Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 1 hour ago, william.scherk said: This has been making the rounds on Trump Hate Hater hatey Facebook ... Two questions, William: 1. Does anyone (other than me) watch these videos you post? They should. This one is classic. It shows Trump to be a world-class ignoramus and buffoon. Of course, Uncle Milty could do that to people. His set-to with Phil Donahue on "greed" is classic. 2. I'm still in WTF mode with this blasted chat thing. I used the name I registered and could not recall or figure out my password, so I registered another name and gave it a password, and it seemed to like it, but it still won't display my attempted posts. No further questions, Your Honor. REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 And now for something a little different (from the Daily Mail) Anti-Trump protesters take the night off as the Donald speaks for an hour in Ohio with ZERO interruptions... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Hoedown at Breitbart Inside Cruz’s state-by-state plan to defeat Trump Cruz, for instance, is likelier to pass Trump in delegates than he is to reach 1,237 delegates himself. POLITICO’s calculations show that he would need to win as many as 800 of the 910 remaining delegates to be bound after March 15 to clinch — a near impossibility. He would instead need to rely on the more than 100 unbound delegates who will arrive in Cleveland, or, more likely, the chaos of a second ballot. Another key is the other states that vote on Tuesday — Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina — that offer a combined 193 delegates, more than Florida and Ohio. Cruz must rack up delegates there to keep Trump within reach. Cruz is hunting for delegates especially in Missouri, where the winner in each congressional district receives an unusually high five delegates. He held four events across the state on Saturday, after campaigning in Illinois on Friday night and in North Carolina on Sunday. And here is a section of Jonah Goldberg's mighty, lengthy tergiversation on Trump the phenomenon. This takes TrumpHatery to the summit. But more importantly, if you listen to Trump’s answers to almost any question about how he will fix a problem, he uses up the first 95 percent of his time explaining, re-explaining and demagoguing about how bad the problem is. (That is, if he’s not talking about polls.) Then in the last few seconds, he says we’ll fix the problem by being really smart or by winning or by hiring the best people. In other words, he has no idea how to fix it. Before Trump gelded him, or before he went to sleep and awoke from his husk with a strange, new, Renfield-like respect for his master, Chris Christie was very good at pointing out how Trump can’t explain how he will do anything. Now no one seems to care. What I can’t get my head around is how other people can listen to this stuff and hear something substantive or serious. I truly don’t understand it. Or maybe I do understand it, and I just don’t want to because I don’t like what it might say about a lot of people I respect. [...] I understand the anger. I understand that political junkies are likely to marvel at anything that arouses such political passion. I also understand that politicians have a weakness for anything that inspires the masses. I remember how the sainted Jack Kemp was just a bit too spellbound by Louis Farrakhan’s Million Man March, for example. But what bothers me is the way that this admiration or appreciation bleeds into power-worship. One of the most illuminating aspects of this entire sorry chapter in American history — and it’s not even done yet — is how so many smart people reply to criticisms of Trump with declarations about his popularity and his success. This form of argumentum ad populum is more fit for ancient Rome. The people want blood sport! Give them blood sport! I get that people are legitimately hurting from the effects of globalization and Obama’s ridiculous policies. That doesn’t make protectionism any more advisable. The next phase of the Trumpodian metamorphosis is often a weird self-serving braggadocio. Trump’s fans will often respond to a criticism of Trump by bragging that they knew “from the beginning” that Trump was going to be big. It goes something like this: I offer a criticism of Trump. Someone freaks out at me on Twitter by saying “Who cares what you think!?” or “You just don’t get it!” and then they follow up by boasting about how they always knew Trump would be big, like some aging, bitter music critic who saw Lou Reed play early on in some dive bar in Newark. “I knew he had ‘it’ the moment I saw him!” Well, the first problem with this kind of argument can be summarized in the timeless words of Aristotle: “So f***ing what!?” Bully for you! How does that rebut my claim that he has no clue how health care works or my argument that protectionism is dangerous? Saying you predicted Trump’s appeal isn’t a reply, it’s changing the topic to some utterly meaningless preening about yourself. Youch. So much HATERADE. What explains this? Could it be .... Satan? For the Trump-lover in all of us .... please watch at least two of Trump's rally performances. It will learn you about him and his plans for you ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 4 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said: Sea Island? Please decode. Republican leadership, donors, elites, some 60 planes, they met on Sea Island off Georgia a week or two ago to conspire to thwart the will of the voters. Dirty tricks coming. Piece of Shit Mitt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 CEOs And GOP Honchos Didn't Intend To Focus On Trump At Secretive Meeting. They Couldn't Help It. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 6 hours ago, Mark said: By the way, Binswanger opposes Trump – another reason to like Trump. See Binswanger’s post:FutureOfCapitalism.com/comments/9016 and my response:FutureOfCapitalism.com/comments/9026 Well done, Mark. Harry is goofy. That's rather how a third grader would put the story together, isn't it?... <<<Gosh, I guess from what people are saying, it was eminent domain. I think I understand how he did it too. Trump took away old ladies homes, then more of them, then more of them, until he had billions of dollars. Oh, and he focused on greed and left his decency behind. Those two, plus eminent domain = billions of dollars. That's all there is to doing what Trump has done. Anyone can do it.>>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Here are some comments on the Breitbart housecleaning. For some time now, I've been sensing a conflict within the Breitbart News site over Donald Trump. Some of the people were pro-Trump and some virulently anti-Trump. You could tell by the nature of the stories. The pro-Trump side was headed by Steve Bannon, the Executive Chairman of Breitbart. The anti-Trump side was headed by Ben Shapiro, editor-at-large. A kerfuffle came to a head last August that didn't help: Breitbart Staffers Believe Trump Has Given Money To Site For Favorable Coverage. According to the article, there were four anonymous staffers as source. Bannon denied this and, to be honest, it was probably baloney. Steve Bannon made a 2011 movie Kat and I saw here in Chicago and Bannon himself came for the viewing: The Undefeated. This is a full feature documentary on Sarah Palin and was VERY pro-Sarah. I imagine there is much friendliness between Steve and Sarah (and their respective people). So it makes sense if Sarah was going to support Trump, Bannon was on the team so he would, also. But the anti-Trump side at Breitbart has shown the special form of outright hatred that takes root in some people regarding Trump. Since last August, the coverage at Breitbart re Trump has been weird. It has either been very pro-Trump or outright bashing of the worst kind. Very little middle. Last Friday, former Breitbart spokesman Kurt Bardella resigned citing Trump as the reason. He did not leave quietly and made the rounds bashing both Trump and Breitbart. Then the dustup with reporter Michelle Fields and Trump's campaign manager Corey Lewandowski happened. Apparently, Lewandowski pulled her back as Trump was passing, but from the video, it looked like normal crowd jostle. She filed charges and all hell has broken loose about this. I can't say for sure, but from all the yelling, it seems like Fields (or people next to her) tried to leverage the event to get benefits from Trump (I heard Fields say that to Megyn Kelly tonight) and Trump's people were probably having none of it. So an irrational war erupted on both sides at Breitbart. Both sides have been slinging mud at each other. Today a mini-exodus started when Michelle Fields and editor-at-large Ben Shapiro resigned. Later they were followed by national security reporter Jordan Schachtel and associate editor Jarrett Stepman. By my count, there were 4 anonymous staffers leaking made-up dirt last August. There are a total of five people who resigned since last Friday. So that probably covers it, or at least most of it. The anti-Trump side lost and things will soon get back to normal. Today there are a few articles here and there trumpeting the demise of Breitbart yada yada yada. I have little doubt Bannon will replace those who left in short order. There is no lack of right-wing journalism talent in America. So Breitbart is going nowhere. On the contrary, imagine what opportunities will run through there once Trump wins. If it seems like this affair is a lot of noise over little, that's because it is. The spotlight is on it because of the Trump connection, seeing how there are many media people who hate Trump. If these thoughts have any value for you, I'm glad. But just a little. Even though I wrote them, I only value them as insider gossip. Fun, but not important. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Trump learned from Zero Mostel... Quote "I was so careful. I picked the wrong play, the wrong director, the wrong cast. Where did I go right?" — Max Bialystock, The Producers A character's attempt to deliberately fail at some task (usually to fuel some other, hidden goal) backfires when the intended failure proves impossible, or becomes an unwanted success instead; in other words, they failed to fail. (Something like that.)This is usually caused by Finagle's Law at work, where the attempt to fail is so spectacular that it Crosses the Line Twice. Crossing it twice is always "better" than crossing it only once. In these cases, the meta-fail was a result of trying too hard. In a variation (really more of a Failure Gambit Gone Horribly Right), the person will fail at the initial task as planned, but somehow manage not to accomplish the hidden goal that the failure was supposed to yield. The person is now doubly cursed, as they now have to deal with the fallout from their planned failure without being able to enjoy the rewards of the goal they were actually striving for. This is a Sub-Trope of Failure Gambit. Compare Fake-Real Turn, with "fake" and "real" replaced with "failure" and "success" respectively. Common for people with Dismotivation. May be caused by a Plague of Good Fortune. If the initial failure would be getting in trouble with the authorities, see Can't Get In Trouble For Nuthin'. Compare with Nice Job Fixing It, Villain. For one going for success and succeeding despite others thinking he won't, see And You Thought It Would Fail. For when one doesn't even try to do anything but ends up winning anyway, see Wins by Doing Absolutely Nothing.In contrast is the Xanatos Gambit, where the planner is perfectly content with the success of the first part of the scheme or the second part.See also Reverse Psychology and Black Sheep Hit. Not to be confused with Gone Horribly Right, where a person aims to succeed rather than fail, and does succeed, but the success turns out to be a bad thing instead of a good thing after all. Also not to be confused with Epic Fail, which is when an unintended failure happens in such sheer magnitude that the failure becomes impressive in itself. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SpringtimeForHitler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 How I envision interchanges between Trumpgasmers and Bidibob and Bigwanker: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 A pretty good comparison: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Roger, How did you know Biddibob was a pussycat? Everytime I try to discuss Trump with him, he starts with the following subtext frame: "You are stupid, I am smart and Trump is scum. Let's have a rational discussion." After that is understood by the reader (in his perception), off he goes with a list. He doesn't use those words, but that meaning is very clear. I generally say I don't buy the frame. Besides, there is some fundamental stuff he left off his list. I mention a few things (doing versus saying, war profits, Trump's achievements, things like that.) Man does he get irritated when I do that. But before the pressure builds up, he does another post essentially repeating: "You are stupid, I am smart and Trump is scum. Let's have a rational discussion. Now talk about the goddam list." And back and forth we go. But he can sure come up with lists. He'll do another list. Then another. Then another. Always with the same subtext. Before he blows, he says he ain't posting anymore because he gives up. Then he blows and starts calling me names. Man, does he get pissed. But it's all surface bluster. The dude's a pussycat underneath. Like I told him, I love him (especially for his fiction writing), but I'm aware he doesn't like me. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 Here's my caption for the pic: "And then I told him, Donald, here's your chance to make a little girl very happy. Run for the GOP nomination!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 4 hours ago, Mark said: For example, consider the following stupidity from a Trump supporter we could do without: Fuck you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 2 hours ago, Jon Letendre said: That's rather how a third grader would put the story together, isn't it?... Really? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 13 hours ago, anthony said: Davidson's article is very strong and some more absorbing background info for me. It has long been thrust on the USA, less willingly lately, to be "the leader of the free world" ( unsaid, "the moral leader" matters much more) - one hears the confusion from overseas commentators, asking outright : Where has America been? And doubtless in recent times, the 'leading from behind strategy' has emboldened terror groups and hegemonies. I can fully understand the increasing resistance from Americans having to police other countries. But it has all changed since Washington's times and even since the Kuwait war. Enemies can (and want to ) bring 'the fight' to the US, despite all the freedom-sapping security measures implemented. So I've argued that isolationism vs. interventionism is a terribly false alternative. The former is short term and concretist in thinking, delaying inevitable action for later - and the latter has in practice meant more exposed risk and great expense, and taking and implementing Democracy to countries which seldom show they deserve it and desire it. Guilt and altruism should play no part in the nation's self-interest and defence (or of the "free world", for that matter). As I see a possible strategy, any foreign military 'excursion' would clearly fit certain criteria: a direct response to a direct attack; a response to an almost certain longer term threat; a selective and highly concentrated force on narrowly defined targets; a standing agreement of co-operation and involvement from allies; and mostly, that clear objectives can be reached, quickly and effectively - in and out. (It's funny. I'm hearing and seeing a lot of anti-Trump derision and