Donald Trump

[PDS]

10 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

LOL...

Just listen to you...

How on earth can I answer that?

In other words, if I'm too stupid to know something is happening, how do I manage to know it?

Dayaamm!

Here's a counter offer. How do you know when people agree with you? Who agrees with you. And when? Is this a trend? Can you give specific examples? 

And how does a person in your position even know when someone truly agrees with you?

 

Michael

I don't know how you would answer that.  That's my point.   You're the one claiming to be ignored.    Asking for evidence is not the same as calling you stupid.   Stop playing the Victim Card about this. 

The war protesters (in real time) were certainly not ignored:  they were on the front page of the newspaper, they led every newscast, and they created quite the ruckus.   The anti war people in Congress were not ignored.   They debated their notions in public, and had quite an audience for them.    The Editorial Writers (some call them the intelligentsia) who wrote against the Wars were not ignored.   The man running for President who claimed to be against the Wars was not ignored.  He was elected President. 

How were YOU ignored, Michael?

If you answer this question I will be happy to tell how I know when people agree with me on matters.  

You will be disappointed by my answer, but I am happy to answer your question.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

David,

We disagree.

Michael

[PDS]

10 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

If you say so.

They are going to come to an end, anyway.

You can count on it.

Michael

Can you name one for me?

That way I can see if your prediction comes true once The Braggart becomes President. 

Otherwise, you are simply setting up an falsifiable straw man, not unlike the Global Warming Crowd. 

[PDS]

3 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

We disagree.

Michael

On what?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Just now, PDS said:

How were YOU ignored Michael?

Come on, gimme a break.

The internet is full of my posts.

I have had more discussions about Endless War during the Bush years--and since--than I care to count. 

I was even bitching to everyone and their brother about the Patriot Act back when I was still in Brazil. 

Everywhere I went it was the same. Nobody who could do anything about it, or even who had an audience, was interested. Either I got ignored or I got a pat on the head and told to study the issue some more.

There are so many goddam cases, I don't want to start naming names because I don't want the hassle.

Here.

Here's a recent one just so you know what I'm talking about: Robert Bidinotto. Read some of our exchanges on Facebook. There are links in this very thread. Believe me, there are plenty of people like that.

And if that doesn't satisfy you, I doubt you are truly interested in learning about me.

Michael

[PDS]

By the way, my use of the term The Braggart or The Pathological Braggart is intentionally in homage to Trump's deployment of the linguistic kill shot. 

If anybody can think of a better linguistic kill shot for Trump, I am all ears. 

I thought the term Bullshit Artist might be a good term, but, as I have argued, the term seems to be encompassed by Pathological Braggart, so I am using the latter term for two linguistic kill shots with one stone, so to speak. 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

7 minutes ago, PDS said:

The war protesters (in real time) were certainly not ignored:  they were on the front page of the newspaper, they led every newscast, and they created quite the ruckus.   The anti war people in Congress were not ignored.   They debated their notions in public, and had quite an audience for them.    The Editorial Writers (some call them the intelligentsia) who wrote against the Wars were not ignored.   The man running for President who claimed to be against the Wars was not ignored.  He was elected President.

David,

This is the essence of what I am talking about.

To you, not being ignored means talking about something.

To me, it means stopping the goddam Endless Wars for profit.

In all the blah blah blah you mentioned above, the government and war machine grew and grew and grew.

It's a talk versus do thing.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

9 minutes ago, PDS said:

Can you name one for me?

David,

Nope.

It's because I have not written anything about this at all on this thread, I am stupid as a rock, and I don't exist anyway.

How's that for a victim card?

Michael

[PDS]

1 minute ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

This is the essence of what I am talking about.

To you, not being ignored means talking about something.

To me, it means stopping the goddam Endless Wars for profit.

In all the blah blah blah you mentioned above, the government and war machine grew and grew and grew.

It's a talk versus do thing.

Michael

So you were ignored because you lost the argument?

