Donald Trump

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

2 minutes ago, turkeyfoot said:

I, Louisana Cajun cook guarantee he would have better success, if only he better understood the principals involved...

Geoff,

Better success?

You mean like he might be winning the election in today's incredibly corrupt process?

That, of course, was a smartass comment because Trump is winning the election in today's incredibly corrupt process. I'm just communing with my inner smartass.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I just received the following link offline.

It's to Scott Adams's blog (Scott Adams is the Dilbert guy).

Ayatollah So
Scott Adams
April 14, 2016

The first three paragraphs are especially perceptive of the entire primary con game during the last few decades--that is until this election.

Adams said:

In Iran you can vote for anyone for President so long as that person has been approved by the Ayatollah Khameini. We Americans call that system a dictatorship.

Voters in America recently discovered that they live under an Iranian type of system and didn’t know it. In the primaries, voters participate in some sort of ritualistic placebo voting while party leaders select the candidates. In the general election, the richest and smartest of the elite use money and psychology to brainwash the masses into imagining they have independent opinions and that their votes matter. We call that a republic.

Everything was going fine until Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders ripped the cover off of the American system and showed it to be more illusion than democracy/republic. In a way, this is the first contested election in our lifetimes. And by that I mean citizens are trying to wrestle control from the big money interests driving the political parties.

The thing is, Trump is winning it despite the con. (I love that phrase Adams came up with: placebo voting.)

And one way to explode a con is to rip the covers off in a credible fashion. It's like covert persuasion. Once people know--and believe--that you are deceiving them, they stop trusting you and giving you the power to do that. Which means the con, or the persuasion, doesn't work anymore.

Hat tip to my friend (who I will name if he ever wants to be named, but until then, I will respect his privacy).

We are not yet Iran...

Michael

[Selene]

However, we sure have been slowly, incrementally walking the road to tyranny for quite a few decades.

[BaalChatzaf]

36 minutes ago, Selene said:

However, we sure have been slowly, incrementally walking the road to tyranny for quite a few decades.

And we will continue to do so for decades to come.  Tyranny in the U.S.  has not yet made the country unlivable 

[Robert Campbell]

2 hours ago, PDS said:

It would be nice if a man who inherited a bunch of money, has been rich all his life, has had almost every conceivable good break, and really has nothing to complain about were more generous in his dealings with others.  If Trump gave off that vibe more often, he would get more benefit of the doubt when stubbing his toes.

True.

But he isn't likely to become more generous all of a sudden.

Robert

[Robert Campbell]

5 hours ago, Peter said:

If I can make the candidates promise to do as they say during the campaign, what would you make each of them promise? They will know in advance that the truth-alizer has been turned on so from this point forward they can only speak the truth and fight mightily, if elected, to keep their promises. Mindy, what would you make them promise?

Well, if it were up to me, I wouldn't make Donald Trump repeat his promise that Social Security and Medicare, which MUST BE PRESERVED, will never be cut.

Oh well.

Why do I think that, if elected, this is one promise Trump will actually try to make good on?

Robert

[KorbenDallas]

Rove debunking the Politico story:

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

17 minutes ago, KorbenDallas said:

Rove debunking the Politico story...

Korben,

Thank God!

Still, I think it's BS both ways. Rove will sing Trump if his masters turn around and sing Trump.

Notice his big honking qualification at the end, that his personal views are not those of American Crossroads.

Hmmmm... That wasn't the only qualification... American Crossroads will not work with primaries, only the general election... and wait... there were a few other qualifications...

You know... the more I think about it, the more I see that Rove's statement is an excellent specimen of how to appear to say something without saying a goddam thing at all. This guy's good...

 

Michael

[KorbenDallas]

1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Korben,

Thank God!

Agreed!  Seems like Trump would share that sentiment.  This is from 2012:

Congrats to @KarlRove on blowing $400 million this cycle. Every race @CrossroadsGPS ran ads in, the Republicans lost. What a waste of money.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 7, 2012

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

I just caught this and I let out a big long belly-laugh. It's a little old (from September of last year), but I missed it the first time around. Or if I didn't miss it, I thought it was too silly to comment on at the time.

Trump and the Meaning of Egoism
by Peter Schwartz
09/28/2015
The Huffington Post

I could quote this thing and rip it to shreds, but it ain't worth it. I like the comic value too much.

Schwartz claims Trump lacks self-esteem.

I can't even write that without laughing.  

Peter Schwartz! The man at the Huffington Post who bills himself as "Distinguished Fellow, Ayn Rand Institute." Check the link, you'll see it. The man who's gotta call himself "distinguished" in public because no one else will. 

