ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points -- Dragging Up Dead Racists

[ Posted Friday, June 21st, 2019 – 17:49 UTC ]

Joe Biden drew a huge target on himself this week, with his comments on getting along with stone-cold racists in the United States Senate. Conservative commenter Ana Navarro perhaps best summed up Biden's error, criticizing him for "dragging up these dead racists instead of talking about the live racists."

Biden's gaffe came at an inopportune time for him, seeing as how the first Democratic debates are now less than a week away. All the other candidates had been struggling with whether to attack Biden next week, since he is so well-beloved by Democratic voters. Biden is the clear frontrunner in the race at this point, regularly polling many multiples of the numbers of almost all the other candidates (excepting perhaps Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, whom Biden only outpolls by a factor of two). It was tough, before Biden stepped in it, for the other candidates to develop any debate strategy for taking Biden down a peg. But that just got a whole lot easier, due to Biden's own words.

Here are the remarks that got Biden into so much hot water, courtesy of Salon:

Biden pointed out that his ability to work with segregationists like former Mississippi Sen. James O. Eastland and Georgia Sen. Herman Talmadge showed that he could "bring people together," The Washington Post reported.

"I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland," Biden said. "He never called me 'boy,' he always called me 'son.'" He also cited Talmadge, calling him "one of the meanest guys I ever knew."

"Well, guess what?" Biden said. "At least there was some civility. We got things done. We didn't agree on much of anything. We got things done. We got it finished. But today, you look at the other side and you're the enemy. Not the opposition -- the enemy. We don't talk to each other anymore."

. . .

Sen. Cory Booker of New Jersey, one of Biden's Democratic opponents, issued a statement condemning the former vice president's comment.

"You don't joke about calling black men 'boys,'" said Booker, who is black. "Men like James O. Eastland used words like that, and the racist policies that accompanied them, to perpetuate white supremacy and strip black Americans of our very humanity."

"Vice President Biden's relationship with proud segregationists are not the model for how we make America a safer and more inclusive place for black people, and for everyone," Booker added. "And frankly, I'm disappointed that he hasn't issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans. He should."

The Washington Post reported what happened next, as Biden responded to Booker by doubling down:

Taking a page from the Trump playbook, Biden took umbrage and demanded that Booker apologize to him for asking him to apologize. "Cory should apologize," he said. "He knows better. There's not a racist bone in my body; I've been involved in civil rights my whole career. Period. Period. Period."

This effort at damage control appears to be making matters worse. Booker, whose parents faced racial discrimination when trying to move into a white neighborhood in New Jersey, appeared on CNN in the 10 p.m. hour and responded with a riff that had the tone of being more in sorrow than in anger. "The fact that he has said something that an African American man could find very offensive and then to turn around and say, you know, 'I'm not a racist, you should apologize to me' is so insulting and so missing the larger point that he should not have to have explained to him," Booker told Don Lemon. "He knows better. And at a time when Donald Trump never apologizes for anything, he's better than this."

Other 2020 rivals piled on: Kamala Harris said Biden "doesn't understand the history of our country." Elizabeth Warren said it's "never okay to celebrate segregationists." Bernie Sanders tweeted that he agrees with Booker: "This is especially true at a time when the Trump administration is trying to divide us up with its racist appeals." New York Mayor Bill de Blasio invoked his mixed-race family.

You don't have to look at Eastland's record very hard to find examples of stone-cold racism, as Bill de Blasio's tweet painfully pointed out:

It's 2019 & @JoeBiden is longing for the good old days of "civility" typified by James Eastland. Eastland thought my multiracial family should be illegal & that whites were entitled to "the pursuit of dead n*ggers." It's past time for apologies or evolution from @JoeBiden. He repeatedly demonstrates that he is out of step with the values of the modern Democratic Party.

Biden's gaffe was problematic on many levels, of course, but we wrote a whole article yesterday examining the political fallout, so you can check that out if you want to know how we really feel about Biden's inept examples.

Biden wasn't the only Democrat on the hot seat this week, but his seat was definitely the hottest. James Clyburn, a respected African-American congressional leader, accused Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer of "tokenism" in their office's hiring practices, which just isn't true. He later had to issue an apology for his false accusation.

And Marianne Williamson, who is an actual presidential candidate (because why not?), seemed to side with the anti-vaxxers this week. She hastily tried to walk her comments back, but the damage had already been done at that point. When initially asked about the controversy surrounding vaccination, her first response was:

"To me, it's no different than the abortion debate," Williamson reportedly said in New Hampshire. "The U.S. government doesn't tell any citizen, in my book, what they have to do with their body or their child." But the presidential candidate and self-help author walked back the comments over Twitter. "I understand that many vaccines are important and save lives. I recognize there are epidemics around the world that are stopped by vaccines," Williamson wrote. "I am sorry that I made comments which sounded as though I question the validity of life-saving vaccines. That is not my feeling and I realize that I misspoke."

She also claimed that mandatory vaccination was "Draconian" and "Orwellian." A columnist from the Guardian later pointed out: "George Orwell died from tuberculosis, a disease since made preventable by a vaccine."

Of course, any missteps on the Democratic side of things absolutely pales in comparison to the idiocies regularly emanating from the White House these days. It's tough to even keep track of them, in fact. These are all from the past week alone, we should mention.

President Trump promised a new healthcare plan (that will never appear). As the Washington Post helpfully pointed out:

You might recall that about three months ago, Trump claimed that he had assigned a couple of Republican senators to come up with a health-care plan, and it would be ready real soon. But there was no plan, and there was never going to be a plan. This new plan, coming in a month or two? It's not coming, either.

Why not? Two basic reasons. First, Republicans in general and Trump in particular don't care enough about the issue to put any energy into it. Second and more important, they know that what they'd like to do on health care is so incredibly unpopular that actually laying it out would be politically catastrophic, as they learned when they tried and failed to "repeal and replace" the [Affordable Care Act] in 2017.

Speaking of healthcare, Donald Trump Junior lambasted Joe Biden for promising that he'd "cure cancer" if elected, at Trump's Orlando rally this week. Right before Junior's daddy promised exactly the same thing. You'd think they could get their stories straight, wouldn't you?

"There's something off with that guy," Trump Jr. said. "What was the good one last week? Remember? Joe Biden comes out, 'Well, if you elect me president, I'm going to cure cancer.' Wow, why the hell didn't you do that over the last 50 years, Joe?"

To be fair, curing all cancer is going to very difficult since there's no one-size-fits-all solution to the disease.

Still, that didn't stop the president from making the exact same promise during his own speech.

"We will push onward with new medical frontiers. We will come up with the cures to many, many problems, to many, many diseases -- including cancer and others," Trump said. "And we're getting closer all the time."

