I’m vulnerable to accusations of excessive exuberance.
(Now, however, it seems like the assassination of JFK should be included in any list of political upheavals.)
ropelight (559f0e) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:20 pmBeldar, I’m getting the feeling you are trying to box me into a gotcha moment.
I think Reagan is a great influence on Trump, he wants such a legacy. I’m sure some would think that self serving, but those some would beieve the worst regardless. Personally, I think it a worthy aspiration. Anyway, like I said, you gotta play the game. As Reagan said, trust, but verify. That’s the game, and hopefully Trump will be as successful as Reagan in the circumstance.
As an American, I would hope you would too.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:27 pmropelight (#701), by referring to 1864, were you intending to refer more generally to the American Civil War? I think the source of the confusion is that that war started in 1861 and ended in 1865; 1864 was a very important year (with major battles in Fredericksburg, Cold Harbor, Mobile Bay, and Nashville), but I’m not sure what paradigm shift occurred then. Lincoln was reelected in 1864, but perhaps you meant 1860, when he was elected for his first term (triggering the succession of the states that joined the Confederacy). If you either meant to refer generally to the Civil War, or to Lincoln’s first election in 1860, I’m with you as to the paradigm shift, but if you meant something specifically in 1864, I’m still confused.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:28 pm@ lee: That’s a reasonable concern; I cross-examine people for a living, in my day job. I’m really not trying to cross-examine you, though, but rather to get to know you better, which your answers are genuinely helping me with. I don’t have some “gotcha” that I intend to deliver, although I do have some different views that I might offer, hopefully with the same civility we’ve been using so far in this conversation. Again, if you decline to reply, I’ll take no offense, and I’m not going to accuse you of fleeing the field in disarray or any such nonsense.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:31 pmHe said Mexico would pay for it, not that we save enough money to pay for it ourselves:
“I will build a great great wall on our southern border and I’ll have Mexico pay for that wall.”
Paying for it out of the savings we realize means WE are paying for, not Mexico.
Dave (445e97) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:36 pmI certainly do hope that Trump’s efforts with the North Koreans will be successful, by the way, although I have grave reservations about them. I also fully approve of his withdrawal from the ridiculously misnamed “Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” aka the Iran Nuclear
DealRollover and Giveaway. You & I probably agree about that, I’m guessing.But that’s really not the point of my question; it’s intended to help me understand better how Trump fans feel about Trump.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:36 pmBeldar, I’m not sure what further reply you are looking for. I think I answered your questions, no?
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:44 pm@ lee: You did thoroughly answer my first question, about the wall, yes. Although you’ve offered some related observations (with which I generally agree) about North Korea and the degree of its nuclear threat and the importance of Chinese influence, and the importance of verification (hey, we’re both Reagan fans; we’re learning about things we have common views on here, in the process!), I don’t think you’ve exactly responded to the original question, which I keyed to the language of Trump’s tweet:
Do you believe that there is no longer a Nuclear Threat from North Korea?
Note well: I don’t mean to confine you to a yes/no answer, and invite you to offer any further comments or qualifications or reservations or observations you choose. Again, I’m not trying to trap you into a box, I’m trying to find out what you really think, in your words rather than my guesses about what you might be thinking.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:49 pmDave, you pick nits.
It’s like saying solar panels will pay for themselves. Do the solar panels actually send cash to the manufacturer? No. They pay for themselves by the money that would go to the electric company going to the solar panel seller, who uses that to pay the solar panal manufacturer instead.
It’s like that. That’s how I always understood it. If you took it another way, well, sorry. But I didn’t take it another way.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/5/2018 @ 11:54 pmThis argument seems (il-)logically similar to the following:
An executive discovers that one of the companies he does business with has been systematically cheating him for years, by over-charging and/or shorting him on his orders.
He consults with an attorney. “I can make the dirty rascal pay for cheating you,” he tells the man.
“But litigation is costly…” the man muses out loud.
“Not to worry,” the attorney says. “Your malefactor will pay for every cent of the cost of recovery.”
“Every cent?”
“100%”
A little while after he pays the attorney a hefty, and non-refundable, retainer, the attorney tells him, “Good news, I’ve arranged a settlement that does everything I promised.”
“You will stop doing business with the company that cheated you, and over time, you’ll make up the money they stole from you – and what you paid to hire me – out of the savings.”
“But you said the guy that cheated me would pay for every cent!”
“Oh, but he *is* – because the money you aren’t paying him is coming out of *his* pocket, not *yours*. I’m a man of my word!”
Dave (445e97) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:01 amAnd so the electric company is the one who really pays for your solar panels?
If you quit smoking and use the money you save to buy a boat, does the tobacco company acquire title to the boat? According to your logic, they paid for it, didn’t they?
Dave (445e97) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:12 am@ lee: If you’ve decided not to continue further in our conversation, that’s okay. Your “trust but verify” observation (with which, again, I agree) might be read to imply that you recognize a continuing nuclear threat from North Korea. I think that’s a reasonable inference to draw, but I’d rather not have to draw my own inference, and there might be other, different and even inconsistent explanations for the “trust but verify” reference. I’ll hold off a while longer before commenting further or sharing any of my own views.
I have no expectation that I will persuade you to abandon your support of Trump by the end of this conversation! And I’m not seeking to — and probably couldn’t — find some way to embarrass you regardless of whether you answer, more directly than you have so far, the question about North Korea. You clearly can speak for yourself.
Regardless of whether you’ve more to say to me tonight, if you’re still checking this post, thanks again for your civility and candor in our exchanges so far; I commend you for it, and feel that so far, anyway, my own efforts at civility haven’t been wasted on you.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:13 amNot to be combative, but I answered that up at #693.
I think the idea Kim would launch unapproved by China is naive. N. Korea is a pawn in the big game. So to me your question really boils down to do I believe there is a no longer a nuclear threat from China.
What I think is really happening is China’s bluff of Kim’s derangment is being called, and China is being pressured to allow the 65 year old Korean conflict to end. Really just a hunch, but I’m pretty confident there’s way more going on than you or I have a clue about. Wheels within wheels.
I don’t think there’s zero nuclear threat from Israel, much less N Korea. But saying so probably isn’t in the interests of American foreign policy.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:23 amYou didn’t know Cruz advocated a wall before Trump, did you?
Didn’t think so.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:40 amEh, you probably could. The depth and breadth of what I don’t know is appalling, and ferreting it out would be no problem, I’m sure.
What I do know is the nation as founded is under attack as never before (per Lincoln’s observation about the danger being from within), and Trump is not the problem. I can’t guarantee he’s the solution, but I remain unshaken in my conviction he is the right man for the times. Not perfect by any means, but ideally suited for the circumstances we face. There are just times when you need a right b@stard to take the fight to the enemy, and these are the times. YMMV.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:49 amThe wall was advocated for in 2006. I don’t think Cruz could have possibly won the 2016 general election. In fact he didn’t.
Get over it.
lee (ab26cf) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:53 am716. I’ll let this stand without much further comment, except to point out just how broken and corrupt our body politic is in this day and age.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/6/2018 @ 1:48 am@ lee: Certainly your answer at #713 is adequately responsive, and I thank you for your careful but cheerful conversation in route to answering both. The conversation has been useful. I can tell that you have a good fund of knowledge about world events and dynamics, that you’ve paid attention to American politics for a long time, and several other things that incline me to take seriously your opinions.
Are you waiting for the ‘But’? There’s really not one, not in the sense of a gotcha. I’ll share some observations of my own on these topics, if you’re interested. (If not, again, no offense. And it’s getting late, so if you don’t wander back around until tomorrow, or never do for that matter, I draw no adverse conclusions from that.)
*****
So you’ll know where I”m coming from, since we’ve just made each other’s online acquaintance:
I am a fourth generation Texas Republican who’s voted for the Republican nominee, sometimes with my hose firmly held, in every presidential election since Jerry Ford’s. I’ve been a civil trial lawyer in Houston since 1980. I’m not a social conservative, but I’m a foreign policy hawk, a fiscal conservative, a federalist, a civil libertarian, and a free trader. I’ve been a fan of Patterico’s since he started this blog in 2003, and in comments here, or back when I regularly wrote for my own blog (linked from my screenname on these comments), he & I agree far more often than not.
Trump first showed up on my personal or professional radar screen in 1984 or so, because he was a buddy of Carl Icahn’s, and sometimes invested in stock plays with Icahn. I was a very junior lawyer on the team representing T. Boone Pickens in his hostile takeover attempts, which Icahn had speculated in from the sidelines. The SEC and SDNY believed (and probably still believe) that Icahn was dirty but too smart to get caught, so they were always asking us, as Pickens lawyers, about any communications between Pickens and Icahn, to which our answer was always, “Nope, still none, just like the last time you asked.” But in the Gulf Oil deal IIRC, they also asked about Trump, so we had to figure out who the hell he was so we could confirm that nope, he had nothing to do with Pickens either.
About that same time, Trump got national attention when he signed Herschel Walker to play for his USFL team, and since Houston had a USFL franchise, and as it turned out, one of the better ones, I watched their games in that league’s two seasons. As a sports fan, I followed fairly closely the demise of that league, including Trump’s boneheaded decision, as most powerful owner within the league, to move it from spring football (its original business plan and reason for being) to head-on-head competition with the NFL in the fall — after which the USFL never played another down. Then, because my practice then and now included antitrust law, I followed fairly closely the USFL’s antitrust lawsuit against the NFL, in which the jury expressed its contempt for the NFL and its star witness, Pete Rozelle, by finding that they’d violated the Sherman Act in competing with the USFL, but its equal contempt for the USFL and its star witness, Donald Trump, in awarding one dollar in damages (trebled to $3.00).
