Donald Trump

[BaalChatzaf]

1 hour ago, Peter said:

In 2015, Jonah Goldberg, fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a senior editor of National Review wrote: . . . . Republicans are fielding the best candidates in a generation, but Trump is poised to make them chumps by association. He has no chance of becoming president, but he has the huge potential to deny his alleged party a White House victory in 2016. And when that happens, he will of course stay a celebrity, but he will have traded his fame for infamy, even among those now cheering him on. end quote

I am embarrassed now because I agreed with Jonah!  I wrote around the same time, “Sorry to his fans but when I look at him giving a speech I am reminded of Benito Mussolini.” I thought President Trump’s chances of getting through the primaries were between zero and ten percent.

Rush is discussing how the media is without ammunition that can reach “Mon Capitan.”  A year from now they will still be belaboring the same ghost stories. The left will still be trying to cobble together a coalition of disenfranchised non producers. The media can’t swing it. Money can't swing it.

There are a lot of hot to trot (and riot) democrats but they are a minority and when the economy takes off after Ryan’s revised tax code is enacted the economy will take off like a rocket. We will decrease the business tax by ten percent or more, and be able to file personal income taxes on a postcard. Major corporations and money will repatriate to America. And as the regulations are decreased more investments will be made in businesses.

And the estate tax will cease to exist. That means the estate a person worked for their whole lives will go to their kids. That means small businesses will continue to exist after the passing of the original owner. And that means more farms will stay in the family. In my area the average farmer is 65 but if there is no estate tax it is less likely the heirs will sell the farm to split up the proceeds.

Hurrah! Peter   

Goldberg's hypothesis  was very plausible.  But we know from experience that plausible does not necessarily equal true. 

As to a "magic bullet"  to revive our economy,  do not count on it.  Our economic system is complicated and massive and it has a lot of inertia.  That is the inertia of  habitual thinking and accepted or received principles.   The only thing likely to produce  significant and persistent change is  a catastrophic failure.

[Peter]

Ba’al wrote: As to a "magic bullet"  to revive our economy,  do not count on it.  Our economic system is complicated and massive and it has a lot of inertia.  That is the inertia of  habitual thinking and accepted or received principles.   The only thing likely to produce  significant and persistent change is  a catastrophic failure. end quote

I know there are “tides” affecting the Dow but there are also pro business decisions that will make it shoot up like a rocket. Paul Ryan said the new tax deal should be running by the first of the year. Ten percent lower business tax. Less taxation on money entering the country.  Simpler tax forms that will make the process easier but it will also make the itemized items more “honest.” No estate tax.  Tremendously decreased regulations. The States will follow suit in some instances. There will be a boom in those States and in the country in general. Unfortunately some misguided states will increase their taxes to the federal level as the federal level drops to gain more revenue to spend on their pet projects and cronies. Two of those corrupt states may be Maryland and New Jersey.

Peter  

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

54 minutes ago, Peter said:

I know there are “tides” affecting the Dow but there are also pro business decisions that will make it shoot up like a rocket.

Peter,

There already is a "catastrophic failure" taking place. But not for normal Americans. (These are winning.)

President Trump is dismantling the corrupt crony establishment structures. And the corrupt crony establishment is screaming bloody murder.

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

9 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Peter,

There already is a "catastrophic failure" taking place. But not for normal Americans. (These are winning.)

President Trump is dismantling the corrupt crony establishment structures. And the corrupt crony establishment is screaming bloody murder.

Michael

The corporate lobbyists are still bribing and misleading members of Congress.  There is also a revolving door  between government and the corporate  upper levels of management.  The U.S.  government is still as corrupt and rotten as it ever was. The State and metropolitan governments are even in worse shape.  Government at all levels in the United States  is slime and rot.

[Peter]

Michael wrote: Peter, There already is a "catastrophic failure" taking place. But not for normal Americans. (These are winning.) President Trump is dismantling the corrupt crony establishment structures. And the corrupt crony establishment is screaming bloody murder. end quote

And Bob responded: The corporate lobbyists are still bribing and misleading members of Congress.  There is also a revolving door between government and the corporate upper levels of management.  The U.S. government is still as corrupt and rotten as it ever was. end quote

I noticed in his recent speech President Trump specifically implored Democrats to work with him. That may have demonstrated a smidgeon of “making nice” but it also signaled a failure of the Republican majority to stand behind the President. Otherwise, why worry? The votes should be there.