Trump instituted fictional sanctions against Iran:

The White House did not impose new sanctions against Iran on Thursday in response to its downing of a U.S. military drone, contrary to President Trump's assertion in a Twitter post Friday morning.

Trump's statement of new penalties against Iran came during a string of Twitter posts, in which he explained his decision to stop - at the last minute - military attack against Iran.

"Sanctions are biting & more added last night," he wrote. "Iran can NEVER have Nuclear Weapons, not against the USA, and not against the WORLD!"

But no such sanctions were imposed.

Trump took credit for something John McCain and Barack Obama accomplished, while swearing that McCain and Obama "couldn't get it [done]."

President Donald Trump often fabricates accomplishments for himself and at times falsely strips them from others, but a new lie manages both: Claiming nonexistent credit for a veterans program that his late nemesis Sen. John McCain actually did help create.

"The vets -- the VA was in horrible shape. Now, they have choice. And nobody could get choice," he told ABC News recently. "John McCain couldn't get it. Nobody could get it. They tried for years. They couldn't get it. I got choice for the vets."

In fact, the provision of the law that Trump touts most often -- the ability of veterans to get private medical care if VA waitlists were too long -- was something that McCain specifically pushed for and eventually won in his negotiations with then-Veterans' Affairs Committee chairman, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

. . .

Following the compromise struck by McCain and Sanders, the legislation passed both chambers and on Aug. 7, 2014, was signed into law by then-President Barack Obama -- notwithstanding Trump's repeated false claims that the "VA choice" law was something that he himself achieved.

"They have trying to get it passed for 44 years. We got it passed," he told a rally audience in Panama City, Florida, last month.

"We passed VA choice," he repeated to an Orlando audience on Tuesday. "You go out now, you get a doctor, you fix yourself up, the doctor sends us the bill, we pay for it and you know what? It doesn't matter because the life and the veteran is more important."

A former speechwriter for John McCain reacted with disgust to Trump's false claim: "He has no ethics of any kind."

And then there was just the garden-variety idiocies from Trump. Such as misspelling while bragging: "We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights." He ought to set his "sites" a little lower, one supposes.

Trump caused much merriment online when he pointed out that the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (or "drone") that was shot down was unmanned: "We didn't have a man or woman in the drone. We had nobody in the drone. It would have made a big difference, let me tell you. It would have made a big, big difference." Yes, it would have, because a drone with a man or woman in it is called "an airplane." As many pointed out.

Then there were idiocies from Trump's past, proving once again that there is always a former Trump tweet which contradicts just about anything he's now for. Way back when, Trump warned repeatedly that: "In order to get elected, @Barack Obama will start a war with Iran," and: "Obama will someday attack Iran in order to show how tough he is," and the priceless: "Remember that I predicted a long time ago that President Obama will attack Iran because of his inability to negotiate properly -- not skilled!"

Chuck Schumer voiced Democrats' current fears over the Iran situation much more elegantly: "These conflicts have a way of escalating. The president may not intend to go to war here, but we're worried that he and the administration may bumble into a war."

The Senate was busy this week pushing back on another of Trump's war decisions, as they voted 53-45 to strip Trump of the power to move forward on his arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Trump will doubtlessly veto this if it passes the House, but seven Republican senators went on the record defying Trump.

What else? Roy Moore announced he'll be running for the Senate again, much to the dismay of the entire rest of the Republican Party (from Trump on down). The most scathing reaction came from Senator Martha McSally, Republican from Arizona: "Give me a break. This place already has enough creepy old men."

And finally, while the Supreme Court ruled this week that a Christian cross can stay on public land in Bladensburg, Maryland, please remember that that knife cuts both ways. A regional governmental meeting in Alaska this week was opened with an invocation by a member of the Satanic Temple: "That which will not bend, must break, and that which can be destroyed by truth should never be spared as demise. It is done. Hail Satan." Because if government opens its doors to things like religious prayers before meetings, then those doors must be open to all religions. In other words: All hail the Establishment Clause!

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

We have two Honorable Mention awards to hand out this week, and then a retroactive Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award that we really should have handed out last week.

Cory Booker deserves an Honorable Mention, for getting out in front of all the criticism of Joe Biden's remarks on civility in Washington. While Kamala Harris and Bill de Blasio also weighed in (both Booker and Harris are black, and de Blasio is married to a black woman), Booker was the one whose critical words resonated the most with Biden himself. Booker hasn't had many standout moments on the campaign trail to date, but this time he showed some real leadership and "spoke truth to power" as it were. He will not be on the same stage with Biden next week (they drew different days), but since Booker's debate will happen first, he may use the opportunity to define the response from those who disagreed with Biden without having to say any of it directly to Biden's face. So we're looking forward to that.

Amy Klobuchar also deserves an Honorable Mention, for her attempt at catching up to Elizabeth "I've Got A Plan For That" Warren. Klobuchar released her "first 100 days" agenda, which was breathtakingly extensive in its breadth. Not so much in its depth, but even so.... here's Politico's reaction to her agenda:

Sen. Amy Klobuchar wants the U.S. to reenter the Paris climate agreement, raise the minimum wage for federal contractors to $15 an hour and require publicly traded companies to disclose all political spending over $10,000 to their shareholders -- and that's just three out of 137 ideas she wants to put forward in her first 100 days as president.

On Tuesday, the Democratic presidential candidate released an exhaustive list of policy prescriptions -- more than 137 bullet points, extending over 17 single-spaced pages -- that she would prioritize in the first months of her administration, if elected. Klobuchar's plans run from extending veterans benefits to their infants to restoring the Clean Power Plan, a set of Obama-era environmental protections.

One-hundred and thirty seven! Whew! Although the article did note: "While Klobuchar's list of 100-day priorities indicates the breadth of her policy plans, it's also light on the details." Even so, promises of executive actions are going to be important, because even if the Democrats win the White House back, they're still going to have to deal with Republicans in the Senate, one way or another.

But our Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award goes to none other than Jon Stewart, who testified a week ago on the shameful delay in passing legislation to guarantee lifetime support for the first responders to 9/11. His testimony was one of those rare events in Washington where members of Congress had to sit and listen to a private citizen expose their shameful behavior for the world to see. There was no reason at all for all the delays in getting this money appropriated, other than Mitch McConnell using it as a political pawn to extract concessions from Democrats. Which Stewart accurately pointed out.

McConnell then tried to sidestep the blame, but Stewart was having none of it. After McConnell's dismissive comments, Stewart sent another broadside in his direction (which McConnell richly deserved). There is only one word for McConnell's behavior, and that is "shameful," and Stewart used the megaphone of his own celebrity to point it out for all to see.

Which is why he really should have gotten the Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week last week, and which is why we're awarding it to him this week, to make up for our own indefensible delay. Well done, Mr. Stewart, well done!

[Jon Stewart is not a politician, so you'll have to search for his contact information yourself in order to let him know you appreciate his efforts.]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

We have two (Dis-)Honorable Mention awards before we get to the main event this week.