By the time Trump had this meeting, I was a partner in the Houston office of New York-based Weil, Gotshal & Manges. I didn’t work on the firm’s representation of his largest creditor, Citibank, but my NY partners did, and the crucial meeting — in which Trump was kept out of personal bankruptcy only so that he could help his creditors promote the properties he was giving up his interest in — was, as that article states, in one of our conference rooms in the GM building in midtown. At that year’s holiday party in the Rainbow Room, I learned exactly what my New York partners thought of Trump as a businessman: Some of them had known Trump’s dad for decades, and had known him, as one told me, “since he was a little pisher at Fred’s knee, before he got sent off to military school.” I said I was surprised we weren’t representing Trump (because there’s lots more money to be made in fees representing a big debtor client, especially if he does go into bankruptcy, and WG&M was the foremost national bankruptcy debtors’ counsel for major business bankruptcies). “That guy, Donnie Trump?” said one of my partners, followed by a crude remark about the diseases one could catch given who Trump slept around with. We’d never take him on as a client, I was told, because “He won’t listen and he won’t pay.” (WG&M happily represented Enron and Lehman Bros in their bankruptcies, so it’s not like they were unreasonably picky.)
So by the time Trump’s casino empire had been washed and rinsed and repeated in the bankruptcy courts a few times, and he’d cut way back on his equity investments in real estate in favor of licensing his name and doing reality TV, I had a very thorough and firm opinion of Donald Trump: Bad businessman, braggart, serial deal-breaker, con man, unreasonable litigant, personally immoral, self-destructive, media-obsessed, and all-around clown.
There’s nothing Trump, or anyone else, could say to make me change those opinions. I cannot be persuaded that he’s anything remotely close to the kind of business genius he pretends to be; I’ve seen otherwise, and I know what his actual reputation was in the New York financial and real estate communities. So I viewed him as a political candidate from a very different perspectives, probably, than most of his reality TV fans, or his early political supporters. I don’t recite any of the above to invite you or anyone to quibble, but rather, to share the factual and historical basis for my own views about Trump.
*****
Thus it is that when I saw Trump’s tweet about the end of the nuclear threat from North Korea, I had a very different reaction to it than the Trump fans who described their reactions to it. I thought: “Here’s another deliberate lie, told with the intention of suckering the American people, because we’ve just given Kim the legitimacy he and his father have sought for decades, without getting anything but empty promises, all previously broken already, in exchange.” But Trump supporters here — including you, lee — don’t hold it against Trump that he’s told what is, at a bare minimum, a falsehood if taken at all literally. “Don’t take him literally,” I’ve heard some Trump supporters say, “Take him seriously.” But I can’t take him seriously because I don’t believe anything he says can ever be trusted.
Trump supporters do trust him, though. I think they are being profoundly unwise in so doing; I think they’re being suckered, including some very intelligent and well informed people who should be very hard to sucker; but I don’t think they’re being dishonest, at all, when they tell me they trust him. And if they do trust him, which I must recognize even if I think it’s unwise, they’re not bothered by his being any or all of the things I mentioned in the list above, starting with “bad businessman” and ending with “clown.” And the people who believe him aren’t doing that just to piss me off. They’re doing it because they genuinely believe he’s trustworthy. And they therefore are inclined to give him extravagant credit (often more than he deserves) when he does something right (Gorsuch & other judicial nominees, regulatory reduction, Paris accords, pulling out of Iran deal, moving the embassy to Jerusalem), or just when something goes well because he’s not-Obama/not-Clinton (e.g., signing the tax cut bill).
But they excuse things which are to me inexcusable. I can’t support a POTUS who can be that misleading about nuclear war, to pick one of a thousand things that he does which makes me crazy.
Likewise, Trump supporters say they’re disappointed that there’s been no progress on the wall, and they blame Congress. Well, who was the Speaker of the House when Trump ran for POTUS? Who was the Senate majority leader? It was the same two guys that it is now, right? I don’t remember Trump qualifying any of his “We’re gonna build a great big beautiful wall” promises with a disclaimer, “Provided you help me persuade Congress to fund it.” Or “provided you don’t reelect Paul Ryan.” Or “provided that the Democrats don’t play partisan politics.” I seem to recall that when Reagan made campaign promises, the Dems controlled both chambers of Congress, and Reagan actually either struck compromises or peeled off enough of their votes to get major legislation passed anyway. You’re certainly right, lee, about all the broken promises made about immigration reform before Trump took office. Trump was aware of that too. Why did he say, over and over again, that it was going to be so easy, you won’t believe how quickly, yada yada, if he really knew how damned difficult it was going to be to get anything through even the GOP caucuses? Why don’t Trump supporters hold Trump to the same standards as they hold the “GOPe” to? Why do they pretend that no progress is okay? I get it that they trust Trump, and that I don’t. But when he’s made such explicit promises — repealing Obamacare and building the wall — why don’t his supporters recognize that he’s failing as a leader, that he can’t get support the way Reagan could, and that his promises are as empty as any of the previous GOP leaders and presidents the Trump fans want to tar & feather?
Thus ends my very long set of observations. Not a one of them is intended as a personal attack on any Trump supporter, and especially not on you, lee, who have been rational and thoughtful, and indeed, clever. (I don’t quite buy the solar panel argument, but I think it’s clever and more persuasive than, for the reasons Dave’s mentioned, it ought to be. I also note that to figure out whether solar panels will pay for themselves, one now must figure in a tax — in the form of a tariff — on imported panels, or else the higher price that domestic manufacturers can now charge in their protectionist market. Weren’t we all upset about picking solar panel winners and losers when Obama did it?)
If you, lee, or any other Trump supporters can help explain to me why you hold him to none of his most important promises — why nothing is ever his fault when he fails to deliver as very explicitly promised, even though he’s the POTUS and promised that only he could solve these problems and that they would be easy — then it will be a lot easier for me to give Trump supporters more benefit of the doubt.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 1:49 amErrata #718: I held my nose to vote for Bob Dole and John McCain, not my hose.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:01 amFurther errata #718: I didn’t vote for Trump (or for Hillary); I meant every presidential election since Ford, until this one. Others here may know that, but lee may not.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:07 amAnd thus, the GOP became the party of Alinsky.
Your fellow Americans who think differently about politics than you are not “the enemy.”
Dave (445e97) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:49 amMy winter coat paid for itself considering the cost of a hospital stay for pneumonia. Mr. lee is a parody of Trumpkinthink.
nk (dbc370) — 7/6/2018 @ 5:56 amlee is a long time though infrequent poster here and also appeared a lot in pre-Disqus pjmedia threads. But yeah, something’s off.
urbanleftbehind (944c49) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:03 amThat’s a two-part clunkily-worded question, but yes, my opinion is that Trump is a bigot, with good reason. As for Iranians in general, he’s the one who implemented a travel on seven countries, one of them being Iran but, as I understand it, it’s not permanent. I have no objection to that. But that wasn’t the point of his tweet, was it? It was basically a dig at Obama, and the thing is, lee, if you have to lie to score a political point against Obama, you don’t have much of a point, do you?
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:23 amAnd the reason for inclusion was dictated by statute, noted in the supreme court decision,
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:27 amI have no problem with the GOP becoming the party of Alinsky. Alinsky was right about a lot of things. What bothers me is that we have a white Obama in office, and Republican voters don’t care as long as he’s their bastard.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:36 amActually, Beldar, “hose” sounds better, but without trying to visualize.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:41 amI asked because in the last thread you seemed to hold Trump responsible for the Dems escalating attacks and behavior since you said they were learning from him. I responded that they have been doing these actions for years and cited various events. My interpretation of your response was that this was different and Trump’s behavior was beyond the pale. So I asked, in abrupt fashion, if there ever is a time when to “take it to the mattresses.” It was my last question in the previous thread that was never answered so I brought it over here.
Thank you.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:17 amThank you for taking the time to respond so thoroughly. The bold remarks are helpful in understanding your position.
The reason I have responded as I did is because it feels to me that your remarks go beyond the absurd Trump supporters such as Happyfeet simply because there aren’t many of them on this board. Most of the current supporters on here are ones that know Trump is an immoral man, a liar, a trickster who could easily cut a deal with the left if they played ball. Other than the pathetic budget that he and Congress passed, for which he was roundly ridiculed on here, he hasn’t done so.
If it’s meant for just the extreme Trump supporters, well they aren’t here. They don’t post on this blog that I can see with the exception of Happyfeet and I don’t take him seriously. So I don’t see the utility in yelling at people that aren’t there to receive the remarks. Now, the people that are here are the ones that have either warmed to Trump or reluctantly supported him because he was better than the alternative. So they read the remarks and digest them and wonder if all this hatred is meant for them just as they did when Obama said “bitter clingers” and Hillary said “deplorables.”
That’s human psychology. Read enough abuse and you begin to internalize it. Treat someone as an adversary long enough and you see them as the enemy. We are still at the mercy of our innate behaviors.
But it’s not my board site so I will try and ignore the remarks as best as I can.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:28 am“Muh principles”… https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/i-left-the-republican-party-now-i-want-democrats-to-take-over/2018/07/03/54a4007a-7e38-11e8-b0ef-fffcabeff946_story.html
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:41 amWe’ll max kids wants ponies and ice cream too.
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:42 amPolitical behavior on both sides is unacceptable to me. I think the Democrats escalated first and that’s one minor reason I could never be a Democrat. The main reason is I don’t agree with Democratic Party policies.
However, I am not impressed with the Trump argument that the only way to fight back is to act the same way. I think fighting for my principles and ideas is noble. I think sacrificing my values in the process is counterproductive, but it’s obvious that Trump and I don’t have the same values. Sometimes we have the same policy goals, and I support him when we do.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:53 amThey had more leverage in 2012 had a Santorum or hardcore Gingrich prevailed when Romney got a high water mark % of Boot’s co-religionists. They are just falling into the Abzug/Streisand role of the 70s.
urbanleftbehind (944c49) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:56 amhappyfeet is not the only Trump fan here who will overlook or justify almost anything Trump does.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:56 amYes but Romney beat Gingrich with a massive ad blitz, Santorum similarly then he went basenghi re obama.
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:00 amAgain: mocking the idea of principles is good evidence that you don’t really have any.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:06 amPresident Trump is the best president we’ve ever had my whole life, and I don’t want to just take that for granted, especially cause of I never expected him to win or to be such a marvelous leader.
There’s so much in which we can all delight! but…
It nevertheless still feels like a reprieve not a full-blown pivot. But i’m more hopeful than i been in many many moons.
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:10 amSupporting and voting for Democrats is a traveshamockery of one’s “principles”, if one is a Republican.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:14 amThe same goes for Will, Schmidt, Scarborough and the rest of those fellows.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:15 amWho gives a farthing about them, they were meticulous to someone of impeccable honesty, 10 years ago Dr evil waa just following the jones,memo but regardless, the shop he founded mercury is neck deep in the russia business.