If anyone can find specifics on which Republicans in Congress are obstructionists I would be glad to read the articles. Also, is there still a site like that Wikipedia article on The Prez’s first 100 days that chronicles his achievements since then and projects into the future? I would read it. I know rider-less Senator Rand Paul is consistently libertarian so he is forgiven his neighs, but I will lobby against any dirty rotten scoundrels who fail to join our great march to liberty and freedom.

Tea Party! Reconstitute yourself immediately! Shame the Republicans who are NOT voting on principle.

Peter  ?

[jts]

50 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

The corporate lobbyists are still bribing and misleading members of Congress.  There is also a revolving door  between government and the corporate  upper levels of management.  The U.S.  government is still as corrupt and rotten as it ever was. The State and metropolitan governments are even in worse shape.  Government at all levels in the United States  is slime and rot.

And yet you trust government. Government is your guide to morality. Government approval is how you differentiate between a legit doctor and a quack. (I judge doctors by how well their patients do and I don't give a rat's ass whether government approves.) You trust the FDA (Fraud and Deception Administration).

 

[Peter]

jts wrote to Bob: And yet you trust government. Government is your guide to morality. Government approval is how you differentiate between a legit doctor and a quack. end quote

 

Go commando? Before I stop looking for the “certificates” on the wall of a doctor’s office I want an iron clad way of judging who is real and who is a quack. That endorsement (if not licensing) could come from the AMA but it would need to be well established before I would go laissez faire.

 

Government does a hell of a lot of good. But as our Founding Father’s theorized, it must be specifically tasked, monitored and at times disciplined. I think President Trump is the best thing to happen nationally in a hundred years.     

Peter

   

[jts]

1 hour ago, Peter said:

jts wrote to Bob: And yet you trust government. Government is your guide to morality. Government approval is how you differentiate between a legit doctor and a quack. end quote

 

Go commando? Before I stop looking for the “certificates” on the wall of a doctor’s office I want an iron clad way of judging who is real and who is a quack. That endorsement (if not licensing) could come from the AMA but it would need to be well established before I would go laissez faire.

 

AMA is an arm of government and is corrupt.

Certificates don't need to be from government. They can be from schools that are independent from government. The value of the certificate can depend on the reputation of the school, which can depend on the performance of the graduates of the school.

Certificates can be from things like the INHS. Whether this is worth anything is for you (not government) to judge. Another web page might have a list of approved witch doctors, also for you (not government) to judge.

I don't understand why people trust government approved doctors who by their own statement have nothing to offer, and reject helpful knowledge merely because it is not generally accepted. Authority above reason.

"Never take anything on trust." -- Botvinnik (former world chess champion) to Kasparov (age 10, future world chess champion)

 

[Peter]

"Never take anything on trust." -- Botvinnik (former world chess champion) to Kasparov (age 10, future world chess champion)

Yet there are people and businesses I trust and no longer scrutinize for malfeasance. Only as a final act after laissez faire is instituted, would I cease government licensing by “The State” for several professions including doctors and lawyers. I don’t mind laws that curtail the activities of conmen. Yeah, you can say everybody is an adult and deserves what they get, but come on . . . Doctor, Doctor where’s your degree?

Peter

From The Music Man.

Well, ya got trouble, my friend, right here,
I say, trouble right here in River City.
Why sure I'm a billiard player,
Certainly mighty proud I say
I'm always mighty proud to say it.
I consider that the hours I spend
With a cue in my hand are golden.
Help you cultivate horse sense
And a cool head and a keen eye.
Did ya ever take and try to give
An iron-clad leave to yourself
From a three-rail billiard shot?