The first goes to a former aide to Senator Maggie Hassan, who is going to pay a steep price for crossing a big ethical line:

A former aide to Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) was sentenced to four years in prison Wednesday for hacking Senate computers and releasing personal information online about five Republican senators out of anger spurred by their roles in the confirmation hearings for Justice Brett Kavanaugh. U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan said the sentence for Jackson Cosko, 27, was needed to send a signal that criminal harassment driven by political motives would be punished severely in an era marked by extreme political polarization.... In April, Cosko pleaded guilty to five felonies, admitting that after being fired last year from his work as a systems administrator on Hassan's staff, he repeatedly used a colleague's key to enter the office, install keylogging equipment that stole work and personal email passwords, and downloaded a massive trove of data from Senate systems.

Our second (Dis-)Honorable Mention goes to Pete Buttigieg, who (while eclipsed by the whole Biden fracas) seems to be having his own problems addressing racial issues. He broke away from the campaign trail this week to return to South Bend, Indiana, after a police shooting there caused an outcry. But, like John McCain before him, he proved that these "interrupting my campaign" stunts can backfire badly:

Instead of showcasing Buttigieg's ability to lead through a crisis, however, the shooting is exposing what has long been considered an Achilles' heel of his candidacy: his frosty relationship with South Bend's black residents. Since arriving on Sunday, Buttigieg has alienated the family of the dead man, Eric Logan, 54, skipped a vigil at the scene of the shooting, and sought advice from outsiders, including the Rev. Al Sharpton of New York..... The shooting has handed Buttigieg the first significant challenge of his charmed campaign. To allies, his decision to leave the campaign trail and then hold two days of private meetings signals deliberate, considerate leadership. But to detractors, including many of South Bend's black activists, his actions show that he still doesn't get it.

Which brings us, in a roundabout way, back to the travails of Joe Biden, who is our winner of this week's Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week award. But not for the reason you might think.

We're not actually giving Biden the MDDOTW for his comments on palling around with racist senators this week, because we think the response from other Democratic candidates has already been sufficient. Instead, we are giving Biden the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week for some other comments he made at the same fundraiser. Biden was speaking to a crowd of Wall Street fatcats, in an effort to get them to generously donate all the money they could to his campaign. And he wanted to let them know that, if he became president, they would still be feeling the love from Washington. And no, that is not an exaggeration. Here is how Politico reported his remarks to the plutocrats:

Former Vice President Joe Biden told a room of affluent New York donors on Tuesday night that he doesn't think it's appropriate to "demonize" the rich.

"You know, what I've found is rich people are just as patriotic as poor people. Not a joke. I mean, we may not want to demonize anybody who has made money," Biden told about 100 donors at the Carlyle Hotel on the Upper East Side, multiple media outlets reported.

"We can disagree in the margins, but the truth of the matter is it's all within our wheelhouse and nobody has to be punished. No one's standard of living will change," he continued, addressing a well-heeled group, including former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, former Deputy Treasury Secretary Roger Altman, and Goldman Sachs Chief Financial Officer Stephen Scherr, according to reports.

So not only will Biden not raise their taxes, he'll also vigorously defend the patriotism of the downtrodden demographic that is rich people. Because it's so unseemly that other Democrats would (gasp!) demonize them. Salon also reported how downright servile his comments got, at the end:

Biden's assurance to donors in New York came shortly after his appearance at the Poor People's Campaign Presidential Forum in Washington on Monday.

Biden said that poverty was "the one thing that can bring this country down" and listed several new programs to help the poor that he would fund if elected.

"We have all the money we need to do it," he said.

But speaking to wealthy donors in New York, Biden appeared to suggest that his plan would not involve big tax hikes on the rich.

"I mean, we may not want to demonize anybody who has made money," he said. "The truth of the matter is, you all, you all know, you all know in your gut what has to be done. We can disagree in the margins but the truth of the matter is it's all within our wheelhouse and nobody has to be punished. No one's standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change."

Biden went on to say that the rich should not be blamed for income inequality, pleading to the donors, "I need you very badly."

"I hope if I win this nomination, I won't let you down. I promise you," he added.

These comments, obviously, were overshadowed by his other awkward comments to the same group of people. The media and other Democrats focused solely on his praise for antediluvian racist senators, and for good reason. But we'd be willing to bet that Biden's sucking up to Wall Street fatcats will also be brought up during next week's debates, either by Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren (at the very least). Seriously, Joe? "I won't let you down" and "I need you very badly"?!? Wow.

This shows -- with just as much potency -- how out of touch Biden can be with where the energy currently is within the Democratic Party. More and more Democrats are swearing off exactly the kind of deep-pocket fundraising that Biden still "needs very badly" as their own personal way to fight back against pay-to-play politics. But not Biden, obviously.

So even if we ignore the other self-inflicted scandalous remarks Biden made this week, we find that he still qualifies as the Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week, albeit for different reasons. And we look forward to some other Democratic candidate (or perhaps even the moderators) to call Biden out on his tone-deaf comments to the wealthiest of the wealthy this week, during next week's debates.

[Former Vice President Joe Biden is technically a private citizen, and our longstanding policy is not to link to candidate webpages, so you'll have to seek out his contact information on your own if you'd like to let him know what you think of his actions.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 532 (6/21/19)

Speaking of next week's debates, we have a program note before we get to this week's talking points.

There will be no Friday Talking Points column next Friday, due to the debate schedule. We have decided that it would be too hard to post an instant review of each nights' debate, so instead we're going to post our reactions the next day. Since the debates will be held on Wednesday and Thursday, the second one will pre-empt next Friday's column. So we'll see you all back here in two weeks' time, where we'll be able to more accurately gauge the reactions to the first of the Democratic debates. Fair warning.

Oh, and it didn't fit anywhere else, but we have a link to pass along: www.trumpgolfcount.com, which tracks how expensive Trump's golfing habit has been to the American taxpayer (as well as pointing out that Trump's golfing far exceeds Barack Obama's, which Republicans used to love to complain about -- how times change, eh?).

 

1
   Maybe update that example?

Our first talking point this week is suggested for any Democrat running against Joe Biden. It should be expressed "more in sorrow than in anger," in our opinion.

"I would like to suggest to Joe Biden that if he wants to make a point about civility in Washington, he should choose a more modern example than citing senators who were first elected in the 1940s. Perhaps next time Biden wants to talk about Senate civility he could use John McCain's name? Just a suggestion, Joe."

 

2
   Another fine mess he's gotten us into

Here we go again, folks.