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:18 amWe can’t spare this guy, he actually fights.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:19 am736. Hence my coinage of the term “Schlichterite” to point out those who sacrifice their principles in favor of the same behavior they decry in Democrats.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:28 amYour party is doubling down on hardcore socialism. Is that really the path you want to go down?
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:31 amNo he voted for the tokemeister, an even more quixotic exercise,
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:33 am743. Your president palled around for decades with the party that always had pushed hardcore socialism. Apparently you have no problem with that.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:35 amSo did Reagan. He’s your President too.
P.S. Since I have a duplicate comment in moderation, my numbers don’t match up with your own. So it’s more helpful to quote the comment than just the number.
Public Service Announcement.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:37 amHe’s not my president, NJRob. I reject him and everything he stands for.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:40 am747… 🙈🙉🙊
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:45 amnarciso decrying quixotic exercises. That’s rich.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:45 amHear no evil, see no evil speak no evil
Vs.
Actively support no evil
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:46 amNarciso is not a Sclicterite, but he is the bizarro version of the SJW White Knight, chivalrous defender of the virtue of poor put-upon conservative woman candidates across the land.
urbanleftbehind (944c49) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:48 amSo you won’t vote for a Democrat… okay, then…
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:49 amI wasn’t old enough to vote for Reagan. I actively avoided voting for Trump and will do so in 2020 when the time comes.
Knowing what I’ve learned about the 1980 election, as easy as it is to point out all the wonderful things Reagan did in office, I’m not so sure my vote wouldn’t have been AGAINST Bush rather than for Reagan had I voted in the primaries back then anyway.
Gryph (08c844) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:55 amMy daughter went to one of those shrines when she was in Japan. There’s also a children’s song about them:
Or something like that.
nk (dbc370) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:56 amI was just barely old enough. Reagan signed my commission.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:59 amOn paper, ‘poppy’ looked good as did Jeb nearly 40 years later, but he had no ‘big mo’
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:08 amBecause of people like you.
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:09 amnk, if I can help.
http://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/jizo1.shtml
If I suspect your daughter went to one of the shrines I suspect she went to one of the shrines dedicated to the infants who were aborted…
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:09 amI could be wrong.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:10 amMizuko Jizo. The water child Buddha. Want me to manspai?
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:13 amThank God, 756…California would have been off the R farm even sooner, though Gary Hart would have been the Clinton figure several years sooner as well.
And you are correct, Patterico
urbanleftbehind (944c49) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:14 amMissed a key stroke. Sorry.
Steve57 (0b1dac) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:16 amWho was pushing for the wall in 2008?
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:18 amIt could be, Steve, but I was specifically referring to the Three Wise Monkeys Shrine.
The Sanno Shrine in the song was at Nagasaki and well, you know, let’s say it’s a little different now than it was at the time of Tokugawa Yoshinobu.
nk (dbc370) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:18 amAlso, I don’t know about 2006, but try 2011 and 2012.
https://patterico.com/2016/02/07/video-ted-cruz-was-talking-about-a-wall-years-before-trump/
There is no reason on Earth to think Cruz would not have done even better than Trump in a general, which is different from a primary where people have to appeal to extreme idiots who would vote for the likes of Donald Trtump when they had better choices.
YOU and people like YOU are to blame for the fiasco that was our set of crappy choices in the general. You actually CHOSE this chucklehead. Lord.
For those who don’t know Lee, he harassed me for years on behalf of Jeff Goldstein. Then he (and at least one other wild-eyed Trumpalo who recently stalked me at Quillette) had a falling out with Goldstein because Goldstein is actually a committed classical liberal and they are “anything wut ownz da libs is grate hur hur” Trump humpers.
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:19 amNo both Reagan and Bush affirmed amnesty as a,goal in the 1980 and 1984 platform, find another argument.
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:21 amYou can reject him and everything he stands for, but he’s still your President.
NJRob (d9cfb8) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:22 amTo repeat my question Leviticus:
Ted lacked the x factor that’s for sure
he’s so smirky too and he didn’t have the messages that resonated
not like how Donald Trump did
i remember noticing this at the time
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:23 amYou are deserving of contempt. I have known you for years and your position is always the stupidly hyper-aggressive one. And it’s not that you “don’t hate” Trump so let’s please be honest. You love him and all the immoral shit he does. Love him.
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:24 amIn retrospect, Jen was like Howard baker, yes one of those trivial pursuit questions.
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:25 am“Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman Tom Perez said the 28-year-old socialist [Ocasio-Ortiz, aka Loopy Velez] “represents the future of our party” on Tuesday.
What Perez didn’t mention is that the group behind “the future” of the Democratic Party is teeming with radicals openly dedicated to dismantling and overturning the economic and social foundations of the United States.
“As a DSA chapter co-chair I just wanna set the record straight for a minute: communism is good,” Portland DSA co-chair Olivia Katbi Smith wrote on June 30. Other DSA chairs quickly followed her lead.
The DSA’s Charlottesville chair quoted Smith’s tweet and wrote, “as a DSA chapter co-chair, I would like to cosign this pro-communist statement.” DSA chairs in Seattle and Hudson County, New Jersey added their support as well.”
http://dailycaller.com/2018/07/05/marxist-radicals-democratic-party/
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:27 amJohn reed didn’t think the liberal party of new york went far enough, hence he sought inspiration in Leninism, he eventually died on the road to baku.
Narciso (28ee45) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:32 amJust some economic anxiety https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/1014940752462393344
Davethulhu (fab944) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:40 amI don’t see how the “ones that know Trump is an immoral man, a liar, a trickster who could easily cut a deal with the left” could possibly get offended by a series of comments that explicitly distinguish them from Trump superfans, who have no understanding of policy except “fight the left! If it owns the libs it’s good!” and who apply a double standard to Trump than they apply to me, excusing his every utterance that shows stupidity while jumping on me for my words, day in and day out.
I’m fine with the former group and disgusted and appalled by the latter. If virtually everyone on this blog is in the former group, awesome. Why do they get their noses so badly out of joint?
Sounds to me like you’re either deliberately ignoring the distinction I’m making, or you see yourself as falling more in the latter category than the former. If you really, truly see yourself in the former category, try paying better attention to what I say in the future — because you’re not the one being insulted.
If you agree with me that Trump is a low-life, immoral sack of human garbage who lucked into an office that he’s not remotely intellectually qualified for, says insanely stupid nonsense all the time that demeans the office and is potentially destabilizing on the world stage, is economically illiterate and pursuing ruinous tariffs that show a complete and utter ignorance of the importance of the free market, and is easily one of the least moral people in public life today, if not the very least, then hey, you and I are in agreement. And if, despite all this, you’re still pleased Hillary’s not president, I can understand that. And if you feel like his presidency has worked out better than you expected it to, that’s fine too.
But…but this isn’t really how you feel, is it? You…you kinda love him a lot at this point, don’t you? And you are willing to hold me and my utterances to a more demanding standard than you hold Trump and his utterances, aren’t you? And you are impatient with discussions of his incredible level of lying and immorality, aren’t you? You kinda want to pretend that he hardly lies more than any other politician, don’t you?
Maybe I misread you, but while I don’t see you as a superfan, I see aspects of the superfan in you. And that’s where my comments sting, I suspect.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:54 amMaybe the Lane Bryant killer was able to see the future.
urbanleftbehind (944c49) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:55 amLong running blogs with active comment sections are like long-running soap operas. Just when you think you have generally figured out the plot, the loose end from that season 10 years ago shows up, and throws everything in an uproar.
(Inspired by comments at #757 and beyond, my own history at another blog, and a need to be silly on a Friday afternoon)
Appalled (c9622b) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:57 amLet’s try a test. For this test, “but Barack Obama was worse!” or “but he’s still better than Hillary!” is not an option. Just offer a true or a false answer to these questions.
ARE YOU A TRUMPALO? A SIX-QUESTION TEST
1. Trump routinely lies and seems to have no regard for the truth. TRUE FALSE
2. Trump is an adulterer. TRUE FALSE
3. Trump is a con man whose actions in lending his name to Trump University, and in making videos about how great this con job was, should be a source of deep shame for him, but obviously are not. TRUE FALSE
4. Trump hardly reads anything and seems to place far too much stock in what he sees on the teevee. TRUE FALSE
5. Trump is nasty and vindictive. TRUE FALSE
6. Trump routinely says stupid things on Twitter. TRUE FALSE
What are your answers, NJRob? Mine are six trues. Why do I suspect you’d have a hard time answering true to each of these statements without picking at them, finding ways to complain about the wording of the statements or wriggle out of the conclusion, and/or point the finger at the left as being just as bad or worse?
If you have trouble answering each of these questions TRUE without fifty caveats or carping, you might be a Trumpalo. I’m not saying you are. But you might be.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:04 amRinos have no idea how to put on the big boy pants.
mg (9e54f8) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:06 amFeet stomping will eventually ruin your arches.
And this is exactly why I said your remarks are directed at more than just the super fan Trump supporters. You just listed an entirely screed against Trump and said as long as we agree on all those issues we are fine. But if you don’t, then you must love the man.
Churchill had many of the same character flaws that Trump has, but he was the right man for the time. Trump isn’t the leader that Churchill was, but he does have some of the same characteristics, i.e. he fights.
I don’t read your Twitter or his Twitter so that doesn’t bother me. I don’t watch his campaign rallies so they don’t bother me. I pay attention to his negotiations with other nations, such as Germany saying they will lower auto tariffs and a potential trade war with China. I watch carefully the Supreme Court nominations and if he nominates someone like Harriet Miers I will demand they lose the nomination.
Policy matters more than person at this point. And when people posted Sanford bagging on Trump, personal actions didn’t matter then, did it.
NJRob (d9cfb8) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:08 amCaptain Obvious would agree that Cruz didn’t win the general. What we do know for a fact is that Cruz polled better against Hillary than Trump did against Hillary, by at least five points. Just look at the head-to-head poll match-ups in April 2016, Cruz’s final month as a candidate.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:11 amWe love him because he has lived up to his campaign promises in a way virtually no elected official ever does and, in so doing, has put America back on a firmly conservative track.