[BaalChatzaf]

7 hours ago, jts said:

And yet you trust government. Government is your guide to morality. Government approval is how you differentiate between a legit doctor and a quack. (I judge doctors by how well their patients do and I don't give a rat's ass whether government approves.) You trust the FDA (Fraud and Deception Administration).

 

No. I do not trust the government.  I choose my physicians by the rating given by other patients and the medical society.  No I do not trust the FDA.  But I do read independent evaluations of the various  drugs I use.  I know how to read the medical and pharmacy journals. Most of the medicines I use have been in use many years and there is no set of warnings  or  negative indications in the professional journals.   

We do have to trust the expertise of  certain groups and we more or less have to use the refereed and vetted professional journals as a guide.  What else is there:?  The unsubstantiated claims of various crackpots and quacks? 

[jts]

24 minutes ago, BaalChatzaf said:

No. I do not trust the government.  I choose my physicians by the rating given by other patients and the medical society.  No I do not trust the FDA.  But I do read independent evaluations of the various  drugs I use.  I know how to read the medical and pharmacy journals. Most of the medicines I use have been in use many years and there is no set of warnings  or  negative indications in the professional journals.   

We do have to trust the expertise of  certain groups and we more or less have to use the refereed and vetted professional journals as a guide.  What else is there:?  The unsubstantiated claims of various crackpots and quacks? 

Let's take a specific, reasonably concrete example. During a fast (water only) of 20 or 40 days, some people experience nausea. The question is what to do about the nausea? You could take the patient off the fast but let us assume the fast is to be continued.

The typical average doctor who knows nothing about fasting probably would give a drug to stop the nausea. The drug would work. It would stop the nausea. All the peer reviewed research would show that it stops nausea. The evidence would be conclusive. Who can argue against success? All the patients would testify that it worked for them. All the doctors who tried it would find that it works; it stops the nausea. Anyone who says anything against this anti-nausea drug would be regarded as a fool. Any professional who opposes it would be regarded as a crackpot and a quack.

The typical average doctor would make no attempt to understand the nausea. Why is it happening? What does it mean? To the typical average doctor, all symptoms are bad and must be stopped at all cost, usually by a drug. The vetted professional journals would make no effort to understand the nausea.

What is actually happening is the liver is pouring crud into the stomach. One of the many functions of the liver is to clean the blood. All the blood in the body goes thru the liver and the liver removes junk from the blood and dumps it into the stomach to be removed from the body. This activity happens 24/7 but tends to be stepped up during a fast. The digestive system, especially during a fast, is a giant channel of elimination. There is something of a trade-off between digestion and elimination. Sometimes during a fast the liver dumps so much crud into the stomach that it causes nausea. This is why some people experience nausea during a fast.

You can stop the nausea during a fast by means of an anti-nausea drug but to do so is to demonstrate lack of understanding. But you will have the approval of all the vetted professional journals and all the government authorities and all the government approved professionals. And you will be regarded as a crackpot and a quack. And your patients probably will get well after they get rid of all that crud.

 

[jts]

1 hour ago, jts said:

You can stop the nausea during a fast by means of an anti-nausea drug but to do so is to demonstrate lack of understanding.

I simplified this a bit.

Drugs are poisons. During a fast (when you get deep enough into the fast) the body gets more sensitive to poisons. Tobacco addicts might develop an aversion to tobacco. Tap water might have a bad taste because of the poisons in it. All that stuff. So what happens if you take a poison during a fast?

Conflict!

 

[BaalChatzaf]

14 hours ago, jts said:

Let's take a specific, reasonably concrete example. During a fast (water only) of 20 or 40 days, some people experience nausea. The question is what to do about the nausea? You could take the patient off the fast but let us assume the fast is to be continued.

The typical average doctor who knows nothing about fasting probably would give a drug to stop the nausea. The drug would work. It would stop the nausea. All the peer reviewed research would show that it stops nausea. The evidence would be conclusive. Who can argue against success? All the patients would testify that it worked for them. All the doctors who tried it would find that it works; it stops the nausea. Anyone who says anything against this anti-nausea drug would be regarded as a fool. Any professional who opposes it would be regarded as a crackpot and a quack.