 

In other words, this pontification on the self-esteem of others is levied by the man (Schwartz) who does little except attack others cloaked in the mantle of Rand's ideas, not his own, about a man (Trump) who has literally reshaped large chunks of the earth in his own image.

What planet does Schwartz live on? Get rid of his Randian jargon and what does self-esteem even look like to this "distinguished fellow"? Not my self-esteem, that's for damn sure.

Ya' gotta love the crazies...

Here's a question for ya'. What kind of world would you like to live in? A Trump golf course or luxury hotel, or a clique of neurotic bickering underachievers where you have to get past "distinguished fellow" gatekeepers like Peter Schwartz to get in?

It's your call since it's your life, but in my view, it's also a matter of self-esteem...

 

Michael

[BaalChatzaf]

2 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I just caught this and I let out a big long belly-laugh. It's a little old (from September of last year), but I missed it the first time around. Or if I didn't miss it, I thought it was too silly to comment on at the time.

Trump and the Meaning of Egoism
by Peter Schwartz
09/28/2015
The Huffington Post

I could quote this thing and rip it to shreds, but it ain't worth it. I like the comic value too much.

Schwartz claims Trump lacks self-esteem.

I can't even write that without laughing.  

Peter Schwartz! The man at the Huffington Post who bills himself as "Distinguished Fellow, Ayn Rand Institute." Check the link, you'll see it. The man who's gotta call himself "distinguished" in public because no one else will. 

 

In other words, this pontification on the self-esteem of others is levied by the man (Schwartz) who does little except attack others cloaked in the mantle of Rand's ideas, not his own, about a man (Trump) who has literally reshaped large chunks of the earth in his own image.

What planet does Schwartz live on? Get rid of his Randian jargon and what does self-esteem even look like to this "distinguished fellow"? Not my self-esteem, that's for damn sure.

Ya' gotta love the crazies...

Here's a question for ya'. What kind of world would you like to live in? A Trump golf course or luxury hotel, or a clique of neurotic bickering underachievers where you have to get past "distinguished fellow" gatekeepers like Peter Schwartz to get in?

It's your call since it's your life, but in my view, it's also a matter of self-esteem...

 

Michael

For Trump hardly anything exists  other than himself.  That is an overdose of "self esteem".

[Peter]

PDS wrote: . . . and really has nothing to complain about were more generous in his dealings with others.  If Trump gave off that vibe more often, he would get more benefit of the doubt when stubbing his toes. end quote

Good thinking. By now Trump could have had several endowments to PBS for shows like Downton Abbey. Maybe not Downton – is it too close to home for Scrooge McDuck? No, let me change his PBS endowment to “Call The Midwife.” A show dramatizing struggling, lower class, British women. It’s not too late! It would appeal to the US female vote. And he could start some schools for the gifted in third world countries, and plant a tree in Israel. Co-write a pro USA spy and anti terrorist novel? More trips to the border? A Trump wing on Shriner’s Hospital for Children? A second slogan like, “Wake Up America!”

The cynical object of this assumption is to look generous to the voters, but it also could reflect the deeply held beliefs of the candidate.  

Peter   

[Peter]

Would Trump live within his salary as President? Or would he appear ostentatious, using our money and his own wealth?

Quote: Since 2001, the president has earned a $400,000 annual salary, along with a $50,000 annual expense account, a $100,000 nontaxable travel account, and $19,000 for entertainment. end quote

Every President and first lady has been criticized for changing something in the White House. If he holds true to form, Trump will try to suit himself and then he will jokingly, but bitterly, complain to the American people because he doesn’t have the power to add another wing to the White House, or to knock out walls and redesign.

(Would Don Corleone Trump deliberately set a fire so he could redesign? That’s a joke. Hillary Clinton though? I can see her doing hideous things and not satisfied with her currently owned 100 million dollars in bribes, she might leave the White House with a cool billion dollars in graft, and America in a terrible decline or in more of those endless wars.)

Peter

A Full Time Dedicated Medical Team. Since the American Revolution, the official physician to the president, as director of the White House Medical Unit created in 1945, has provided what the White House calls "worldwide emergency action response and comprehensive medical care to the president, the vice president and their families." Operating from an on-site clinic, the White House Medical Unit also attends to the medical needs of the White House staff and visitors. The official physician to the president, oversees a staff of from 3 to 5 military physicians, nurses, medical assistants and medics. The official physician and some members of his or her staff remain available to the president at all times, in the White House or during presidential trips.

Presidential Retirement and Maintenance. Under the Former Presidents Act, each former president is paid a lifetime, taxable pension that is equal to the annual rate of basic pay for the head of an executive federal department -- $201,700 in 2015 -- the same annual salary paid to secretaries of the Cabinet agencies.