There is one more thing he has done that we all should be grateful for: he has goaded a broad spectrum of politicians, bureaucrats, media stars and others into revealing their true colors. I had no idea what a hateful, dishonest and conniving bunch they are. Now we know, thanks to Trump. For this reason, and this reason alone, he has helped to Make America Great Again.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:14 amPatterico,
half your TRUE statements are opinions because you don’t have the evidence to prove them.
1, 2, and 6 are factually true. The rest are conjecture and not provable as you not I personally know the man.
3 is in question because you have no idea if he feels shame or not.
4 is in question because you have no idea whether he reads or not.
5 is opinion and varies based on whose ox is being gored.
NJRob (d9cfb8) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:14 amI stick my head in the sand, so not much bothers me.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:15 amSure, ThOR. The Swamp is drained and the Wall is built and everybody has healthcare for cheaper and we’re Winning!!!!1!
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:17 amlol @ “5 is opinion.”
“That’s just, like, your opinion, man.”
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:19 am“4. Trump hardly reads anything and seems to place far too much stock in what he sees on the teevee. TRUE FALSE”
What classist bilge! High school educated Harry Truman got the same sort of denigration from the bigoted cultural elite of his era. “He’s not one of us!” True enough.
Why does this litany read more like virtue signaling than an indictment of a successful politician? Because it is.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:25 amChurchill had many of the same character flaws that Trump has
OK — name the similarity in flaws. The main flaw Churchill is known for (drinking) is precisely the one Trump does not have.
Appalled (c9622b) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:28 amThat is not what I said.
You’re an odd case.
You seem to agree that “Trump is an immoral man, a liar, a trickster who could easily cut a deal with the left”:
But if I said those same words in a post, odds are you’d whine about it.
They are directed at the part of your personality that causes you to whine when I write a post about how Trump lied. The lie by the President of the United States bothers you less than my pointing it out. I cannot respect that.
Clearly, you show some understanding that Trump is not perfect. But you act like a Trump superfan a lot of the time.
Honestly, that one comment I just linked, to me, says a lot about you. I have deep contempt for an attitude that says “a blogger’s post pointing out a Presidential lie upsets me more than the lie.” And that seems to be your attitude. It doesn’t mean I have contempt for you as a person. But yes, I have contempt for that attitude.
And if that upsets you, then what would Trump say? Lighten up little man, I’m just punching back! I fight! If Trump would say that, why can’t I? Because you have a double standard?
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:30 amThis test is identifying the Trumpalos pretty clearly.
OH MY GOD I AM SUCH A CLASSIST because I think Reading Is Fundamental…
LOL
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:31 am— ThOR
There are hardly any Trump superfans on this blog! I know this because NJRob told me so!
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:32 amI like Patterico. He fights!
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:36 amSee what I did there?
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:37 amHe’s an enthralling and electric personality, President Trump is
and his policies are all really terrific A+++ scratch-n-sniff sticker policies
people are so happy and they’re increasingly effusive in their praise
that’s how it looks from here anyways
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:37 am“But if I said those same words in a post, odds are you’d whine about it.”
“if”? That’s funny, hat tip to Patterico!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:38 amYes, he does, Simon. He does fight.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:39 amActually, friend ThOR has a point: Trump’s “nightmare appearance” to the far Left does indeed get them to crazily enter a death spiral (with Trump) into who can say the most outrageous and unfair things.
That is good information to have.
It’s like “Ghostbusters”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNAQ9lbe3kw
The result is the StaPuft Marshmallow President.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:40 amOff to Carmel, enjoy your Friday, all of youse!
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:40 amThere actually is one thing Trump has done I am grateful for.
I have always recognized that the readers here were a coalition of reasonable people and “hur hur let’s own the libs” reactionary types. Usually the latter group identified themselves during the endless debates about the Great Need to Use the Left’s Tactics Against Them (otherwise known as the debates over The Great Need to Act Immorally and Use the Left’s Behavior as an Excuse). But formerly, our shared distaste for leftist policy helped paper over those differences.
Trump has come along and made the divide clear. Now I know who my real friends are, and who my real friends aren’t. And the (fairly large, actually) group of people who aren’t my real friends are the people who have essentially cast aside my years of writing to gravitate towards worship/praise/whatever of an immoral con man. My real friends are the ones who hold the same principles, will support Trump when he does good and criticize him when he does bad, and will always have open eyes about his wretchedly immoral and dishonest personality.
Knowing who my real friends are, and that they are a relatively small group, makes me love them more. And that is a gift. And for that, I owe a debt of thanks to Donald Trump. Thanks, Mr. President!
See? I can praise him when he deserves it!
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:42 amthat’s a fictional movie about marshmallows but President Trump does stuff in real life all the time (he sent a cd to North Korea for example)
real people are seeing the results!
they feel good and confident and safe – way more than they did before
this goes a long way towards undermining the nevertrump argument which asserts that President Trump is somehow a bad person who’s deserving of criticism
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:44 amIt was revealing to me to see Colonel Haiku agree with another commenter that he actively likes Trump’s insane nonsense on Twitter. I think Haiku has posed at times as someone who says we should just ignore what Trump says because We Mature People should focus on his actions. But I always suspected that he actually liked Trump’s stupid Twitter insanity. And when ThOR, I think it was, praised it, Haiku cheered and seconded the motion, confirming my suspicions.
That, too, is the behavior of a Trump superfan. Haiku may have been a reluctant Trump supporter once. But now, Haiku is fully aboard the Trump Train, and functions mostly as a troll who tries to make people’s lives miserable each and every time they criticize Trump.
But there are hardly any Trump superfans on this blog! I know this because NJRob told me so!
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:47 amHere’s how nasty it got the last time the Left got real nasty…
“Despite the [civil rights] movement’s historic achievements—and the success of liberals in securing scores of other major reforms—young radicals grew impatient with the pace of change, especially in Vietnam. Peaceful protests continued, but growing numbers of militants now styled themselves revolutionaries and adopted tactics to match. Groups like the Weather Underground preached and carried out violence, including lethal violence, which was deemed “as American as cherry pie” by H. Rap Brown, rendering ironic the name of the group he’d come to lead, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. (Brown, who now goes by Jamil Al-Amin, is currently serving a life sentence for murder.)
Most activists stopped short of planting bombs and shooting police officers. But many still blew past the boundaries of what nearly everyone considered legitimate protest. Demonstrators not only directed chants of “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” at President Lyndon Johnson; they also accosted officials of his administration when they set out in public. In 1967, when Secretary of State Dean Rusk tried to attend a banquet of the Foreign Policy Association in New York, a radical group called Up Against the Wall Motherfvckers (often called “the Motherfvckers” for short) threw eggs, rocks and bags of cows’ blood, though Rusk slipped into the hotel unscathed. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara was spat upon in an airport and called a baby killer; on a visit to Harvard, a hostile mob encircled his car and rocked it back and forth until police spirited him to safety via a tunnel. Antiwar radicals even tried to set fire to McNamara’s Colorado vacation home—twice. A few years later, after he’d left government, someone tried to throw him off the Martha’s Vineyard ferry.
The confrontations continued after Johnson yielded the presidency to Richard Nixon.”
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/07/05/democrats-civility-1960s-violence-218948
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:47 amSorry you feel that way, Patterico. Best wishes in your continuing struggle.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:49 amYou all do realize that you can never, ever credibly criticize a Democrat again for any number of bad traits that you have defended in Trump, right?
Torching your credibility is not without consequence. And for what?
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:49 amI think it would be better if Twitter was burned to the ground. And not just because of Trump. It’s for Class “A” narcissists and does nothing to enlighten anyone. That’s how I feel, what I believe.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:51 amYour party is doubling down on hardcore socialism. Is that really the path you want to go down?
The GOP under Trump is doubling down on hardcore nationalist authoritarian statism. Is that really the path you want to go down?
kishnevi (bb03e6) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:52 amHaiku, just now:
And yet:
547, from ThOR:
There’s more, but that’s the relevant part and I’m not taking it out of context. The links are in this comment if you doubt me.
548, from Haiku:
Two Trump superfans, praising his idiotic comments on Twitter.
But there are hardly any Trump superfans on this blog! I know this because NJRob told me so!
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 10:58 amYou’re expecting a demonstration of principle from someone who openly mocks the notion of principles, Patterico.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:01 amNot discourage your highlighting of such obvious beclowning, of course.
Leviticus (8c2ac9) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:04 amLook: if it bothers you to see a blogger point out the President’s lies more than the President’s lie itself bothers you; if you can’t admit that Trump isn’t a reader; if you can’t admit that Trump is nasty and vindictive; if you can’t admit that he’s a shameless con man; if you love love love his moronic tweets; then yeah, you might be a Trump superfan. So embrace it. Let your freak flag fly! Stop pretending to be a reasonable person who just has the country’s best interests at heart. Just admit that owning the libs is your top goal in life and you’re fine with ObamaCare never being reversed and our children facing crushing debt as long as those libs are owned good and hard. Nobody will take a knee on a football field dammit, and isn’t that really what matters?
All I’m asking for is honesty.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:05 amThis is an easy one. Note the present tense. FALSE. Though it is well known that Trump has been an adulterer in the past, I know of zero evidence that he has been unfaithful since assuming office.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:06 amTwitter brings the worst out in just about everybody. Everybody. Not just Trump.
Good to see you are able to tolerate the opinions of others. It speaks well of you.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:06 amAnd if you are in bed with the far left, recognize it for what it is. Whether intentional or not.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:08 amIt depends on what the meaning of “is” is, eh, Anon Y. Mous?
nk (dbc370) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:09 amI have a lot of non-murderers in prison for life, Anon Y. Mous. Sure, I convicted them of murder in the past. But I know of zero evidence that they are killing anyone right now, at this very moment, on this fine Friday morning, as we sit here discussing Donald Trump.
Insert your own slow clap gif here for Anon Y. Mous’s excellent and incisive logical reasoning abilities.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:11 amNot at all. Clinton was dishonestly parsing the meaning of “is”, allowing him to say no because he wasn’t, at that moment, screwing Lewinski on the table.