contempt from those of leftist persuasion over here. Is this the man who will have his finger on the Red Button? sorta thing. That's what progressives do, parade for others those publicly correct morals at every opportunity. But underneath, I'm sure I hear also a wistfulness for a firm America back in the world again to alleviate their fears. They won't ever admit it, they too crave blunt honesty and strength). Tony: You may not have seen this angle. However, as a photographer who has covered actual news and took pictures of Mandela, what do you see of this angle? If I was the Secret Service Agent, I would have shot this prick the minute he got past the first ring of agents. Apparently, from his own mouth he stated that he has been planning this for over six (6) months. He should be in a Federal jail awaiting trial, or, in a box. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 4 hours ago, Mark said: For example, consider the following stupidity from a Trump supporter we could do without 2 hours ago, Jon Letendre said: That's rather how a third grader would put the story together, isn't it?... You know what's funny you two? It was sarcasm. I was reaming REB for his repeated misunderstanding of how Trump uses eminent domain, and you think _I_ was the dumbass? You two completely missed the fucking point. Sorry REB, that's what that was. I'm not taking the fall for that one. I'm not calling you a dumbass, I'm calling them dumbasses for missing that sarcasm toward you. And no, I do not want to argue. Clean up the attacks, they are baseless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said: It was sarcasm. I was reaming REB for his repeated misunderstanding of how Trump uses eminent domain, and you think _I_ was the dumbass? You two completely missed the fucking point. 1 Don't listen to him, Mark and Jon. You guys are champs! REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 14 hours ago, merjet said: You are a prolific expert at making false presumptions. As my freshman algebra teacher told us, "X is the unknown, and a spurt is a drip under pressure - so an expert is an unknown drip under pressure." Right on, Merlin. REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 3 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said: Don't listen to him, Mark and Jon. You guys are champs! REB Yea? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 18 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said: Sorry REB, that's what that was. I'm not taking the fall for that one. I'm not calling you a dumbass, I'm calling them dumbasses for missing that sarcasm toward you. 16 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said: Don't listen to him, Mark and Jon. You guys are champs! REB Actually, no I'm not sorry that after reading that comment. You're a coward for not addressing me directly. Maybe you should go back to your farm and stop pretending to be a philosopher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 35 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said: 5 hours ago, Mark said: For example, consider the following stupidity from a Trump supporter we could do without: Fuck you. OK, I'll address you directly, jerkwad. Same to you. REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 2 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said: Maybe you should go back to your farm and stop pretending to be a philosopher. Why don't you take a break until the surgeons restore the other side of your face? REB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Letendre Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 26 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said: Really? Not you. Harry. And yes, really. He sounds like a dopey simpleton in that comment, or a very young person. Whatever the version, I've seen many, they go,like this... "made all his money from eminent domain" "inherited all his money" "didn't do quite as well as the S&P500 over the comparable 30 year period" The last one is my favorite, because it fails to appreciate the difficulty of deploying vast sums of capital into the real world, not securities traded from the couch, but instead land, and millions of dollars of concrete coming Tuesday, and thirty million dollar window orders, etc., without losing all of it, let alone gain and gain and gain, decade after decade. To do anywhere near the S&P500 with whatever Daddy left 'ya, again, with real world projects, is phenomenal. So, all those simplistic reductions of the man are silly, they sound to me like the way third graders grasp the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KorbenDallas Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 8 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said: OK, I'll address you directly, jerkwad. Same to you. Good job. 8 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said: Why don't you take a break until the surgeons restore the other side of your face? Not so good :\ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Bissell Posted March 15, 2016 Share Posted March 15, 2016 On 3/14/2016 at 8:01 PM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: CNN Exclusive: 'Trump is a bully,' says man who rushed stage Here's yet another angle on the attack on Trump: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now