That's not being ignored.   That's losing the argument.

Losing an argument is something that occasionally happens in a constitutional republic. 

In this case, however, I think you are demonstrably wrong.   Barack Obama won the 2008 election, in part, by seeking to end the Iraq War.   Then he got elected.  Then he withdrew our forces.   That ended the Iraq War.   In this context, I don't understand your "talk versus do thing" point. 

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Mark Levin has been harsh on Trump, but at least he's not silly enough to think suicide is the best approach.

If Trump is the candidate, after this video, does anyone have any doubt who he will actively support?

Michael

[PDS]

5 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

Nope.

It's because I have not written anything about this at all on this thread, I am stupid as a rock, and I don't exist anyway.

How's that for a victim card?

Michael

That is a full-on, 100% use of the Victim Card.

This is a long thread.  I have read most of it.   I may be wrong, but I don't recall what you have in mind when you use the term "con game". 

One more time, Michael:  this isn't about you, it's about your arguments.

You exist.  You're not stupid.  And you're not stupid as a rock.  

You disagree with me.  This doesn't mean you are calling me stupid, or saying that I don't exist.   The converse is true as well.   

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

3 minutes ago, PDS said:

So you were ignored because you lost the argument?

David,

No, silly.

I was ignored because what I wanted done wasn't even considered.

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

7 minutes ago, PDS said:

In this case, however, I think you are demonstrably wrong.   Barack Obama won the 2008 election, in part, by seeking to end the Iraq War.   Then he got elected.  Then he withdrew our forces.   That ended the Iraq War.   In this context, I don't understand your "talk versus do thing" point. 

David,

Barack Obama is the essence of the Endless War machine.

If you don't know what that means, I fear we are too mired in words and I will "lose arguments."

So like a coward, I will tuck tail and run.

I am in terror of being out-worded.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

David,

"Our forces" ended the Iraq War--almost. Their withdrawal made room for the subsequent mess. Essentially that's what happened too in Vietnam and was a good reason--not the only good reason--not to invade Iraq in 2003, which I was absolutely against then even though I could hardly imagine the extent of the unintended consequences.

--Brant

sorry for intruding on your argument

[PDS]

1 minute ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

No, silly.

I was ignored because what I wanted done wasn't even considered.

 

Michael

Hmmm.  I'm certain the arguments for (1) not starting the war(s) and (2) ending the wars were and have been considered.

I'm missing your point here.   

[Mikee]

" What I don't think exists are persuasive arguments in favor of Trump becoming our President. "

Given 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result'...

Perhaps the best argument is the people supporting Trump are not insane.

[PDS]

1 minute ago, Brant Gaede said:

David,

"Our forces" ended the Iraq War--almost. Their withdrawal made room for the subsequent mess. Essentially that's what happened too in Vietnam and was a good reason--not the only good reason--not to invade Iraq in 2003, which I was absolutely against then even though I could hardly imagine the extent of the unintended consequences.

--Brant

sorry for intruding on your argument

Agreed, Brant.  On all fronts--no pun intended. 

[Brant Gaede]

42 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

There's no guarantee that Trump will win, but if he doesn't, a great dismantling will occur amongst the elites and intelligentsia. I guarantee that.

Ah, the best argument for Trump losing?

--Brant

it's a good one

[PDS]

9 minutes ago, Mikee said:

" What I don't think exists are persuasive arguments in favor of Trump becoming our President. "

Given 'The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result'...

Perhaps the best argument is the people supporting Trump are not insane.

I don't think the Trump supporters are insane.    From what I can tell, their concern for the state of the Republic is nearly spot on.   

I just don't think Trump is the right change agent for the expression of that pathos.    My biggest fear of Trump is that he actually make things far worse than they are.

But as for your quote from Einstein, I don't think that applies here.   The sample size is too small. 

[Brant Gaede]

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

Yup.

I was ignored, too.

That's one of the reasons I know what I know. The reason you don't know it is because you don't believe it exists, yet.