Trump is not currently engaging in adultery, and as I made clear in my comment, I wasn’t just talking about this exact moment, since I specifically referenced Trump’s entire time in office.
An honest reader of my comment would understand the difference.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:12 amNot Trump at all, according to you. You agreed with, and praised as “well said,” the opinion of someone who said that “at the top of the list” of Trump’s accomplishments is his use of Twitter.
You can always retract it, but if you don’t then stop pretending you don’t think it, or that you sadly decry Twitter as used by everyone including Trump.
I am just asking for honesty.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:14 amLeviticus,,
I see you responding so I know you see the post. Will you answer the question?
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:15 amSo much has been revealed about the Left and the Right because of this dumpster fire.
I used to think the Right had principles, and the Left was all about expanding power.
Seems to me that there is a blurring in the middle now.
After reading Patterico’s thoughts since the election, I am writing down a list of things I believe in, and things that, if they happen, I will object to. True, it’s difficult for me to read trollish types constantly calling Romney a pedophile, and Trump some Golden Paragon (I mean, seriously, look at the personal lives…and I actually would love to see the boxing match that would result if that troll said that in person to Romney). But I understand that is 5th dimension trolling that has no basis in principle or ethos…just trying to be obnoxious and stir people up.
Then there are others who were very, very particular about statements made by Presidential candidates in the past, and…not so much now. Because the other side would be worse. Because…because…because…
I like what Patterico said: recognize good things Trump does, and criticize bad things Trump does. That seems to me to be the path forward.
Unless our future is more like this:
https://youtu.be/YbBiXPVKuTA
As for the “He fights” business about Trump, well, I agree, but not in the way people think.
Trump fights against his own best interests, through what appears to be a lack of self-control.
So: time to think about the future. What kinds of politicians do we want to lead us? What do we look for in a leader? Or does none of it matter, other than the Team Letter they wear?
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:16 amI know of no evidence that the murderers I convicted have killed anyone the whole time they have been in prison.
I guess they aren’t murderers!
These pretzelly twists of logic make sense only when the objective is defending the morality of Donald Trump. Otherwise they are laughable and easily revealed as such.
But there are hardly any Trump superfans on this blog! I know this because NJRob told me so!
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:16 amIn most people’s lexicon, once a murderer, always a murderer. It sticks with them for life.
The same is simply not true with adultery. For most people, if they refer to someone an adulterer, it means they are currently not staying faithful to their marriage. The is no evidence that Trump has strayed since becoming POTUS.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:17 amIs Bill Clinton an adulterer, Signor Mous?
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:17 amAre you not entertained?!?
“Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’ Good night, and good luck.” -Edward R. Murrow, CBS News, ‘See It Now’ March 9, 1954
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:18 amhttp://dailycaller.com/2018/07/03/socialism-will-win-harvard-prof/
Just a reminder how far down the rabbit hole the left has gone. But Trump, I know.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:22 amI recognize that Trump superfans like you think that literally any criticism of the President is out of bounds because the left would also make the same criticism.
Whether you recognize it or not, that means you have no credibility with anyone who is not already a committed logic-be-damned member of your tribe. I suspect you don’t care.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:22 amIt does to me. Marriage is a life commitment about fidelity, love and sacrifice. Adultery, like spousal abuse (verbal or physical) is a betrayal of that commitment.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:23 amHaiku, I got really busy with work and did not have a chance to respond to you in the previous thread to thank you for admitting that you did sockpuppet that comment in 2012, which you had initially denied doing (again in 2012).
That denial, as well as your apparent mental deterioration when it comes to internet debate stuff, and sharing the IP address with a commenter who occasionally just wanted to say “Haiku is right” has me assuming you were probably sockpuppeting more recently. Your denial obviously is not credible.
Someone had mentioned that maybe, just maybe, you were innocent the first time and this was a source for our years-long little back and forth, but no, it’s really that I call liars what they are and they respond with projection.
This reminds me of your comment that you hope I come to my senses regarding Trump while citing your sympathy for a tragedy I faced in my personal life. Passive aggressive and insincere. Of course as soon as I point this out you climb onto your high-horse about how you really joke Patterico overcomes this ‘struggle’ but Patterico and I aren’t the guys lying or twisting ourselves into knots for partisanship.
Best of luck with your continuing struggle, Haiku!
Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:23 amI can walk and chew gum at the same time.
I can recognize that the person at your link is insane and that his ideas are dangerous.
But it bothers you if I ever note that, at the same time, Trump is a liar.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:24 amYou can try to make a critical case against President Trump but that’s an uphill climb
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:25 amI don’t closely follow Clinton, and even if I did, I think answering that question would require me to follow the tabloids and gossip sites. But, I do recall some woman, given the nickname “The Energizer” by Clinton’s SS detail, frequently visiting Clinton and for some reason being in the mainstream news. Don’t recall why it made the wider news. Of course, the Energizer Bunny is known for going and going and going… So, sounds like Clinton is still up to his old tricks. If I had to guess, based on the fact that he was willing to use the oval office as his bachelor pad, I’m guessing Clinton never changed his stripes. I doubt him and Hillary have had sex in years, so assuming that he still has those impulses, my guess would be that Clinton continues to be an adulterer.
But, that’s just a guess, though an educated one, I would say.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:26 amIf I follow your reasoning correctly, that means that you believe that everyone who divorces and remarries is an adulterer.
Is that correct? If not, why not?
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:29 amYou have a good point, Dustin. Having this sort of stuff aimed at me helps me see that Haiku probably was referencing your own personal tragedy as a way to tweak you. Which is nasty, nasty stuff — but justifiable in the eyes of a Trump superfan, because you are a Trump critic and thus in bed with the far left. And if you’re in bed with the far left, why not needle you about a tragedy you experienced? Those in bed with the far left deserve it!
Is there really any value in keeping such a person around? Honest question. I throw it open to the crowd.
I wouldn’t miss that sort of commentary. It’s not conversation. It’s just nasty. Incredibly nasty.
And now that what I suspected was a faux mask of adherence to politeness is increasingly being revealed as such — as Haiku tries to pretend again that he finds Twitter distasteful even when used by Trump (polite Haiku) in the very same thread where he revealed that he loves the fact that Trump goads people on Twitter (reactionary Trump superfan Haiku).
Which is the real Haiku? Who cares, if the reactionary Trump superfan is more and more what we’re seeing?
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:29 amI recently posted that we need real conversation. And we do.
A sad corollary is that many many people are incapable of it. And trying to talk to such people is a frustrating way to waste one’s time.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:31 amYes. But I’m one of those icky social conservatives that believes in the sanctity of marriage and that marriage is the union of a man and a woman before God.
NJRob (b00189) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:32 amYou’re content to guess for Clinton.
With Trump, an absence of evidence, beginning on an arbitrarily selected irrelevant date, is good enough to conclude positively that he’s not.
Trump superfan applying different standards to different people.
But there are hardly any Trump superfans on this blog.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:33 amSIX QUESTIONS ABOUT OBAMA
1. Obama routinely lied and seemed to have no regard for the truth. TRUE FALSE
2. Obama was an adulterer. TRUE FALSE
3. Obama was a con man whose actions in saying you could keep your doctor should be a source of deep shame for him, but obviously caused him no shame. TRUE FALSE
4. Obama hardly reads anything and seems to place far too much stock in what he sees on the teevee. TRUE FALSE
5. Obama is nasty and vindictive. TRUE FALSE
6. Obama routinely says stupid things on Twitter. TRUE FALSE
Let’s hear your answers, NJRob.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:37 amI did name some evidence. But, of course, I can’t claim any independent knowledge of what goes on in Clinton’s sex life. To the extent that I care (barely, I wouldn’t be talking about it if you hadn’t asked), I have to rely on what’s in the media.
I would care if Trump was engaged in sex outside his marriage while POTUS. The only reason it would be important to me is the effect it would have on the governance of our nation. I have no doubt whatsoever that if there was even a whiff of that kind of behavior by Trump, now or in the future, the media would pounce on it. Since we haven’t seen that, the best evidence is that it isn’t happening.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:41 amThe “evidence” is sourced to a tell-all gossip book. If that’s good enough for you, Michael Wolff says Trump has slept around on Melania while in the White House.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:48 amFair enough. But, when most people use the word “adulterer” today, it is not to describe someone on their second marriage, who has never cheated on either of their spouses while they were married to that spouse. Most people believe that the divorce from the first spouse severed the bounds of that marriage and that sex within the bounds of the second marriage is not adulterous.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:49 amWhich is not the case with Trump, who has cheated on more than one wife, with several women.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:57 amI haven’t paid much attention. I don’t follow the tabloids. But, that story “made the majors”.
https://nypost.com/2016/10/14/clinton-aides-alarmed-by-bills-energizer-in-leaked-emails/
Seems to be a bit more behind it then the book, but I’m not invested in it. So, maybe he is, maybe he isn’t. That should have been my first answer, since I have no personal knowledge about Clinton’s sex life and no interest in it.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:57 amWhich I did not dispute.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 11:58 amThe evidence you cite dates to 2014. You said Trump is not an adulterer because you know of no evidence (although I just gave you some that is of the same low quality as yours) that he slept with another woman since January 20, 2017. What is your evidence that Bill Clinton slept with another woman since that date?
You are the one who randomly and arbitrarily picked that date, remember.
I’ll accept “I should have answered FALSE” if you want to be consistent.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:01 pmholy jesus what’s wrong with people
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:08 pmMy life has been seriously disrupted in the past few days — none of your business — and I have had relatively less time for meditation and contemplation. (Still plenty for prayer, but not directed at how to deal with Trump superfans.)
Which is IN NO WAY to say I am at fault for the stream of dishonest, absurd BS emanating from Trump superfans in this thread.
But which is to say, instead, that I made a commitment to myself to try not to be as bothered by that stream of dishonest, absurd BS. And I am not keeping that commitment recently.
I think I’ve made my points, and they will be ignored by the people who most need to hear them. In another words, another day at patterico.com.
I’m now going to do my best to let the dishonesty and double standards fly without getting myself twisted into a knot over it. Have fun. Remember: Trump never does anything wrong and if anyone dares say otherwise they are in bed with the far left!!!!1! And the emperor’s clothes are AWESOME!!!!!!!!11!!1!!!