"You know, if Donald Trump hadn't pulled out of the Iran deal, then we wouldn't now be on the brink of war. They wouldn't be threatening to enrich more uranium than they had agreed, and they wouldn't be taking belligerent actions towards our military. Trump pulled out of the deal, and things have gone downhill, because Trump has no idea what to do that would be any better than the deal they had already agreed to. Here we are on the brink of war and Trump doesn't even have permanent people in the top two spots in the Pentagon. Once again, Trump proves he is master of the self-inflicted crisis."

 

3
   Trump on the telegraph

Another thing to remind voters of springs to mind.

"When Trump campaigned for president, he swore up and down that he wouldn't ever telegraph to our enemies what he would do next militarily. He denounced Obama for doing so, and promised he'd never do such a thing. Then he apparently ordered a strike on Iran this week, changed his mind at the last minute, and then admitted to the world that he had aborted a strike. This isn't the only area where he's broken his promise not to signal in advance what he was going to do. Remember when he castigated Oakland's mayor for warning of an impending ICE raid? Now he's bragging that he's ordered ICE raids -- next week. Because he thinks he can score some political points. As Trump would put it: 'SAD!'"

 

4
   Empty seats

This one always gets under his skin -- he even helpfully pointed it out in real time.

"Donald Trump held yet another rally down in Florida this week, pretending that his re-election campaign is just beginning. Like his ICE raids, this was probably planned in order to steal some of the Democrats' thunder, since they're holding their debates in Florida next week. Trump bragged that he had not only sold out the arena he appeared in, but that there were thousands waiting outside who couldn't get in. Neither was true, as Trump himself pointed out, drawing attention to all the empty seats in the arena. He can't even get his own lies straight, it seems. Once again: 'SAD!'"

 

5
   How are those tariffs going?

Trump lies about the economy all the time, of course, but this one really needs some pushback.

"U.S. Steel announced this week that it was halting production at two steel mills, in Detroit and in Gary, Indiana. Like American farmers all across the Midwest, the workers in these mills are just more collateral damage from Trump's tariff strategy. Trump was supposed to be the master dealmaker, but all he's done so far is to bring pain and suffering to every industry he tries to help. Which is about par for the course for Trump, given his own lengthy record of business failures."

 

6
   Bernie's right

Bernie Sanders got into a dustup with Third Way, a Democratic centrist group that has warmed to Elizabeth Warren while still heaping scorn on Sanders, even though their agendas are pretty much interchangeable. Third Way is terrified that Republicans will be screaming "Socialism!" but they're obviously going to do that anyway.

"Bernie Sanders is right -- the Republicans are going to call anything Democrats are for 'socialism,' in an attempt to demonize their opponents. Case in point: Mitch McConnell this week cautioned against statehood for Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico, even though the Republican Party platform has always supported Puerto Rican statehood efforts. But McConnell is now aghast at the possibility, warning that those dastardly Democrats, quote: 'plan to make the District of Columbia a state -- that'd give them two new Democratic senators -- Puerto Rico a state, that would give them two more new Democratic senators.... So this is full-bore socialism on the march.' Unquote. Excuse me, Mitch? How in the world is adding new states 'socialism'? If Democrats came out in favor of apple pie and motherhood Republicans would label it a socialistic plot! They've gone bonkers over the word, because it's the only thing they've got left in their fearmongering toolkit. It's sad, really, to see how far the Republican Party has fallen down this rabbit hole."

 

7
   Not morally fit to run a bar

This could get highly amusing, depending on how the board rules.

"A group of clergy members and judges has petitioned the Washington D.C. licensing board to deny Trump a permit to serve alcohol at his Trump International Hotel, on moral grounds. D.C. law states that the holders of liquor licenses must be of 'good character and generally fit for the responsibilities of licensure,' which the group is arguing obviously does not describe Donald Trump. So Trump's Washington hotel might just have to close its bar because the president is morally unfit to serve alcohol to the public. That really says something, doesn't it?"

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

312 Comments on “Friday Talking Points -- Dragging Up Dead Racists”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joe Biden drew a huge target on himself this week, with his comments on getting along with stone-cold racists in the United States Senate. Conservative commenter Ana Navarro perhaps best summed up Biden's error, criticizing him for "dragging up these dead racists instead of talking about the live racists."

    Oh, I'm pretty sure Biden would have received the same treatment from the same people if had been talking about live racists.

    And, they all would have missed the same point. largely due to hypersensitivity, a problem that is on track to making it near impossible to achieve the promise of America.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Biden's gaffe came at an inopportune time for him, seeing as how the first Democratic debates are now less than a week away

    On the contrary, it could be the epitome of perfect timing.

    I'm looking to see Biden take this whole thing head on and knock some sense into people.

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It was tough, before Biden stepped in it, for the other candidates to develop any debate strategy for taking Biden down a peg. But that just got a whole lot easier, due to Biden's own words.

    Ha!

    You may soon want to eat your own words on that score. The rest of the field won't know what hit them.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris, you are at the top of the list of political analysts I respect to the nth degree.

    But, you are wrong about this particular Biden "gaffe". Which you have always described as an inconvenient Washington truth.

    Let's piece together how what Biden probably happened by splicing your paragraph:

    Biden pointed out that his ability to work with segregationists like former Mississippi Sen. James O. Eastland and Georgia Sen. Herman Talmadge showed that he could "bring people together," The Washington Post reported.

    "I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland," Biden said. "He never called me 'boy,' he always called me 'son' … "Well, guess what?" Biden said. "At least there was some civility. We got things done. We didn't agree on much of anything. We got things done. We got it finished."

    Chris, do you seriously believe that Biden was saying that Eastland was complimenting him by calling him 'son' instead of 'boy'?

    If you don't, then you've covered all wrong.

    If you do, then you really must think Biden is an idiot.

    How else can you explain your analysis on this?

  5. [5] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris, you are at the top of the list of political analysts I respect to the nth degree.

    But, you are wrong about this particular Biden "gaffe". Which you have always described as an inconvenient Washington truth.

    Let's piece together how what Biden probably happened by splicing your paragraph:

    "I was in a caucus with James O. Eastland," Biden said. "He never called me 'boy,' he always called me 'son' … "Well, guess what?" Biden said. "At least there was some civility. We got things done. We didn't agree on much of anything. We got things done. We got it finished."

    Chris, do you seriously believe that Biden was saying that Eastland was complimenting him by calling him 'son' instead of 'boy'?

    If you don't, then you've covered all wrong.

    If you do, then you really must think Biden is an idiot.

    How else can you explain your analysis on this?

  6. [6] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Sorry about that.

  7. [7] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    . Cory Booker of New Jersey, one of Biden's Democratic opponents, issued a statement condemning the former vice president's comment.

    "You don't joke about calling black men 'boys,'" said Booker, who is black. "Men like James O. Eastland used words like that, and the racist policies that accompanied them, to perpetuate white supremacy and strip black Americans of our very humanity."

    Cory Booker is simply wrong as he misstates one critical thing:

    Biden wasn't joking about black men being called 'boy'.