The typical average doctor would make no attempt to understand the nausea. Why is it happening? What does it mean? To the typical average doctor, all symptoms are bad and must be stopped at all cost, usually by a drug. The vetted professional journals would make no effort to understand the nausea.

What is actually happening is the liver is pouring crud into the stomach. One of the many functions of the liver is to clean the blood. All the blood in the body goes thru the liver and the liver removes junk from the blood and dumps it into the stomach to be removed from the body. This activity happens 24/7 but tends to be stepped up during a fast. The digestive system, especially during a fast, is a giant channel of elimination. There is something of a trade-off between digestion and elimination. Sometimes during a fast the liver dumps so much crud into the stomach that it causes nausea. This is why some people experience nausea during a fast.

You can stop the nausea during a fast by means of an anti-nausea drug but to do so is to demonstrate lack of understanding. But you will have the approval of all the vetted professional journals and all the government authorities and all the government approved professionals. And you will be regarded as a crackpot and a quack. And your patients probably will get well after they get rid of all that crud.

 

I went to my doctor and I  told him every time I lift my arm like this (motion indicated)  it hurts.  He replied,  don't do that. 

What is the organic  chemical  formula of "crud"?   Do you know what your are talking about?  

The liver has several hundred  specific chemical functions  and kidneys are as much a part of "cleaning the blood"  (whatever that means)  as the liver.

How does "clean blood"  differ from "unclean blood"  chemically and physically.   If you can't answer this then you do not know what your are talking about. 

That is what I am getting at when I say  quacks and crackpots. 

In matters of diet and nutrition  quacks and crackpots  abound.  That is why herbal non-prescription   products constitute a multi-billion dollar industry in the U.S.  A dietary purist  grinds up foxglove to put in his tea.  An educated person  gets a  prescription for digitalis.   Who knows better?

[Peter]

Bob wrote: How does "clean blood" differ from "unclean blood" chemically and physically. If you can't answer this then you do not know what you’re talking about. That is what I am getting at when I say quacks and crackpots. end quote  

My thinking exactly. Fasting? Fasting is not healthy, nor is chronically taking in too many calories. It is in direct contradiction to evolution. I don’t care if I were on a desert island I would still not deliberately fast to shed a few unwanted pounds and all I had to eat were sea worms and little soft shelled crabs, like Tom Hanks in that island movie.

Herbs? Potions? Vitamins? Enemas, for Caesar Salad’s sake? Give me a break. You would be healthier if you turned over logs and ate grubs.

I have mentioned it several times but that teen “fat ranch” in Texas is a cool idea if going there is voluntary. (You had to walk miles and perform work to get a meal, just like on a real Texas ranch if you showed up in 1884 and said, ‘Hey, I need a job.”)

How about a Caribbean island “Cast Away” fat ranch near relatively free Costa Rica, with a nod to the TV show, “Lost”? That might make you millions if you advertised it in Vogue and several Men’s magazines. I would stay away from the brain dead “Bachelorette,” themes though.   

Peter

[jts]

Fasting is one of those subjects that many people have an opinion about but very few people know much about. You can look up yahoo answers on fasting and see some gross ignorance from people posing as experts. Most people never went without food more than a day or 2. You can't judge 40 days from 2 days. If you do a 2 day fast and find that it is a bad experience, you should not infer that 40 days would be 20 times as bad.

Let's start with something really basic. There are 2 great processes of life: nutrition and elimination. Both are necessary. Without either you die. They can't be entirely separated because each supports the other. Every living cell produses metabolic waste. You can look it up. In addition to the waste produced by the living cell, there are environmental poisons coming from outside. All this stuff can be informally called 'crud' or 'garbage' and there is no single chemical formula for all of it.

This crud or garbage is eliminated  mainly by colon and kidneys and liver and lungs (CO2) and perhaps skin. If for whatever reason the elimination does not keep pace with production of garbage, the garbage level rises. If it rises above the toleration level, the body produces a "crisis". This means there is a state of emergency and the body uses vicarious channels of elimination. For example the skin, which normally doesn't excrete much, might become a more active channel of elimination. The lungs, which normally don't eliminate much other than CO2, might develop a cough. The digestive system, normally used mostly for digestion, might shut down digestion and produce an aversion to food and become a major channel of elimination.