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:11 pmAlso, I hate anyone who ever voted for Trump! That’s a transparently dishonest claim, but The Crowd Has Spoken — and they, not I, will get to write the history of my thoughts. Have a nice day. I’ll try to have one by forgetting about Trump and Trump superfans as much as humanly possible.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:13 pmYes, 2014. The link I gave, to the NY Post. Leaked emails were discussed and they also linked to the Enquirer. The Enquirer used the book as a jumping off point to do some of their own reporting. So, like I said, a bit more.
The date Trump assumed office as POTUS is not random or arbitrary. It is relevant to any discussion of President Trump.
As far as Clinton’s behavior, you seem to be acting purposefully obtuse to what I am saying. I have said that I was speculating about Clinton based on his past behavior. If he was willing to engage in that behavior in the Oval Office itself, why would he stop afterwards? But, I still made it clear that I didn’t know for myself.
As to my answer for Clinton, no, I would not proclaim that it is FALSE that Clinton is an adulterer. My best answer would be PROBABLY, BUT MAYBE NOT. That would be if I was invited to speculate. If I was asked the question in a more formal setting, I would have to answer that I simply don’t know.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:15 pmTrump’s comments about Iranians and how bad it is for them to immigrate here has me wondering how much my distaste for him comes from that aura of contempt he’s had for that nationality. It’s been pretty consistent. I can even understand it to an extent these days, albeit not from the President.
Yes, he fights, but he doesn’t fight for me and if Trump had his way, people like me would not be Americans. The GOP is one primary away from being useful for me, politically, so it’s not the end of the world.
I would love to watch a movie about the Russians co-opting the extreme left and the extreme right, using each to goad a huge, huge pile of suckers into absolute hatred of the other side, and destabilized the USA into isolationism.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:41 pmSid Blumenthal giggles
Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/6/2018 @ 12:42 pm“He fights” is not at all the same thing as “He does what he’s promised to do.”
The things he’s promised to do, which he has in fact done — moving the American embassy to Jerusalem, to pick an example, or naming a SCOTUS nominee from the list he promised to use exclusively in order to lock in Ted Cruz’ endorsement, to pick another (and more important) one — are things which he has been able to do solely by being the POTUS. He didn’t have to “fight” anyone; no one could stop any POTUS from doing these things if he so chose.
In terms of fighting to get something done that the POTUS cannot do by himself, however — such as building a wall, or repealing Obamacare, to pick the two most conspicuous and consequential campaign promises he made — he doesn’t fight, he tweets.
His tweets are not without effect: They rouse his supporters (including, as Anon Y. Mous painfully admitted after a multi-day debate, the hard-core racists and bigots among them), and they outrage his political enemies. But that’s not the same thing as keeping the promises, is it?
He didn’t promise, “You wait and see, I’ll tweet so hard and so much that you’ll be very pleased with how riled up my supporters are and how angry and crazy my political enemies are!” No, he said he was going to build a big, beautiful wall, that he was going to repeal and replace Obamacare, and that we would all love the results of his keeping those promises.
He promised we’d get tired of winning. Well, what’s he won, when he actually had to enlist Congress to pass some legislation, or a foreign leader to abandon its nuclear weapons program, to deliver on his promises?
Sorry, friends and neighbors, but the “He fights” argument is silly unless he can demonstrate that he can actually win a fight — as opposed to, say, signing an executive order, which was, after all, the preferred mode of governance of his immediate predecessor, who also couldn’t ever deliver on any of his promises after his party lost both the House and its filibuster-proof majority in the Senate with Ted Kennedy’s death.
Trump supporters certainly seem to relish following him. But that’s obviously not contingent upon, or apparently, even much affected by, him keeping his core promises or not, when it comes to anything which a POTUS can’t do unilaterally.
So I’m left to conclude that some significant number of those supporters — lee, for instance — don’t really value the keeping of core campaign promises or the leadership required to do so. They’re not just satisfied, but thrilled, simply by the level of the hyperpartisan tribal combat on Twitter and in the media.
Meantime, there’s no wall. The Norks are still doing their best to get into a position from which they can nuke San Francisco. Obamacare survives. The federal government is spending a binge levels, and not just for the military spending that needed to be made up after the sequester, but for everything, including entitlements that Trump has declared off-limits even for discussion. Our world allies of many decades, including our two bordering nations, are confused and dismayed and going their own ways rather than submitting to Trump’s supposed leadership.
An obvious deliberate falsehood on the single most existential issue confronting America — the threat of an attack with nuclear weapons that will make 9/11 look like a birthday party — can be written by the President of the United States, and swallowed whole, without a qualm or a burp, by roughly half of the United States.
I cannot respect someone who acknowledges the literal truth of these assertions, yet has no better response than to fist-pump the empty air and assert “But he fights!”
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 1:32 pmBeldar – Brilliant.
GOP operative Rick Wilson adopted the acronym ETTD years ago. I don’t much care for his overall cynical K Street values, but the man nailed DJT: Everything Trump Touches Dies.
He also screamed from Day One that there will never be a wall built. The man is wired into the GOPe and Deep State and knows of what he writes.
It’s gutting that I now have to root for DJT to back down (as Obama did early and often) on the Chinese tariffs for the betterment of the country. This will be his “No new taxes” moment.
Winning? It was fun while it lasted. Truly.
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/6/2018 @ 1:45 pm@ Dustin (#847): Your concluding paragraph made me flash back to a two-word historical phrase that arguably explains the last four-fifths of the 20th Century:
Sealed train.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 1:46 pmI hope that Monday night, shortly after 9pm Eastern time — or, more likely, earlier in the day, when it’s leaked — I’ll be giving Trump full and enthusiastic credit, again, for choosing a SCOTUS nominee that Leonard Leo spoon-fed to him. I’ll simultaneously give Ted Cruz credit, again, for extracting Trump’s unconditional public written promise to choose exclusively from that list in September 2016.
It won’t change any of my views about Trump, though, nor make me even marginally more likely to ever cast a vote for Donald J. Trump in the future.
With this nomination, what’s important will not be that Trump fights, but that McConnell and the rest of the GOP nuked the rest of the appointments filibuster for Gorsuch in April 2017. The best thing Trump can do is to pick someone whom he’s sure that McConnell can get all of the GOP senators to vote for (which probably isn’t Amy Barrett, which would be a fight I’m not sure McConnell can win for Trump, although I’ll root for her confirmation if that’s who Trump picks).
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:05 pmThe Dems would be just foolish enough to fight the one nominee (Barrett) who might could “evolve” à la Souter.
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:16 pmI’m flattered by the “Trumpalo” label, but regretfully inform you that as the term is generally defined, I’m not one. I voted for other candidates in both the primary and the general election.
I’ve been born again as a Trump supporter.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:20 pmBorn again anything are often the most enthusiastic. It’s a real shame to see such energy expended in service of immorality and barriers to real conversation.
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:24 pmJust for the record, I very much appreciate being given the opportunity to comment on this site. Although I may be in the minority in some regards, it is a bunch I feel very much a part of.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:26 pmI repeat a comment I’ve left here and elsewhere many times:
Twitter delenda est.
However, I was surprised to read Haiku’s comment at #811, in which he wrote: “Twitter brings the worst out in just about everybody. Everybody. Not just Trump.”
As our host pointed out in #831:
And reactionary Trump superfan Haiku has become, in the comments of this blog, a heckler. At best it’s sometimes a medium for stand-up comics. But mostly, Twitter is a heckler’s medium — a medium for digital shouting and digital taunting, for most of its users and readers most of the time. It’s the inevitable consequence of the defining feature of Twitter, its truncation of all rational communication after 280 characters. (Doubling the space limitation allows more trenchant heckling, but did nothing to change the fundamental character of the medium.)
So perhaps Haiku should consider self-deporting to Twitter, where hecklers — including Donald J. Trump — seem to be very thoroughly engaged. Our host asked in #831:
My only response to that is that I’m content for our host to exercise his own best judgment.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:30 pmYes, Beldar, yes! President Trump talks the talk, and his supporters grant him a lot of credit for the easy accomplishments, but when it comes to the ‘great deals’ and the fights we were promised, it’s clear as day that the real fighters, the guys like Governor Walker or Senator Cruz, would have benefited from their experiences in getting their way in adversarial issues.
Dukakis can sign an EO or appoint a judge. We needed someone who builds coalitions for campaigns for reforms. So far, Obama showed more spine just in getting Obamacare passed.
Dustin (ba94b2) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:33 pm“Born again anything are often the most enthusiastic.”
Truer words have never been spoken (“enthusiastic” is a polite way of putting it).
As for Trump’s sinning, I fall into the judge not lest I be judged category.
Do my views and comments really create a “barrier to real conversation”? It seems to me that I provide most of you a useful foil.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:35 pm“Is there really any value in keeping such a person around? Honest question. I throw it open to the crowd.”
– Patterico
I’ll just straight up say “no.” You need iron to sharpen iron.
Leviticus (f8d071) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:37 pmNo disrespect, ThOR, but when you write:
I am just floored. I have read your comments for a number of years. Not standing in judgement of others is…um…not precisely one of your defining characteristics.
It’s just a handy thing to say when someone points out something that you and many others did not care for when it came from other politicians.
To each their own.
But wow.
Simon Jester (c8876d) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:45 pm@ Ed from SFV, your #853 gave me a good snort and a laugh. That would be ironic indeed, in a blackly comedic way.
I give Leonard Leo and Ed Whelan credit for doing a better, wiser, deeper job of vetting Barrett, despite her absence of a meaningful judicial record, however, than John Sununu did of vetting Souter, who had a comparable judicial record to Barrett’s on the First Circuit, but also several years’ prior service on the New Hampshire Supreme Court. As best as I can tell, Sununu realized he could score points in and on behalf of his home state by proposing Souter as a favorite son, he dressed that up with the bogus “stealth” argument, and his vetting of Souter in particular consisted of asking a few mutual friends, which might or might not have included any lawyers outside of New Hampshire, about whether Souter was “good people” and “one of us,” categories intentionally defined very vaguely.