    In fact, he was commiserating with black men as being called 'son' by Eastland was, if not as derogatory as a black man being called 'boy' then certainly derogatory enough.

    Biden would agree whole-heartedly with the rest of what Senator Booker said. Except the part about needing a lesson on race relations.

  8. [8] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Taking a page from the Trump playbook.

    You're just gonna have to give me a freaking break on that one.

    Who on the planet should apologize for something they didn't do?

  9. [9] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Feel free to jump in the water everyone - it's not that bad!

  10. [10] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Cannonball!!!!!

  11. [11] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    [Booker] will not be on the same stage with Biden next week (they drew different days), but since Booker's debate will happen first, he may use the opportunity to define the response from those who disagreed with Biden without having to say any of it directly to Biden's face. So we're looking forward to that.

    Without having to say any of it directly to Biden's face. Right. That's real courageous leadership.

    I'm going to make a prediction: when Biden debates he will single out Cory Booker. Not to humiliate or disparage but to make him understand what Biden actually said AND meant.

    Prediction number two: Cory Booker will finally realize that what his analysis about Biden this week has been patently wrong. Lesson learned.

  12. [12] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    [10]

    Indeed!

  13. [13] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Liz (8)-"Who on the planet should apologize for some thing they didn't do?"

    If you ask them, anyone the social warriors without a clue decide did something they didn't do.

  14. [14] 
    Paula wrote:

    CW:

    Biden went on to say that the rich should not be blamed for income inequality, pleading to the donors, "I need you very badly."

    "I hope if I win this nomination, I won't let you down. I promise you," he added.

    Servile is right. Jeebus.

    This shows -- with just as much potency -- how out of touch Biden can be with where the energy currently is within the Democratic Party. More and more Democrats are swearing off exactly the kind of deep-pocket fundraising that Biden still "needs very badly" as their own personal way to fight back against pay-to-play politics. But not Biden, obviously.

    Yep.

  15. [15] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Good choice for MIDOTW award.

    Can Jon Stewart please do the same thing for the despicable things happening, especially to children, at the US border in US custody?

  16. [16] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    "If the government opens it's doors to things like religious prayers before meetings then those doors must be open to all religions."

    Not quite right.

    Those doors must be open to all religious beliefs.

    Not believing in a deity or religion is in itself a religious belief so an atheist should also get a crack at an opening invocation/prayer/statement of religious belief, if they haven't already.

  17. [17] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @cw,

    so... how exactly do you think a candidate ought to convince people to donate money to his or her campaign?

    tell them they're all terrible people and it's their civic duty to make up for it by supporting the campaign to rid them of all their ill-gotten gains?

    tell them to donate because it's not like they have anything better to do with their money?

    post years of abusive solicitation on their blogs?

    offer some excellent pie?

    well, you know which option i'd choose.

    JL

  18. [18] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Just had to write that.

    The Salon article is illuminating. It immediately raised this question to me:

    Did Biden have a tew foo many martooni's before he started shmoozing with the country club crowd? The Salon article is a gift to Saturday Night Live...I see a cold opening in making!

    On the other hand, Biden had better hope the Upper Crust was as liquored up as he was. I mean, if the Plutocrat's were paying attention, they had to be thinking "Wait a tic - was Biden saying the same thing at the Poor People’s Campaign Presidential Forum in Washington on Monday? If so, why is still in one piece?"

    In other words, this incident could be an equal opportunity con job. It would not be the first time a seasoned politician has played that gambit.

    Biden's staff is in for a busy weekend.

  19. [19] 
    Paula wrote:

    [18] TS:

    In other words, this incident could be an equal opportunity con job. It would not be the first time a seasoned politician has played that gambit.

    I mentioned yesterday listening to PodSaveAmerica podcast with Dan Pfeiffer (who worked for Obama) and others.

    Pfeiffer said Biden "always wants to win the room" and therefore says things he knows they want to hear.
    I don't think he's conning people which implies malice aforethought, I think he just falls into it.

    But its not a good thing.

  20. [20] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Other 2020 rivals piled on:

    Kamala Harris said Biden "doesn't understand the history of our country."

    Biden doesn't understand the history of the country!? She can't be serious.

    Elizabeth Warren said it's "never okay to celebrate segregationists."

    Okay, Biden was most decidedly NOT celebrating segregationists. I mean, seriously, just exactly who doesn't understand history.

    Bernie Sanders tweeted that he agrees with Booker: "This is especially true at a time when the Trump administration is trying to divide us up with its racist appeals."

    Well, that's rich. Biden was actually making a point about the opposite of division. Does Sanders actually believe Biden was engaged in making racist appeals?

    New York Mayor Bill de Blasio invoked his mixed-race family.

    And, I'm not sure I understand the mayor's point. But, I am beginning to see why it has been so hard for America to come to terms with its racist past.

  21. [21] 
    TheStig wrote:

    SO - how does Biden deal with his equal opportunity pandering problem if pressed at the debate?

    Take a leaf from JFK. "A rising tide lifts all the boats." That's probably not far from his genuine belief system. If we all work together, everybody wins.

  22. [22] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    <I?Pfeiffer said Biden "always wants to win the room" and therefore says things he knows they want to hear. I don't think he's conning people which implies malice aforethought. I think he just falls into it.

    You know what these reactions sound like to me? Jealousy. Biden has forgotten more than a lot of these politicos will ever understand.

    Competence can often come across to some people as arrogance.

    I can't wait for the debates!

  23. [23] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Pfeiffer said Biden "always wants to win the room" and therefore says things he knows they want to hear. I don't think he's conning people which implies malice aforethought. I think he just falls into it.

    You know what these reactions sound like to me? Jealousy. Biden has forgotten more than a lot of these politicos will ever understand.

    Competence can often come across to some people as arrogance.

    I can't wait for the debates!

    By the way, how do you mean 'he falls into it'?

  24. [24] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Paula-18

    I don't think he's conning people which implies malice aforethought, I think he just falls into it.

    I could not agree with you more.

    Biden's father had been wealthy, but he lost most of it by the time Joe was born. He genuinely empathizes with upper, middle and lower class families to some degree and knows how to work it. It is just a little too easy and tempting to overwork it.

  25. [25] 
    Kick wrote:

    "We will push onward with new medical frontiers. We will come up with the cures to many, many problems, to many, many diseases -- including cancer and others," Trump said.

    Well, there you go. It seems I finally find myself agreeing with Donald Trump on something. There is definitely a cancer in the White House, and Trump could certainly cure it.

    "And we're getting closer all the time."

    Yes, we are. :)

  26. [26] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    While Kamala Harris and Bill de Blasio also weighed in (both Booker and Harris are black, and de Blasio is married to a black woman), Booker was the one whose critical words resonated the most with Biden himself. Booker hasn't had many standout moments on the campaign trail to date, but this time he showed some real leadership and "spoke truth to power" as it were.

