Mark Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Trump Supporter’s House Vandalized The article, by David Martin (who lives in the D.C. area), begins: I was watching the Fox5 10 pm news on Wednesday, March 9, out of Washington, DC, when I saw the shocking report of a woman’s house having been vandalized ... in nearby Gainesville, Virginia, in Prince William County. She had awakened that morning to discover that her two signs supporting Donald Trump for president had been stolen from her front yard and that the words “Can you see the new world through the tear gas” and “Revolution” had been prominently spray-painted in black on separate sides of her modest white frame house. This looks very much like a thuggish and criminal attempt to intimidate people who support a particular candidate for president into silence, and, as such, it is very newsworthy. Such acts should be exposed and denounced, the sooner the better. I checked my home-delivered Washington Post the next morning to see what, if anything, they might have about the matter. Nothing. I went online to see what other news coverage there might be. It was only on the Fox5 web site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Are you really saying you have no ability to judge a book with your own mind without having someone else along to tell you a different side? Dayaamm! That's the first time I've ever heard you say something like that. Robert, That might come off as more than banter. It's mostly banter, though. Seriously, I've never seen you refuse to read a book, but judge it as bad anyway. Do you suffer from the Trump hatred? There's a Trump hater bug going around and biting great people. Incidentally, Trump's memoir description of his real estate deals is only one part of the book. It's an outline to give it a sequence, so to speak. But think about it. How many books that are descriptions of real estate deals only, have become bestsellers? None. Why? There's no market for that. And that's why The Art of the Deal is much more than a real estate deals. It's actually a self-help book, one of the greats. The deals (from Trump's perspective) are basically case studies and prompts to illustrate his business philosophy and self-improvement in general. Inspiration and motivation according to sound principles is the main point of the book. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 33 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, Are you really saying you have no ability to judge a book with your own mind without having someone else along to tell you a different side? Dayaamm! That's the first time I've ever heard you say something like that. Michael He said that book, not a book. In 1966 I purchased a book on how to make bombs. I would be very foolish to use it without Robert's "knowledgeable" person input just as Robert would in making deals a la Trump according to Trump. --Brant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 minute ago, Brant Gaede said: I would be very foolish to use it without Robert's "knowledgeable" person input just as Robert would in making deals a la Trump according to Trump. Brant, You think Robert wants to become a real estate tycoon? That's why he would read that book? Funny... I had a different impression of him. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 He's selling off bits and pieces of the Clemson campus to the ignorati. --Brant so I read in a book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 40 minutes ago, Mark said: Trump Supporter’s House Vandalized The article, by David Martin (who lives in the D.C. area), begins: Marc, I've read a lot about Trump election materials, election offices, supporter homes, etc., being vandalized. Google these exact words: trump election vandalized In my search, 401,000 results are returned. You can also try some other keyword variations. It makes for some very interesting reading. This hardly ever hits the mainstream press, but the humongous stream of local press about it from all over the country makes quite a statement about the nature of Trump opponents. Not all Trump opponents, granted, but I rarely read the noncriminal Trump opponents condemn what their brothers in arms do... Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 At several news sites, Trump just got called winner in Arizona with about 46% or so, but that percentage could change. (Cruz is about 21%. Looks like Rubio got a good chunk from early voting--the machine was workin' it before he dropped out.) Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Michael: I did not want to raise the bar on the Arizona primary, however, had he lost this particular "winner take all," at this particular race to 1237 would mean that there was a better than even chance that he would not get to a clean 1237. Now it is quite doable. I worked it out last night, hoping for this result. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 5 hours ago, william.scherk said: William, I didn't listen to this yet (I will), but the NYT wrote about information Trump released there; Top Experts Confounded by Advisers to Donald Trump By Alan Rappeport March 22, 2016 NYT From the article: Rappeport said: When Donald J. Trump finally began to reveal the names of his foreign policy advisers during a swing through Washington this week, the Republican foreign policy establishment looked at them and had a pretty universal reaction: Who? . . . ... in an interview with The Washington Post editorial board, he shared the names of five advisers who signed up to be on his team: Joseph E. Schmitz, Gen. Keith Kellogg, Carter Page, George Papadopoulos and Walid Phares. As usual, I have to drag my-hillbilly self to the pundits I most like to think about what to think about this: NYT appalled Trump's foreign policy team excludes those who've "held senior positions in previous GOP administrations." Country cheers.— Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) March 23, 2016 Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: I don't think you have ever heard me discuss "if the election were held today" polls. The reason is I think they're silly. They're a media gimmick to gin up news where no news exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merjet Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 7 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, Do you suffer from the Trump hatred? There's a Trump hater bug going around and biting great people. Are there only Trump lovers and Trump haters? Robert, I invite you to my newly-formed club Trump Skeptics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 12 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: This is a power thing. The winner (between Ailes and Trump) gets to tell the other what to do or else, which is how Ailes likes to play. Trump is showing him there is another "or else." And Fox is taking a hit because of it. Michael, So how far is this going to go? Suppose Trump can't get Ailes to do his bidding, with the means heretofore employed? What else will he do (especially, of course, if he gets elected)? And where are the frozen, personalized targets at ABC/Disney/ESPN, NBC/CNBC/MSNBC, CBS, CNN/HNN? The ones Trump is using for special leverage, over the big shots at each respective venue? Trump might want to be picking such targets. He might want to have picked them out well in advance. Because each of these outlets will be going all in for Hillary, as soon as she has finished with the (delayed) vanquishing on Bernie Sanders. Somehow I don't think threatening to sue them is going to produce the desired result. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 12 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Are you really saying you have no ability to judge a book with your own mind without having someone else along to tell you a different side? Dayaamm! That's the first time I've ever heard you say something like that. Michael, It's the first time I've commented on a book advertising his vast prowess at business as a model for others to emulate, by a guy who has real trouble admitting any of his business failures in public. Also a guy who keeps finding excuses for not releasing his income tax returns, when the real reasons might prove germane. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Campbell Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 12 hours ago, Selene said: In fact, it has become so prolific that to find decent polling data, you need to see the more obscure polls, or, the internal polls of campaigns. It's not just the "bread and circuses." Polling's gone down the crapper in most of the developed world (see British elections, see Canadian elections, etc.), because the polling organizations still haven't adjusted to people relying on cell phones. I suspect that only access to the internal polls of the Obama campaigns enabled Nate Silver to gain a reputation as a prognosticator. I kinda wonder now how good even the best-funded internal polls are. Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Michael quoted: A couple of weeks ago, Trump said a comment, "Islam hates us." end quote They do! They really, really do hate us. Andrew C. McCarthy, the guy who led the prosecution against the first bomber of the twin towers, The Blind Sheik, has an exceptionally good article (Islam – Facts or Dreams?) in the February issue of Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College. The Sheik was, and is considered a globally renowned scholar by the vast majority of Muslims. If a Muslim adheres to their faith they will do exactly as the terrorists are doing. Who we foolishly claim are moderate Muslims are people who are not following their faith, or they are prudent predators waiting for their moment of glory. Today, Wednesday the 23rd, I listened to Trump’s spokesperson, Stephen Miller, on Fox and I think Trump is taking the exact tact that I would on immigration. Instead of going after Muslims with a permanent ban, he is emphasizing what I will call, “The Art of Avoidance.” The world is a dark, city street and as you walk down it you see a group of people on one corner. They appear menacing. So you cross to the other side of the street to avoid them. We should avoid Muslims. It is that simple and throughout history we have avoided thuggish immigrants. Muslims are thuggish, totalitarians. Use your common sense. Say the ban is temporary but watch what Europe does in the short term. They will ban Muslims or Europe will burn. Peter Notes. Summary of Robert Campbell’s list of Muslim absurdities. Suppose you exclude from that 1.6 billion everyone who thinks God has blessed honor killings, or clitoridectomy, or just forbidding women to drive cars, God has commanded all women to wear burqas or abayas in public, the Godly path consists of according dictatorial powers to the top Islamic cleric in the vicinity, or bestowing them on a non-cleric whose strongman status has been blessed by selected Islamic clerics in the vicinity, the institution of slavery is now or ever was consistent with Islamic belief, that dhimmi status for Christians, Jews, and maybe Zoroastrians, and the choice of slaughter or forced conversion for pagan Arabs and Hindus, is consistent with the tenets of Islam, waging war on non-Muslims is incumbent on all able-bodied Muslim males, there is a Hell, and that every non-Muslim will sooner or later end up roasting in it, being a Muslim automatically makes one superior to all non-Muslims, and entitled to a role, however modest, in ruling over them, and Islam was largely spread by conquest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 While Europe is bleeding, Obama is at a baseball game with a dictator doing the wave. He should be morally condemned by every decent person. And Europeans should be especially upset and vocal. He is a disgrace. Let’s hear one resounding, Come on ! Republicans and Democrats should condemn his obscene behavior. Congress should be speaking out. We have sunk so low as a country that the mainstream media will not do one editorial on the national news about our insensitive, juvenile President. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 12 hours ago, Robert Campbell said: How does denying and obfuscating whenever someone asks him about a failed business venture exemplify either of these qualities? I understand and agree with where you're coming from, Robert, admitting to errors, failures, etc., is virtuous, and dodging them is not. But when do we ever see such admissions in politics? It's pretty unusual. I'm a Cruz fan, and I've seen him admit to a mistake or minor wrongdoing on very rare occasions, but I've also seen him deny and obfuscate. Obama admitting to obvious failure? Hillary? Hahahaha! And, hell, it's not limited to politicians. The founders and heirs of Objectivism skated and skirted around their shortcomings. People here on OL do it often. I've expended millions and millions of pixels showing members here (including ones who seem to think of themselves as important Objectivish gurus/leaders) to be wrong and to have failed in their public philosophizing, trying to convince them to accept and admit to the reality of their failures, and ultimately laughing at their stubbornness. Do we expect more of Trump than of anyone else? J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Uh oh. Jeb just endorsed Ted Cruz. Now Trump's really in trouble. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 26 minutes ago, Jonathan said: And, hell, it's not limited to politicians. The founders and heirs of Objectivism skated and skirted around their shortcomings. People here on OL do it often. I've expended millions and millions of pixels showing members here (including ones who seem to think of themselves as important Objectivish gurus/leaders) to be wrong and to have failed in their public philosophizing, trying to convince them to accept and admit to the reality of their failures, and ultimately laughing at their stubbornness. Do we expect more of Trump than of anyone else? J Ha! Every time I saw your knife coming and I artfully stepped aside! --Brant your failure, not mine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 3 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Uh oh. Jeb just endorsed Ted Cruz. Now Trump's really in trouble. Michael Jeb was always too little; now he's too late too. --Brant a complete package Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, Robert Campbell said: So how far is this going to go? Suppose Trump can't get Ailes to do his bidding, with the means heretofore employed? Robert, I look at this from a different lens. Suppose Ailes can't get Trump to do his bidding, with the means heretofore employed? When one thinks through the implications of that, it's not good... I'm happy with the clash of Titans. Better to have them fighting than one submissive to the other. I predict a continued stalemate and I'm perfectly happy with it. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brant Gaede Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 5 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Robert, I look at this from a different lens. Suppose Ailes can't get Trump to do his bidding, with the means heretofore employed? When one thinks through the implications of that, it's not good... I'm happy with the clash of Titans. Better to have them fighting than one submissive to the other. Michael Oh, Trump will make a deal with Ailes and make up with the girl--after he's the Prez. In the meantime the more sparks the better for both guys. (Call DT "Sparky.") --Brant how about Press Secretary or unfettered access 24/7? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selene Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 38 minutes ago, Jonathan said: .Do we expect more of Trump than of anyone else? J I guess so. Romney's bankruptcy rate was 15% or more. Trumps is under 3%. A... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 53 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said: Oh, Trump will make a deal with Ailes and make up with the girl--after he's the Prez. Brant, You might not have a high opinion of Alex Jones, but what he says about Megyn Kelly's broadcasting training here is true. I know this from having studied it. (Please ignore the cheesy thumbnail of Megyn's eyes. Friggin' Alex Jones will be Alex Jones. He's like a goddam dog with muddy paws. ) Pretty female news broadcasters actually are trained to look at the camera with slightly insinuating glances. Not too much, but enough. Don't think Trump doesn't know it, too. One does not keep a top TV show on air for 14 years without learning this stuff. Trump is neutralizing Megyn well neutralized. I wrote earlier: "Actually, Trump's feud with Megyn is starting to be a little about her because I've seen her recent shows and she's cracking." It didn't occur to me until just now, but the break in underscored muted sexiness was the thing that caused me to notice it. If you look at her expressions when she goes on the attack against Trump (in almost every show these days), she loses all the soft insinuation glows and starts looking bitchy in a controlled manner. This is different than the "Joan of Arc" crusader look she gets when challenging a guest. In that look metaphorical fire comes from her eyes and you are right there with her, rooting for her. The look she gets when Trump bashing is cold. Then she often instantly switches to Trump defense of the same thing she bashed in the same cold manner. It's very odd and not emotionally resonating. I think Trump knows this. And I think Ailes knows this, too. I even think Megyn knows this and doesn't give a damn because she's pissed. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, Robert Campbell said: It's the first time I've commented on a book advertising his vast prowess at business as a model for others to emulate, by a guy who has real trouble admitting any of his business failures in public. Also a guy who keeps finding excuses for not releasing his income tax returns, when the real reasons might prove germane. Robert, From my perspective, this is a perfect example of confusing image control with narcissism and needing to hide things. This is the same mistake people make over and over with Trump. They presume he is not in control of his own public behavior. Do you want proof of this mistake? I submit the whole sorry mess of boneheaded theories and failed predictions about Trump from the media and political eggheads since last June. Note, these are not stupid people. If they screw up once in awhile, we all do. That's human, so no biggie. But to consistently get it wrong? Almost all of them? Over and over and over? And still keep saying the same things? For over nine months in a massive proliferation of articles and broadcasts? That's too many for coincidence or anomaly. There are only two choices to explain it: 1. The media eggheads actually are morons, or 2. Trump is doing something they aren't detecting. Or maybe a combination of both. I personally go with the second for most of them. The thing is, once you study this stuff, you see it. You haven't read this Trump thread since it is so long, but let me call your attention to a series of posts elsewhere on the web we discussed earlier. They are by a person who sees some of the things I see with Trump. His name is Scott Adams and he is the creator of the Dilbert comic strip. He's also a trained hypnotist. Scott Adams' Blog - Hashtag Trump. This series doesn't deal with Trump's control of his public image re his companies (I haven't read all of those posts yet, but the ones I read did not), but they show clearly that some of the things people claim that prove Trump is a loose cannon are actually done on purpose. I don't know if this is comforting to your fears (it might make them worse ), but Trump knows exactly what he is doing and is doing it on purpose. Michael 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