Each former president and vice president may also take advantage of funds allocated by Congress to help facilitate their transition to private life. These funds are used to provide suitable office space, staff compensation, communications services, and printing and postage associated with the transition. As an example, Congress authorized a total of $1.5 million for the transition expenses of outgoing president George H.W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle. The Secret Service provides lifetime protection for former presidents who entered office before January 1, 1997, and for their spouses. Surviving spouses of former presidents receive protection until remarriage. Legislation enacted in 1984 allows former Presidents or their dependents to decline Secret Service protection.

Former Presidents and their spouses, widows, and minor children are entitled to treatment in military hospitals. Health care costs are billed to the individual at a rate established by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Former Presidents and their dependents may also enroll in private health plans at their own expense. In May 2015, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), introduced a bill that would limit the lifetime pension paid to former presidents at $200,000 and remove the current link between presidential pensions and the salary paid to Cabinet secretaries. In addition, Sen. Chaffetz’s Presidential Allowance Modernization Act (H.R. 1777) would reduce the presidential pension by $1 for every dollar over $400,000 per year earned by former presidents from all sources. For example, under Chaffetz’ bill, former President Clinton, who made almost $10 million from speaking fees and book royalties in 2014, would get no government pension or allowance at all.

 

[Peter]

One concern I have is that Trump will call for a bigger budget just as Obama has (except Trump will be saying he is doing really big, really good, really NECESSARY things which will be horse shit.) And we will have Republicans in the House and Senate digging in their heels to no budget increases. He will get government out of the way of business but he will also want to spend more before any benefits of his policies are realized. So, there will be no accord with Paul Ryan and the conservatives in the House. I think they will be at political war as we are now.

Internationally? Isolationist or interventionist? How will the world react to America’s withdrawal from Japan, Korea, and Germany, and our diminishing role in NATO, while we re-stock our military? Will they wonder what we are up to? And then how will a thin skinned and volatile President Trump and Vice President (Cruz, Rubio, Kasich, or Fiorina) react to a hostile environment they helped create?

Do we want a businessman in office if we have another global financial crisis? Maybe.

His grown kids and little kids and grandkids will be in the spotlight. Will Trump wag his finger and scold the world for all the bad press.

Peter       

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

24 minutes ago, Peter said:

Would Trump live within his salary as President?

Peter,

Trump has said several times he will not take a salary.

He'll probably donate it to charity or something. Or make it $1.00.

Michael

[Peter]

If he will have a $1.00 salary, what will he spend of his own money? That supposed generosity won't keep him from spending lavishly, though it does mitigate some of the potential criticism. He may have the allegiance of the National Enquirer, but Conservative Press will continue to push their ideology which is not Trump's, and the Free Willy and Hillary state run media like the Washington Post, ABC, NBC, and CBS will still have the Progressives' backs. Can Trump continue to "Play" the press? I don't think so.

Peter    

[Roger Bissell]

1 hour ago, BaalChatzaf said:

3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I just caught this and I let out a big long belly-laugh. It's a little old (from September of last year), but I missed it the first time around. Or if I didn't miss it, I thought it was too silly to comment on at the time.

Trump and the Meaning of Egoism
by Peter Schwartz
09/28/2015
The Huffington Post

I could quote this thing and rip it to shreds, but it ain't worth it. I like the comic value too much.

Schwartz claims Trump lacks self-esteem.

I can't even write that without laughing.  

Peter Schwartz! The man at the Huffington Post who bills himself as "Distinguished Fellow, Ayn Rand Institute." Check the link, you'll see it. The man who's gotta call himself "distinguished" in public because no one else will. 

 

In other words, this pontification on the self-esteem of others is levied by the man (Schwartz) who does little except attack others cloaked in the mantle of Rand's ideas, not his own, about a man (Trump) who has literally reshaped large chunks of the earth in his own image.

What planet does Schwartz live on? Get rid of his Randian jargon and what does self-esteem even look like to this "distinguished fellow"? Not my self-esteem, that's for damn sure.

Ya' gotta love the crazies...

Here's a question for ya'. What kind of world would you like to live in? A Trump golf course or luxury hotel, or a clique of neurotic bickering underachievers where you have to get past "distinguished fellow" gatekeepers like Peter Schwartz to get in?

It's your call since it's your life, but in my view, it's also a matter of self-esteem...

1

For Trump hardly anything exists  other than himself.  That is an overdose of "self esteem".