    I wonder if Booker's criticism 'resonated' most with Biden because it was so off base and so unpleasantly surprised Biden.

    This will go down as one of Cory Booker's worst moments.

  27. [27] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Liz-22 "You know what these reactions sound like to me? Jealousy. Biden has forgotten more than a lot of these politicos will ever understand."

    I think you are right about that. That said, Biden is in his mid 70's, so maybe he's forgotten a bit too.

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    One final point, Chris.

    I'm quite surprised in how far you go to 'report' on Biden's comments to rich supporters.

    Biden never said he wouldn't raise their taxes. He just told them that paying more in taxes is in their wheelhouse and it wouldn't affect their standard of living.

    I cannot for the life of me understand how you can so misinterpret what Biden is all about.

  29. [29] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Liz -28 "This will go down as one of Cory Booker's worst moments."

    I don't think so. Booker is like the guy in the Triumphal Chariot reminding the general he is mortal. Booker is representing his constituents who are largely low income people of color. That is his job. Good on him for doing it.

  30. [30] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Kick-25

    We will conquer bone spurs, dry mouth and reverse raccoon eyes.

  31. [31] 
    Paula wrote:

    [23] Liz: jealousy?

    Nonsense. It sounds to me like you're casting around trying to find a way to excuse JB for putting his foot in his mouth and refusing to admit it/deal with it. You are also completely dismissing Kamala Harris and Cory Booker which is pretty arrogant on your part. I guess we must all worry about JB's delicate sensibilities but naturally KH or CB's feelings are just so much tosh to be ignored - don't those whippersnappers know that next to JB they are meaningless?

    These flailings are not persuasive but whatevs.

  32. [32] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: We're not actually giving Biden the MDDOTW for his comments on palling around with racist senators this week...

    "Palling around"?

    Cheap shot, CW. Biden described Talmadge as "one of the meanest guys I ever knew." He was explaining how he had to work across the aisle with jerks, CW, not remotely describing his "pals." Yes, sure, Biden deserves some criticism, but this is rather a cheap shot and excessive piling on. Bad form. :)

  33. [33] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Liz-28

    "Biden never said he wouldn't raise their taxes. He just told them that paying more in taxes is in their wheelhouse and it wouldn't affect their standard of living."

    I don't think he actually said that, but I think he believes that. It's the rising tide floats all boats economic philosophy that I mentioned in post 21. If his wealthy audience was willing to think he was offering them more than that (status quo) he was not going to dissuade them.

    I don't know if Biden has a realistic plan for achieving that rising tide, but it's a good goal, and I think he might actually try and achieve it as President. The devil is in the details. Warren probably has a better understanding of the details. Biden probably has a better read on the practical politics needed to implement policies that put put the plan in practice. Trump is the Devil who squash Rule of Law if he gets the chance.

    I sincerely hope Biden gets his footing in the next debate because I think he is still the strongest candidate in the pack. That could change this week.

  34. [34] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm sure he'll do well in the debates, TS. It'll be the first time he won't have to beg for questions, even on foreign policy issues for God's sake! :)

  35. [35] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TS,

    Warren probably has a better understanding of the details. Biden probably has a better read on the practical politics needed to implement

    I wouldn't be surprised if he asks her to head up the CFRB. I think she would shine there.

  36. [36] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-35

    My thoughts exactly. Perfect match. I think she be very, very happy there....and very, very effective.

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Chris,

    Is dragging up dead racists kink of like palling around with terrorists?

    Have you seen Bret Stephen's latest piece in the NYTimes? I'm beginning to really like that guy!

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TS,

    Yes, and the CFRB is going to be in a state of disarray when Warren arrives and will be in desperate need of an expert in charge.

  39. [39] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-34

    I just hope Biden doesn't swing for the fences and strike out. Just get on base. Admit he had a bad case of tone deafness. Do not fight with Booker. Thank him for constructive criticism. Push the idea that if you can find common ground with fundamentally bad men to enact good laws, than that is a good thing. Stress that progress is often incremental. Find an applicable Bible quote.

  40. [40] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm not even going to correct that. I'm just not.

    Has anyone around here ever heard of a thingy called an edit function ...

  41. [41] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    TS[39],

    Biden will find a way to smooth things over but, I think it will have more to do with explaining what he meant. Maybe we'll finally get a little context.

    No time like the present to get about learning the art of explaining.

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Find an applicable Bible quote.

    Heh.

  43. [43] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Well, I am done. I have get up at 5AM to beat the heat and humidity.

  44. [44] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Me, too. G'nite.

  45. [45] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: So not only will Biden not raise their taxes, he'll also vigorously defend the patriotism of the downtrodden demographic that is rich people.

    What? Biden wasn't saying he wouldn't raise their taxes, CW; he was saying exactly the opposite... that he would.

    You know, what I’ve found is rich people are just as patriotic as poor people. Not a joke. I mean, we may not want to demonize anybody who has made money. The truth of the matter is, you all, you all know, you all know in your gut what has to be done. We can disagree in the margins but the truth of the matter is it’s all within our wheelhouse and nobody has to be punished. No one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change. Because when we have income inequality as large as we have in the United States today, it brews and ferments political discord and basic revolution. [...] It allows demagogues to step in and say the reason where we are is because of the other, the other. You’re not the other. I need you very badly. I hope if I win this nomination, I won’t let you down. ~ Joe Biden

    How are you getting he won't raise their taxes out of that? He's telling them he will. He's contrasting himself with Bernie Sanders, the guy nipping at his heels in the polls who has been demonizing "millionaires and billionaires" for multiple decades now, except now that Bernie is a "millionaire" he has naturally stopped his demonizing them and tried to stick strictly to disparaging "the billionaire class," although he sometimes still slips up and reverts to "millionaires and billionaires" because 30-plus-year-old habits really do die hard.

    So Biden was saying "you all know in your gut what has to be done" but that he doesn't demonize them like his opponent... you know, Bernie. Biden was telling them that him raising their taxes wouldn't change their lifestyle "and nobody has to be punished. No one’s standard of living will change, nothing would fundamentally change. Because when we have income inequality as large as we have in the United States today, it brews and ferments political discord and basic revolution." Again, a reference to Bernie and also followed by a dig at Trump when he said: "It allows demagogues to step in and say the reason where we are is because of the other, the other. You’re not the other."

    Get it? He's telling them he will raise their taxes and take on income inequality versus the fake populism of the demagogues blaming the "others."

    Bernie and Trump are two sides of the same populist coin in that they each demonize others as the root of all evil. Bernie demonizes and blames the rich while Trump demonizes and blames the poor immigrants.

    How are people misunderstanding this and getting it ass backwards? :)

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Very well said, Kick. Could never have said it better myself.