I have a piece of advice, and I'm not being snarky. If you have sympathies with the elites and the intelligentsia (and there are lots of good people who do, not just the evil bastards), cling to Cruz with all your might and soul.

Cruz is half Trojan horse, a Bush dude underneath. He's got an inconvenient ideology for the Vested Interests, but he's also being bought and paid for by them. They'll make sure he keeps their con game running.

Trump won't. He's going to dismantle the Endless War machine and a whole lot of other rot. And that's a lot of change. I can understand how this scares people.

Michael

Is he going to dismantle this country's ability to defend itself too?

--Brant

the world wants to know

[Brant Gaede]

32 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

David,

Barack Obama is the essence of the Endless War machine.

If you don't know what that means, I fear we are too mired in words and I will "lose arguments."

So like a coward, I will tuck tail and run.

I am in terror of being out-worded.

Michael

This is true--about our Great Leader. This machine is a Cold War leftover running on bureaucratic inertia, something that infects the entire Federal bureaucracy. The idiot at the top who did the most damage was BushII. With super-smart Cruz we may end up with a super-Bush. With Clinton a jejune Bush. With Sanders, no Bush. With Trump--a stumblebum.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

34 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

Is he going to dismantle this country's ability to defend itself too?

--Brant

the world wants to know

Brant,

Go to any YouTube video where Trump is speaking his talking points.

He always says he is going to beef up the military and make it so powerful, we will not have to use it because nobody will mess with us.

And he's going to make sure the people who will have to use military equipment will get the equipment they actually want and need, not overpriced crap or boondoggles jiggered and greased through the system.

He often repeats Reagan's phrase of "peace through strength."

He says it so often, it's kinda hard to miss...

If anyone knows how to deal with equipment suppliers and getting projects done right, Trump does.

Michael

[william.scherk]

5 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

On a more serious note, this one is more policy oriented while still entertaining (a political cartoon). I hope this trend continues with him. I think it's a great way to force the mainstream media to keep these policy problems front and center. [...]

I think the cartoon adequately describes the Trump policy towards Syrian refugees. Here below is the policy in poetry.

On Syria refugee policy, the Trump plan is more-or-less supported by a majority of GOP voters, though not presently a great majority of You People. The Syrians are (potentially) poisonous snakes. Not importing poisonous snakes seems a no-brainer.  So the policy plan is simple. It is potent. It is laden  with (some) justifiable fears and loathings.  

For a measure of the Trumpfian argument againsts The Snakes, the white racialist site Vdare spins the Trump trope into pure gold:

Today’s cutesy moppets may become Allah’s mass murderers of tomorrow.

 

[dldelancey]

44 minutes ago, PDS said:

I don't think the Trump supporters are insane.    From what I can tell, their concern for the state of the Republic is nearly spot on.   

I just don't think Trump is the right change agent for the expression of that pathos.    My biggest fear of Trump is that he actually make things far worse than they are.

But as for your quote from Einstein, I don't think that applies here.   The sample size is too small. 

What would the right change agent look like?  What characteristics would he or she have?  Which things do you think will be worse and how much worse?

Personally, I haven't chosen someone to support yet, but on the topic of Trump and change agents, I suspect that he does indeed have what is needed to express the pathos.  I think it is going to take someone like him, if not him in particular.  Mostly because there is no time for an Overton Window.  The pendulum seems to be set to swing very far and very fast. 

[Peter]

Thanks, Michael for the Mark Levin podcast. I do not fear a Cruz Presidency. I truly worry about Trump. But like Mark Levin I would vote for him if Cruz were not available. I happened to accidentally listen to Levin briefly last night as I drove around 7pm EST. He really blasted “Trump surrogates” who were saying if Cruz was against New York values then he was against The NYPD and New York firefighters. Levin methodically laid out the case that the exact opposite was the truth. The biggest liars are Trump and his Trumpsters.

Peter