I don’t think she’s a true stealth candidate — her legal writing as a law prof is probably more informative than a lot of the state-law bread-and-butter stuff Souter presumably dealt with on the SCONH. But I 100% agree that to be the kind of safe bet required for a SCOTUS slot, one needs a longer judicial track record on a federal court, probably a federal appellate court, than she yet has. And that’s the reason she’s last in my order of preference as amongst her, Kavanaugh & Kethledge.
I also think either Judge K would be more confirmable (meaning, here, likely to drawn yea votes from Sens. Collins & Murkowski, which in turn will probably move a few Dems into the “confirm” column).
But I meant what I wrote when Kennedy announced his resignation: I’ll give Trump due and enthusiastic credit if he picks anyone on the list.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:46 pmIn the ad biz, ‘short-burst-copy’ works; less is more.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:46 pmLiar.
Cheat.
Con man.
Murderer.
Thief.
Rapist.
Adulterer.
In my view, someone who has often engaged in the acts that trigger such descriptions, deserves the description.
If you have often murdered, you are a murderer.
If you have often lied, you are a liar.
If you have often committed adultery, you are an adulterer.
Yet Mr. Mous picks one of these words out for special treatment: a 72-year-old man who has committed adultery many times in his life cannot be an adulterer if he is also President of the United States, and we cannot prove he has committed adultery while holding that office.
Where do such obviously laughable and absurd defenses come from? I submit they come from Trump superfandom, and the abandonment of principles and reason that goes with it, hand in hand.
Patterico (ea0387) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:47 pmI saw somewhere online today some advocacy group arguing that Trump should pick Barrett even if she can’t get confirmed — their argument being that it would be better to pick her, have a big fight about it, and leave the vacancy to be filled after the November 2018 elections, rather than pick anyone else.
That is batsh!t crazy.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:51 pm“Lifelong serial adulterer” does the trick for me. If someone wants to qualify that by adding, “Yes, but he hasn’t gotten caught at it since he was elected (assuming we don’t count the adultery cover-up payoffs as being continuations of the original adultery),” then I won’t object.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 2:54 pmI wrote above:
It occurs to me that my standard of review is analogous to the one used by DoJ Inspector General Horowitz: The point of having the list was that if Trump follows it, no one has to argue further about whether he’s picked “the very best one.” Likewise, the point of the FBI having regulations and procedures is that if FBI personnel follow them, while having at least a plausible noncorrupt basis for individual judgment calls made without violating them, then the IG won’t get you fired. I’m willing to confine my review of Trump’s decision, then, to him choosing from the list.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:00 pm“…covetous, egocentric, manipulative and amoral… with psychopathic tendencies who is constantly plotting subterfuges to plunder…” – ‘J.R. Ewing,’ wikibio
The good, the bad and the ugly; we’re fascinated and fixated. So we watch.
What.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:00 pmA.
Show.
I remember when liberals were calling McCain an adulterer back in 2008 (mainly in comparison to the Obama’s marriage with Michelle), right around when the NYT put out that smear piece on him. He most certainly was an adulterer in his first marriage, by his own admission, but there is no evidence that he carried this behavior into his second marriage, which began in 1980. I suppose that it’s technically true that he’s an adulterer, 30-some years after the fact, but context matters. It’s pretty likely that Trump banged Ms. Daniels in 2005 and paid her hush money in 2016 through the Cohen conduit, so his adultery is newer and fresher. I’m not going to put any stock in Wolff’s book, especially after he smeared Nikki Haley the way he did. Anyways, just thinking out loud.
Paul Montagu (91b6ad) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:02 pmSimon,
It was a half serious comment intended to highlight my own ethical shortcomings(lest I be judged).
It was not an admonition (lest ye be judged).
My career includes a stint consulting on public-private partnerships. My experience has been that pols and high level bureaucrats are, in general, every bit as ethically compromised as President Trump. This experience forms the basis of my view of Trump’s morality – he is no different from the rest and, in some ways, better (for example, I see no evidence that Trump is on the take, which seems omnipresent in the public sector).
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:10 pmBeldar – We are in large agreement. Barrett is no Miers and she would be as reliably anti-Roe as anyone DJT could possibly nominate.
We’re dealing with degrees of certainty and her lack of a record at the appellate level, and my sexist self tells me she would be more apt than a male to go soft or as Maggie might say, “wobbly” than Hardiman, Kethledge, Kavanaugh, Lee, or Thapar.
Yet, a Barrett nomination would still be a great credit to DJT. She is pretty wonderful. What a great American, she is. Truly.
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:13 pmI’ll add one more comment re Judge Barrett:
Assuming she does have a few years’ solid record on the Seventh Circuit under her belt (robes?) by then, Judge Barrett would make a marvelous SCOTUS nominee when RBG leaves the Court. If there were ever a time, politically for purposes of a confirmation battle, when her XX genotype matters significantly, it would be then. And getting someone else confirmed now to replace Kennedy would certainly improve the odds that the Senate might still be GOP when RBG leaves the Court.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:19 pmHe’s a rascal, that Trump is; a ‘bad boy’ people either love or love to hate.
DCSCA (797bc0) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:24 pmForgot to add…Happy Birthday Darrell Royal!
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:27 pmA pertinent DKR quote for this weekend, given Trump’s impending selection of a new SCOTUS nominee: “You dance with the one who brung ya.” Just stick to the list, Donald.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:31 pmOMG. Beldar, I hope you have never seen this video. OMG.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcGbob7fSgE
Ed from SFV (6d42fa) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:39 pmEd, I hadn’t seen that particular video — but I have a very close version of it that I dream I’m in, at least monthly, every year since I left Austin in 1980.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:43 pm(Depending on the kind of week I’ve been having, it may be a happy dream, or it may be the version where I’m late for stepoff/forgot my mouthpiece/am wearing green socks.)
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:48 pmI have seen several Go-Pro videos mounted on snare drums like this one, by the way. I’ve not yet seen one mounted on the end of a trombone slide — which I’m afraid would induce severe motion sickness.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:49 pmI also still tap out those cadences on my dashboard when stuck in traffic.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:51 pmSo? Who used the horn sign first? The Longhorns band or Ronnie James Dio?
nk (dbc370) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:58 pm“He’s no different from anyone else” is a typical defense from the Trump superfan. I don’t even begin to believe it. What’s clear is that, as Simon noted, Trump is judged by ThOR according to the standard “judge not lest ye be judged” –not quite the standard by which ThOR judges Democrat politicians.
ThOR, did you vote for Obama over Romney?
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 3:59 pmTrump court decision energizes White House:
White House officials denied that the first and second runners-up will be forced to accept smaller bouquets and sashes just before the
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:04 pmbeauty-pageant championSCOTUS nominee is announced.The come from Jacksonians who think we are close to a civil war, and worrying about words is unimportant.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:08 pm@ nk, who asked (#881):
Neither! It was, in fact, first used in connection with Texas athletics in 1955 by a then-cheerleader, and a future lawyer and judge before whom I appeared years later when he was on the Travis County District Court bench: the late Hon. Harley Clark. Swell fellow, even if he was on the wrong side in supporting the UT administration’s position in Hopwood (he was, of course, a Democrat).
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:15 pm442
But we were talking about racial/ethnic bigots. I agree everyone is bigoted (intolerant) about some things but I don’t think everyone is a racist.
Racist (and bigot) aren’t very useful terms as people tend to define them as anyone who is more prejudiced than they are.
A substantial portion (probably well over half) of the Republican party is racist as defined by the left. Trump won the nomination by appealing to these people. Any plausible winning conservative coalition needs to get most of their votes. Constantly calling them racists doesn’t seem like the best way to accomplish this.
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:40 pmWords can be defined to mean specific things. It is possible to define racist.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:43 pm809
Stop pretending to be a reasonable person who just has the country’s best interests at heart. Just admit that owning the libs is your top goal in life and you’re fine with ObamaCare never being reversed …
I want the country to adopt and maintain sensible immigration policies. If the price for that is ObamaCare is never reversed that is a price I am willing to pay.
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:45 pm887
Words can be defined to mean specific things. It is possible to define racist.
Maybe but in present day America there is no consensus on what it means and it has just become an almost content free insult.
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:49 pmIt appears Trump doesn’t care that much about ObamaCare either. Sometimes Obama seemed to want issues to linger on so he could use them to motivate his base. I think Trump and many politicians on both sides do that, too.
But Trump said he was different. So the question is: Even if he wants to resolve problems, will Trump risk losing the partisan ratings and polling that hot-button problems produce?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:53 pmAmerica is not a dictatorship. It is a nation founded on government by consent. If we decide that we can never agree on important mat ters, that we can’t even agree on what words mean, then the biggest bully wins. I am convinced Trump supporters think that is where we are as a nation, and they want their bully to Win!
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 4:56 pmIts not i thought he could do things by fiat, there are some he can but you need a blueprint provided by congress one nwuther Ryan nor Mcdonnell are willing to do.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/6/2018 @ 5:00 pmDRJ,
What do you think Obama supoorters wanted?What did get in their faces mean? What did Maxine want?
NJRob (d9cfb8) — 7/6/2018 @ 5:04 pmI expect the plumber to fix my clogged drain; I expect the mechanic to fix the leaking gas tank; I expect my attorney to provide effective counsel. And I expect the politician I vote for to follow through on his promises. I’ve had pretty good luck with the plumbers, mechanics and attorneys of this world. But the politicians? Not even close.
And do I care if the plumber, mechanic, attorney or pol read a few sonnets before heading out to work that morning? Are you kidding?
When Ted Cruz addressed the Senate and described how the congressional leadership connives with senators and congressmen to give the appearances of fealty to their constituents and campaign promises, while all the while working against those interests, I was more than repulsed. And it also confirmed my personal experience around elected and appointed officials. I have to say, I am taken aback that you want to deny the obvious about the moral deficiencies of our elected class, though I do understand how it is a necessary element of your Trump analysis. (This week’s example: Republican Party presidential nominee John McCain encouraging the Obama IRS to go after Tea Party groups).
It floors me that Trump-haters are willing to turn a blind eye to this type of corruption, which is at the core of a politicians duty to his constituents, while obsessing over Trump’s marital infidelities. It gets back to Deng’s not caring if the cat is black or white. Clearly there are those who care more about the color of the cat than any mice it might catch.