    I wish I could understand where Chris is coming form ...

  47. [47] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Have a great rest of the night everyone!

  48. [48] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    15

    Good choice for MIDOTW award.

    Totally agree.

    Can Jon Stewart please do the same thing for the despicable things happening, especially to children, at the US border in US custody?

    I know, right!? Jon Stewart is the perfect example... ahem... of why demonizing rich people is stupid, ignorant, and dumb. How in the world are people misunderstanding that Joe Biden was telling that room of rich people that he was going to raise their taxes and that they could disagree in the margins but that it wouldn't change their lifestyle.

    Help me understand this, EM or anybody else for that matter, please. Joe was saying exactly the opposite, basically: I'll raise your taxes, and you won't feel a thing, and you all know it too because you're all effing rich beyond measure, but I don't demonize you like my opponent does... the millionaire hypocrite... now write me a check, please and let's do this. :)

  49. [49] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    47

    Have a great rest of the night everyone!

    I had a great rest of the night for 14 minutes, and now it's tomorrow in Texas. Drink! ;)

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    And then there was just the garden-variety idiocies from Trump. Such as misspelling while bragging: "We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights." He ought to set his "sites" a little lower, one supposes.

    Wow..

    President Trump is Mark Pellegrino incarnate and ya'all have to resort to spelling lames...

    If ya'all need any more proof of ya'all's HHPTDS, there it is...

  51. [51] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    16

    Not believing in a deity or religion is in itself a religious belief...

    No it isn't. An atheist by definition is a disbeliever. Atheism is exactly the opposite of religious belief; it is by definition a religious nonbelief.

    Why is everyone getting things backwards today/yesterday depending on your time zone?

    … so an atheist should also get a crack at an opening invocation/prayer/statement of religious belief, if they haven't already.

    We believe we don't believe!? Duh. :)

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    And, I'm not sure I understand the mayor's point. But, I am beginning to see why it has been so hard for America to come to terms with its racist past.

    It would be a LOT easier for the US to come to grips with it's racist past if we didn't have Democrats like Jussie Smollet and didn't have the hyper-sensitivity of the Left calling everything they don't like racism and accusing everyone they don't like of being racists..

    The Journo-List debacle is a PERFECT example of why the US can't move past racism and the fault for that inability to do so is solely and completely in the lap of the Democrat Party...

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, I am done. I have get up at 5AM to beat the heat and humidity.

    Must be nice to sleep in so late.. :D

    Shit, if I slept in til 0500, I feel I have wasted half my day...

  54. [54] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    30

    We will conquer bone spurs, dry mouth and reverse raccoon eyes.

    Heh. :)

  55. [55] 
    Michale wrote:

    If there was EVER any doubt that this election is going to be about Party Purity and NOT about electability (as I predicted, then Booker, Harris and the rest of the Biden-bashers has put that doubt to rest, unequivocally..

    The Paula-wing of the Democrat Party is fully in control and, with that, the Democrat Party can kiss 2020 goodbye..

    I mean, seriously.. Look at it.. Paul hates Trump and Trump voters with a passion..

    Do ya'all HONESTLY believe that she can embrace and entice Trump voters to vote for the Dim candidate???

    Nope.. Not a snowball's chance in hell..

    And it's a stone cold fact that the Dim candidate is going to NEED those voters to win the election..

    So, the wisdom of my previous advice shines thru.

    Concede 2020 and concentrate on 2024...

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    Is dragging up dead racists kink of like palling around with terrorists?

    Yes.. Except for it's OK when the pal'ee has a -D after his name...

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    I wonder if Booker's criticism 'resonated' most with Biden because it was so off base and so unpleasantly surprised Biden.

    This will go down as one of Cory Booker's worst moments.

    Yep..

    And it PROVES that Booker is not fit to be POTUS....

    One has to wonder if Booker would have made those comments if Biden was black...

    I would wager he wouldn't have..

    Which makes Booker a racist as well..

  58. [58] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    55

    I mean, seriously.. Look at it.. Paul hates Trump and Trump voters with a passion..

    You're claiming to know who other people hate, and that makes you an idiot of the first order.

    Do ya'all HONESTLY believe that she can embrace and entice Trump voters to vote for the Dim candidate???

    Do you HONESTLY believe that you know who Paula hates? You have no idea what you're talking about.

    Nope.. Not a snowball's chance in hell..

    And it's a stone cold fact that the Dim candidate is going to NEED those voters to win the election..

    Wrong, wrong, wrong... and speaking of "hell" and "stone cold," did it ever occur to you that a whole lot of the Trump voters from 2016 are now dead because they are disproportionately old? Millions of them dead and millions more of them going to be "stone cold" before the election in 2020.

    How many Democrats and Independents do you think that asshats like you and Your Orange Worship have managed to embrace and entice to vote for Donald Trump?

    So to recap:

    Your hero is a big zero.
    Your icon is nothing but a con.
    Check your mirror before you piss on anyone else on this blog. :)

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    You know what these reactions sound like to me? Jealousy. Biden has forgotten more than a lot of these politicos will ever understand.

    Competence can often come across to some people as arrogance.

    Exactly... We see that all the time, even here in Weigantia..

    Lusers always trying (emphasis on TRYING) to take down their better.. :D

    I can't wait for the debates!?

    The debates will determine if Joe Biden lives to fight another day...

    It's gonna be interesting, to be sure..

  60. [60] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    59

    Exactly... We see that all the time, even here in Weigantia..

    Lusers always trying (emphasis on TRYING) to take down their better.. :D

    Now you're getting it. You're the "luser" always doing that. Progress at last. Keep checking that mirror, it's working. :)

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    Biden will find a way to smooth things over but, I think it will have more to do with explaining what he meant. Maybe we'll finally get a little context.

    No time like the present to get about learning the art of explaining.

    The problem Biden faces is that no amount of explanation is warranted or even necessary..

    Everyone knew what Biden meant..

    Booker et al just saw an opportunity to spin the meaning so as to take Biden down..

    Pure unadulterated partisan opportunism..

    And again, I have to comment on how fascinating it is that Democrats are so hyper-sensitive to racism... I mean, the Democrat Party is the originator of the KKK and Jim Crow and all the other racial legacies...

    Racism in America is a product of the Democrat Party.

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are undisputed."
    -Captain Smilin' Jack Ross, A FEW GOOD MEN

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    Failed Hillary Clinton play on Broadway mirrors failures in 2016

    The Hillary Follies continue. For Democrats and the left (but I repeat myself), reality for them has always been a construction that they feed to you through media.

    The desperate effort by Hillary Clinton and her supporters to keep her relevant through simple exposure in the media continues apace. But if being a celebrity is what makes a person important and valuable, then Mrs. Clinton might want to worry about O.J. Simpson’s rising Twitter star knocking her off her perch.