 

1. Let me get this straight: Schwartz has been awarded the title by his peers of "Distinguished Fellow." Apparently, they regarded him with enough esteem to award him that title. (I doubt he awarded it to himself.) So, by your way of thinking (?), MSK, the man who is awarded (by his university) the title of Professor Emeritus and uses that title when writing an article or when being introduced is "the man who's gotta call himself "distinguished" in public because no one else will." Well, I suppose you would also reason (?) that since I have recently been named a research fellow at an institute, if I used my title like Schwartz or the emeritus prof does his, I would similarly demonstrate my lack of self-esteem - and thus really be laughable and crazy if I commented on the lack of self-esteem of someone you, MSK, admire. Good fricking god - I would expect such an attitude from an envious, low-self-esteem "under-achiever." What's your excuse? 

2. The clique of "neurotic bickering underachievers" you're referring to have turned out an awful lot of books in the past decade. How many of them have you read? Schwartz himself has published one on foreign policy and one on ethics. How many books or articles have you published, MSK, and where might one purchase them? 

3. When was the last time you had a gatekeeper problem with ARI? Why were you wanting to get in? Was this before or after you discerned what a pathetic group of neurotic underachievers they were? 

REB

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

59 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said:

How many books or articles have you published, MSK, and where might one purchase them?

Roger,

That's actually a fair question.

I working on it.

I just got this Trumpian thing that the first has to be huuuuuuuuge, so I keep pissing myself off by constantly raising the bar.

For the time being, there's this stuff here on OL. Not book quality for my standards, but definitely readable. I haven't counted between my posts on OL and everywhere else, but I wager they go over 10,000 posts. A large chunk of them are article-length. And, of course, they're all free.

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

57 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said:

Good fricking god - I would expect such an attitude from an envious, low-self-esteem "under-achiever." What's your excuse?

Roger,

Blah blah blah...

I would celebrate Schwartz's achievements, but not within the context of him preaching about the pathetic soul of his superiors.

Shall we talk about Schwartz's book sales numbers, for example?

Believe me, without charity, ARI would not have any impact at all on the culture. And that's impressive considering one of the purposes of ARI is to preach the benefits of capitalism. But ARI gets charity, so it can give away Rand's writing to schools and that's the gross of its cultural impact. Not all, but the vast majority.

People like Trump do it the hard way, the way Ayn Rand herself did it--on the open market with buying customers for income.

Notice that both Rand and Trump have left lasting widespread impacts on the culture. And the people impacted paid them for the pleasure. 

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

The more more the more more you have--like self esteem?

--Brant

going thru life more and more confused

if you keep self esteem in your ass it comes out like gas (this is not apropos the discussion--I just can't help it)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, Roger Bissell said:

The clique of "neurotic bickering underachievers" you're referring to have turned out an awful lot of books in the past decade.

Roger,

Of course you're referring to bestsellers like Rand produced, right?

 

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

56 minutes ago, Roger Bissell said:

Schwartz has been awarded the title by his peers of "Distinguished Fellow." Apparently, they regarded him with enough esteem to award him that title. (I doubt he awarded it to himself.)

Roger,

Be very careful. Schwartz was in on the creation of ARI from the beginning. Maybe he did or maybe he didn't award himself the title, but you can bet he was one of the principals setting the award up.

Here.

Do you want a title? They're not that hard to come by.

How about Roger Bissell, "Distinguished OL Fellow"? How does that sound to ya'? Nice ring to it?

You have my permission to go around advertising yourself as such. I'll even draw up a certificate if you like.

Now you can compete. One day you might even become as great as Peter Schwartz.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

19 hours ago, BaalChatzaf said:

And we will continue to do so for decades to come.  Tyranny in the U.S.  has not yet made the country unlivable 

Depends on who you are. What you are. Who you know. Where you can go. What you know. What you can bear. Etc.

--Brant

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Take that, Romney!

 

 

Michael

[Peter]

Mitt's niece is a real renegade. But I suppose she wants get more attention for the guy she supports. 

Monica is back in the news talking about her experience while being in the public eye. She says women can be bullies too, so I hope she more explicitly names Hillary as a bully. Since the NY primary is so close, maybe she will blast the Clintons. I think Bill was a skunk too for that matter. He left a bitter taste . . . Everyone said at the time, “This sounds like school girl antics,” and it was - but she was acting very recklessly. When I was her age I acted impulsively but I never sought out the circumstances guaranteeing a scandal. If she had just been shy, who knows? She still looks gorgeous in her forties. I hope she finds happiness, forgiveness, and revenge.

I was proud of Rush at the time, with his saying something like, It is day 70 of the crumbling of America or something deliberately pompous and overbl . . . ooops.

Peter