ThOR (d25d69) — 7/6/2018 @ 5:10 pmDustin, at 847: *watching* such a movie would be vastly preferable to *living* it.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 7/6/2018 @ 5:18 pmlol
Check back in when the Wall is built, the Swamp is drained, Obamacare is repealed, and the US is running a trade surplus, ThOR.
Leviticus (9a211b) — 7/6/2018 @ 5:20 pmI guessed you missed the fact that this didn’t happen. It’s fantasy cooked up by fever swampers for gullible Trumpers.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:15 pmI’m sorry, ThOR. That was mean. Larry O’Connor did a story about it (later issuing a correction of sorts and linking to me), so it’s not necessarily only fever swampers who reported it or gullible Trumpers who believed it.
But it’s not true.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:21 pmI do not at all turn a blind eye to it, and I don’t see where you get the idea that I do.
I believe there is plenty of corruption out there. What I can’t believe is that a sizable number of politicians are as immoral as Donald Trump — one of the most immoral people not actually in jail I have ever heard of in public life.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:23 pmI said that? Link? No doubt there are racists among Trump’s supporters, as there are among the supporters of any politician of any note, but I don’t recall the multi-day debate you are referring to.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:34 pmWhen I saw the line about a murderer, I wondered why you limited it to people who have often murdered. I think most would say that all it takes is once and you are forever known as a murderer. But, then I saw the next line about lies, and it made sense. Everyone, every single person alive on this planet, has lied at least once in their lives. But, of course, we don’t call every single person a liar. It would make the word use all meaning. But, then that complicates the standard you wish to employ for adultery. Previously, you were using the murderer standard of once means always.
The real standards are:
If you murder once, you are a murderer. Always.
If you lie often, you are a liar. But, that can change. Someone who lied often as a teen, but has changed his ways long before he gets to his 40’s, will not still be considered a liar by most.
Someone who cheats on his wife is an adulterer. But, that can also change. Someone who cheated in the past, but has stopped doing so and is now faithful, would not be called an adulterer by most.
Did I make these standards up? Do you seriously claim that if someone in his youth was known to lie a lot, he will always and forever be known as a liar, even if he changed his behavior? Now it’s two words I say are different than murderer.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:50 pmThat would be crazy, but what could work is put up someone for those like Collins to vote no. She will have proved that she stood up to those that she felt were too out there against Roe. Then she could vote yes on the next one. But, no need to wait after the election for the second nominee. Put up the second right away.
Unless McConnell can’t get 50 GOPers for anyone decent. In that case, waiting until after the election would make sense.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 6:56 pmI think they want to Win!, too. But I think there are also people from every side — liberal, conservative, libertarian — who believe in principles and want to see them implemented politically. In other words, people who believe in ideas more than personalities.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:00 pmWhose principles predominate, the ones that want single payer, ban firearms and free speech in roughly that order?
narciso (d1f714) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:05 pm@ Anon Y. Mous, who wrote (#900):
I erred, and apologize for confusing you with BuDuh.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:06 pmYou raise some extraneous personal issues about trump, but what about Mueller long history of abuse of power, which stems some 30 years.
narciso (d1f714) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:08 pmTrump’s been a grifter and con man for about 50 years, if timespan is important.
kishnevi (f0a3aa) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:17 pmYou seem to believe that FBI corruption is proof that Trump is not corrupt.
It isn’t.
And even if he is not corrupt, he is certainly incompetent, incoherent, and ignorant. As well as being an egocentric demagogue.
You did err, Beldar. I entertained a question from you after a multi day debate over a separate topic. Nothing was “painfully admitted” whatsoever.
You were gratuitous to me for that engagement and now you piss on my grave. Why is that?
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:22 pm“gratuitous” should be “gracious”
BuDuh (fc15db) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:24 pmA 72-year-old whose long history of cheating continued until at least as recently as when he was a spring chicken of 60 years old might not be called an adulterer if he is too old to perform the act, I suppose. That’s hardly amazing “fidelity.”
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:30 pmwho else is an adulterous adulterer is lecherous pappy bush he was all up in everything but barbara
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:33 pmWould you have voted for Goldwater or Rockefeller in 64, the latter was active at least at that point.
Narciso (b9b290) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:34 pmNo that was a ludicrous allegation, Kurt andersen still allowed conason to publish it.
Narciso (b9b290) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:36 pmI don’t disagree with anything you said there. I am not going to take the position that Trump is any kind of standard bearer of marital fidelity; he’s not. I just don’t believe he is stepping out now or since he became POTUS. As long as he can stay the course until he’s out of office, I will have no complaints on that front.
Anon Y. Mous (01516b) — 7/6/2018 @ 7:37 pm891
America is not a dictatorship. It is a nation founded on government by consent. If we decide that we can never agree on important mat ters, that we can’t even agree on what words mean, then the biggest bully wins. I am convinced Trump supporters think that is where we are as a nation, and they want their bully to Win!
Liberals think affirmative action is good, conservatives think it is bad. So liberals say people who oppose affirmative action are racists, conservatives say people who support affirmative action are racists. The only point of agreement is that it is insulting to be called a racist.
Trump supporters are tired of being bullied into not expressing their views by being called racists when they do.
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:52 pmif they can make it to where you have to bring your own bags to the goddamn grocery store it’s pretty much a dictatorship
happyfeet (28a91b) — 7/6/2018 @ 8:53 pmI was not aware that you had died, BuDuh.
Beldar (fa637a) — 7/6/2018 @ 9:51 pmI don’t blame them, but their experiences in being gratuitously bullied should have taught them it’s not right.
Instead, the lesson they learned is to hire the biggest bully and double down. That is emotionally satisfying and a quick way to solve the problem, but it is not how to govern by consent like adults.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 6:57 amI think Hillary and the Democrats lost because people are tired of being bullied and it was fun to see Trump use their tactics back at them. But the same people who rejected Democrats and Hillary for acting like bullies will reject Republicans and Trump for the same reason. Bullies are in it for themselves, not us.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 7:04 am919
… But the same people who rejected Democrats and Hillary for acting like bullies will reject Republicans and Trump for the same reason. …
They didn’t reject the Democrats, they rejected Cruz and Rubio and the rest of the Republican candidates for failing to adequately defend them when they were attacked by bullies.
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/7/2018 @ 8:44 amYou big bullies! Waaaaaahhhh! You’re meanies, you call me names just because I don’t like brown people! Waaaaaah!
Gross.
Leviticus (9a211b) — 7/7/2018 @ 8:57 amFirst, I am talking about American voters, not just Republican voters.
Second, are you saying that Republican voters did not reject Hillary and the Democrats but they did reject Cruz, Rubio and other GOP candidates, except Trump? That’s interesting. How do you explain that more primary voters voted for someone other than Trump than voted for Trump? Could it be because Trump appeals more to crossover voters who aren’t conservative or Republicans?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 9:20 am919, DRJ: this is spot on, and you see it here on Patterico’s blog.
There are folks posting here who know perfectly well they are hypocritical and dishonest in their support of Trump because they are on record criticizing related behavior from liberals, or even conservatives who aren’t “pure enough” to suit them.
It doesn’t matter to such people. All that matters is making snarky points, often with vulgarity and junior high school taunts, and getting people angry.
There is no ethical center to that approach.
I continue to argue that people need to be able to explain what they value and what they do not, clearly. And then they need to own that philosophy fairly, and avoid hypocrisy.
Trolls won’t. People in honest disagreement with one another will.
Simon Jester (a4a9de) — 7/7/2018 @ 9:21 amExactly! We need this in our everyday lives where we live and work, and we need it in local, state and national politics.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 9:42 am922
First, I am talking about American voters, not just Republican voters.
The number of Democratic voters who rejected Hilary and the Democrats for being bullies is insignificant.
Second, are you saying that Republican voters did not reject Hillary and the Democrats but they did reject Cruz, Rubio and other GOP candidates, except Trump? That’s interesting. How do you explain that more primary voters voted for someone other than Trump than voted for Trump? Could it be because Trump appeals more to crossover voters who aren’t conservative or Republicans?
I am explaining why (in part) Trump voters voted for Trump in the Republican primaries. Trump was able to win a majority of the delegates with only 45% of the primary votes because his opponents were divided and many of the primaries were winner take all.
Of course in the general election most Republicans voted for the Republican candidate (thereby rejecting the Democratic candidate).
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/7/2018 @ 9:53 amFor any others who were not up to speed on ZTE as I was not, this may be of interest: http://thehill.com/opinion/finance/395653-trump-gave-the-giant-chinese-cellphone-maker-a-stay-of-execution?amp
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 7/7/2018 @ 9:56 amWrong thread, Haiku?
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 10:04 amObama voters who voted for Trump:
That doesn’t seem insignificant.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 10:07 amMaybe your point is that there are many other reasons not to vote for Democrats and Hillary, other than because they are bullies. I grant that, but people often vote for the person they like most. So I could say “Democratic voters rejected Hilary and the Democrats because they didn’t like her behavior,” and that wouldn’t be much different. They can decide they don’t like Trump’s behavior, too.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 10:12 amI agree, James. Most Republicans did not pick Trump until the only other choice was Hillary.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 10:15 amA rare moment of agreement between me and James B. Shearer. The only thing I would change is the limitation to “Trump supporters.” Everyone who speaks honestly about race, affirmative action, and related topics is tired of it — whether they support Trump or not.
Patterico (115b1f) — 7/7/2018 @ 10:26 am929
Maybe your point is that there are many other reasons not to vote for Democrats and Hillary, other than because they are bullies. …
Also Obama voters and Democratic Obama voters are not the same thing. I expect many of the Obama voters who switched to Trump were not Democrats.
James B. Shearer (c2a015) — 7/7/2018 @ 10:30 amversus
Leviticus,
Your party is doubling down on hardcore socialism. Is that really the path you want to go down?
NJRob (b00189) — 7/7/2018 @ 11:05 amNo, “my” party is not “doubling down” on “hardcore socialism.” And no, that is not the path I want to go down.
Sorry I didn’t answer your question sooner.
Leviticus (9a211b) — 7/7/2018 @ 11:21 amMaybe they aren’t Republicans, either.
DRJ (15874d) — 7/7/2018 @ 2:07 pm