Fasts can be natural or elective. A natural fast means the body calls for a fast. The stomach does not want food. If you give it food, it will throw the food back in your face. One doctor, who has experience with fasting, says the natural fast is always right and the elective fast is always wrong.

Back to the 2 great processes of life, nutrition and elimination. They interact, each supports the other. Nutrients are needed to remove garbage, example selenium to remove mercury. A cleaner body works more efficiently. But there is in some way a trade off. Energy used for one is at the expense of energy available for the other. During a fast, all the energy that is normally used for digestion is released for other uses which might include elimination.

I have a question about fasting that has been kicking around in my head for a while with no satisfactory answer. It seems no number of short fasts will equal a long fast. For example it seems no number of 15 day fasts will equal a 40 day fast. The question is, why is this? Shelton asserts this from his experience (40,000 fasts) without explaining why. Alan Goldhamer in his lectures does not mention this. Loren Lockman advises not less than 21 days but does not explain why to my satisfaction. There does not seem to be any place on the internet that explains this to my satisfaction.

A long fast has stages.

The first 2.5 to 3.5 days (says Lockman) is the transition from eating mode to fasting mode. During this time you are not properly into the fast. (I am somewhat skeptical about 2.5 to 3.5 days because I suspect that with practise this can be speeded up.)

The transition into fasting mode is not complete until 10-12 days (Lockman).

Dr. Moser says detox must precede healing, so there is a detox stage and a healing stage.

Alec Burton seems to think the detox stage can be subdivided into intercellular detox and intracellular detox. The latter is supposed to begin at around day 15.

If the fast is "complete", that means the fat is running low and hunger returns, which means the body serves notice upon the consciousness that food is needed and there is a flow of saliva and a keenness of taste and smell and usually a greater appreciation of the food experience.

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I wonder if President Trump has ever fasted.

After all, this is the Trump thread.

Michael

[jts]

48 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I wonder if President Trump has ever fasted.

After all, this is the Trump thread.

Michael

I read that what goes into his mouth is almost as terrifying as what comes out of his mouth.

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, jts said:

... as terrifying as what comes out of his mouth.

Terrifying to whom?

ISIS?

I agree.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Supreme Court siding with Trump on a lot today.

The forgotten man (the one paying for the shindig) is forgotten no longer, at least for now.

Kicking butt...

Michael

[Peter]

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Supreme Court siding with Trump on a lot today.

The forgotten man (the one paying for the shindig) is forgotten no longer, at least for now.

Kicking butt...

Michael

Thank you, Michael. It’s working, America. We’re winning. We’re 5-0. The American people see right through the Democrats’ pathetic stunts. And thank you Supreme Court for enforcing my travel ban on terrorists. But I don’t need your ruling. Today, I declare a snow day. I am the President and I can do what any mayor or governor can do. I declare there is inclement weather and no Muslim may drive . . . or walk . . . or fly across the border. Unless I say so.

We will continue to win elections by fighting for the issues that the American people actually care about, but we need to be prepared to stand up to the special interest money flooding into our country and out of the pockets of the Hollywood elites. I know 2018 is a ways off, but don’t make me spend my hard earned money to counter their propaganda. Give me a measly dollar or two. Or a hundred.

Thank you,

President Trump

[Peter]

Joy Overbeck in Townhall wrote: Since it’s been abundantly demonstrated for centuries that the “progressive” approach leads to more human suffering rather than an improvement in the human condition, the leftist/socialist/Marxists are actually taking us backwards, not forward. Their plans would regress humanity to an earlier and utterly failed model that’s left a trail of blood across human history. So let’s call them what they are: “regressives,” not progressives. And let’s celebrate Independence Day, not Dependence Day. end quote

I don’t know if the term “regressives” will catch on but it is a catchy name.

[Peter]

Unfortunately, blasting Morning Joe might get that show more viewers in the short term. Years ago I watched Scarborough and thought he was a neo conservative, but not now. What happened to that Bozo?

I was watching CBS 6:30 news with my wife and I said, watch and you will see them mix in opinion and disinformation. The first two stories did exactly that though the third one was objective. I didn’t write down what the stories were about and now I forget.         

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

6 hours ago, Peter said:

Unfortunately, blasting Morning Joe might get that show more viewers in the short term.

Peter,

Very short term. I predict he will go the way of Megyn Kelly seems to be going after the dust settles.

Nasty anti-Trumpers will sing anyone's praise so long as they are bashing Trump. The one thing they don't forgive is if their surge in audience stops watching them bash Trump. Then they jump ship, too (with sporadic pats on the head just for show).

Here's a good example. Remember Tony Schwartz, the co-author of The Art of the Deal? He was everywhere. Now where is he?

Michael

[Peter]

From The Blaze Daily. Neil Cavuto rattles off a long list of leftist violence the hypocritical media ignores, by Carlos Garcia Jul 3, 2017 10:28 pm. . . . . “CNN itself says it is a sad day when the president of the United States encourages violence against reporters,” he added. “But I guess it’s really not a sad day when it’s former New Year’s host Kathy Griffin holds up the president’s bloody head,” he added. “Not so sad there.” “Or when a Shakespeare in the Park troupe murders Caesar-style a President Trump look-alike. That’s OK,” he explained. “Just like rioters at UC Berkeley turning violent to shut down a pro-Trump speech by Ann Coulter is OK, only weeks after doing the same exact thing to protest another conservative speaker was deemed OK.” “Or turning over cars and lighting them on fire at the president’s inauguration is OK,” Cavuto continued. “Or left-wing professors urging violence against Trump supporters, including one, Eric Clanton arrested for assaulting Trump backers with a bike lock. That’s OK. Or liberal actress Sarah Silverman calling for a coup, that’s OK. Or Charlie Sheen calling for the president’s death, that’s OK.” “Or Johnny Depp musing about another actor killing another president,” he added. “That’s OK. Or liberal journalists such as VOX’s Emmett Reinsin defending such acts because that’s OK, they’re all OK.”

“You know what, NO, they’re not OK, not a one of them is OK,” Cavuto protested. “Not remotely OK.”

“There is a big difference my friend between speaking your mind and quite another proving you don’t have one,” Cavuto continued with a list of rhetoric from Democratic leaders. “Entertainers proving they’re twisted is no excuse for real leaders proving they’re worse.” “Top Democrat Tim Kaine calling for a fight in the streets against President Trump. Hillary Clinton vowing to lead the resistance against, you guessed it, President Trump,” he listed. “Congresswoman Shiela Jackson Lee calling for his impeachment, voting against anything President Trump wants in the meantime, all the time.”

“All OK,” Cavuto surmised.

“The moaning, the burning cauldrons of violence they fear coming from the right,” he continued, “ignoring all that real violence that has been coming from the left, from them. Not from others, from themselves. Not a few cases, lots of cases, not too few to care, too many to mention.”

“Yet the media seems to only fear a silly pro-wrestling tweet from the president right now,” he added, “oblivious to the very real act of violence that still has Congressman Steve Scalise in a hospital, right now. So forget who’s tweeting silly stuff, focus on who’s doing far more serious stuff. Leaving aside I’m not really a fan of the president going off message with these tweets, that not I’m against his tweeting just against things that do nothing to advance his agenda.”

“But to say these tweeting distractions breed violence, that, that would be news,” Cavuto concluded. “Ignoring the very real violence perpetrated by the left, that would be fake news.”

Trump was widely criticized in the media for a tweet containing an animated video of himself wrestling and beating a man with the CNN logo superimposed over his face. The White House has offered no apologies for what some in the media said was inciting violence against the press.

end quote 

[BaalChatzaf]

1 hour ago, Peter said:

 

Trump was widely criticized in the media for a tweet containing an animated video of himself wrestling and beating a man with the CNN logo superimposed over his face. The White House has offered no apologies for what some in the media said was inciting violence against the press.

end quote 

Trump appears to be mocking the media  who are highly mockable.