    The latest news from the Hillary entertainment front is the sad failure of the “Hillary and Clinton” Broadway play. Maybe you didn’t even know there was such a thing, starring actors John Lithgow and Laurie Metcalf. And even those who did know, we’re not rushing to see it.

    For some reason, even in super-bright neon blue New York, no one wanted to see “Hillary and Clinton.” According to the Hollywood Reporter, “The early closing date for ‘Hillary and Clinton‘ is due to underwhelming ticket sales. The play, which cost $4.2 million to produce, began performances in March and drew mixed-to-positive reviews, but has struggled to fill seats, reaching only 36 percent of its gross potential in the last two weeks.”

    Underwhelming sales. Struggling to fill seats. Actually, this could have been very successful performance art as an example of what happened to Mrs. Clinton in Wisconsin and Michigan and Pennsylvania and Florida in 2016.
    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jun/19/failed-hillary-clinton-play-on-broadway-mirrors-fa/

    Hell even a Broadway play about Hillary is a luser.. :D

    "It is to laugh.."
    -Daffy Duck

    :D

  63. [63] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @kick[45]/liz[46],

    precisely, couldn't have said it better myself. biden was making a larger point about bringing people of different classes together, not saying he'd embrace racism or play laissez faire with income inequality. i also think CW is way off-base on this, following the horserace media narrative instead of looking at it critically.

    JL

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    Can Jon Stewart please do the same thing for the despicable things happening, especially to children, at the US border in US custody?

    No, Jon Stewart can't..

    But the parents of those children who put those children THRU their suffering can..

    They can obey our laws...

    Any sympathy for those children MUST acknowledge the FACT that it's the parents of those children who are ultimately responsible for the plight of said children..

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    precisely, couldn't have said it better myself. biden was making a larger point about bringing people of different classes together, not saying he'd embrace racism or play laissez faire with income inequality. i also think CW is way off-base on this, following the horserace media narrative instead of looking at it critically.

    Bravo.. You win the internet for a day...

    Everyone needs to take a step back and look at EVERYTHING critically..

    I have seen things in this forum I *NEVER* would have thought possible since the advent HHPTDS....

    I mean, honestly.. There comes a time when people should step back and ask "Is THIS what I have become!!???"

  66. [66] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    i was with you as far as opportunism. although i find booker to be a good speaker, this was definitely the low road to relevance in the primary.

    as far as the racist elements of the democratic party, it's been over fifty years since the migration of strom thurmond and the rest of the dixiecrats to the GOP.

    source:
    https://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1751.html

    and again, we disagree about the role of smilin' jack ross in a few good men. the whole point is that "the facts" which are "undisputed" are not ALL the relevant facts, and it's the facts that ARE disputed that make the difference between being guilty or not guilty of murder.

    He's gonna show you the bricks. He'll show you they got straight sides. He'll show you how they got the right shape. He'll show them to you in a very special way.....so that they appear to have everything a brick should have. But there's one thing he's not gonna show you. When you look at the bricks at the right angle, they're as thin as this playing card.
    ~my cousin vinny

  67. [67] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    so... do i still win the internet, or do i get the foul call for contradicting kevin bacon?

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    as far as the racist elements of the democratic party, it's been over fifty years since the migration of strom thurmond and the rest of the dixiecrats to the GOP.

    Which still doesn't change the fact that Democrats was the KKK Party... I acknowledge that it IS in the past, but those who forget or erase the past are doomed to repeat it..

    and again, we disagree about the role of smilin' jack ross in a few good men. the whole point is that "the facts" which are "undisputed" are not ALL the relevant facts, and it's the facts that ARE disputed that make the difference between being guilty or not guilty of murder.

    No argument from me on that...

    He's gonna show you the bricks. He'll show you they got straight sides. He'll show you how they got the right shape. He'll show them to you in a very special way.....so that they appear to have everything a brick should have. But there's one thing he's not gonna show you. When you look at the bricks at the right angle, they're as thin as this playing card.
    ~my cousin vinny

    Nice... :D

    so... do i still win the internet, or do i get the foul call for contradicting kevin bacon?

    "Egon.. I am going to take back some of the bad things I said about you... You... you've earned it.."
    -Peter Venkmen, GHOSTBUSTERS

    :D

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    i was with you as far as opportunism. although i find booker to be a good speaker, this was definitely the low road to relevance in the primary.

    Yep... Those who claim that Demcorats are any better than Republicans in the high road/low road department is simply spewing Party loyalty bullshit..

  70. [70] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    66

    as far as the racist elements of the democratic party, it's been over fifty years since the migration of strom thurmond and the rest of the dixiecrats to the GOP.

    I know, right!? Not long after the migration of Strom Thurmon and the Dixiecrats to the GOP, the Environmental Protection Agency was created in 1970 by Richard Nixon via an executive order. Fast forward to 2019 where Republicans are trying in blame the Democratic Party for the Green New Deal and trying to do something/anything about the environment, and to that I say: Nixon started it. The GOP owns it forever because Dick. ;)

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    @kick[45]/liz[46],

    precisely, couldn't have said it better myself.

    Excellent.... Everyone agrees with me.. :D

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    Our second (Dis-)Honorable Mention goes to Pete Buttigieg, who (while eclipsed by the whole Biden fracas) seems to be having his own problems addressing racial issues. He broke away from the campaign trail this week to return to South Bend, Indiana, after a police shooting there caused an outcry.

    One has to wonder WHY there was an "outcry" that required Buttagig's attention??

    SOUTH BEND — The South Bend police officer who fatally shot a suspect early Sunday did not have his body camera on but says the man approached him with a knife and ignored multiple orders to drop it, according to the county prosecutor.

    South Bend Police Sgt. Ryan O’Neill confronted Eric J. Logan in the north parking lot of the Central High Apartment complex downtown after a 9-1-1 call about car break-ins in the neighborhood, Prosecutor Ken Cotter said at a news conference Monday to outline the investigation by the County Metro Homicide Unit.

    Sounds like a good shoot to me...

  73. [73] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hilarious... The people in South Bend claim that the subject has never been a thief.. But he HAS served multiple prison sentences for drug dealing and weapons charges.

    "But he can't be a thief!!!"

    Except for the fact that the douche bag had a ladies purse on him and the knife he used to attack the LEO with was stolen from one of the parked cars..

    Buttagig went home for THAT!!????

    Another crass display of political opportunism... :eyeroll:

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I guess we must all worry about JB's delicate sensibilities but naturally KH or CB's feelings are just so much tosh to be ignored - don't those whippersnappers know that next to JB they are meaningless?

    It's not about feelings, Paula. It's about understanding the English language.

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's not even about understanding plain English..

    Booker and Harris et al understood EXACTLY what Biden was saying and why he was saying it..

    But they choose to spin it in a way that paints Joe as a racist so as to enhance their own primary standing..

    It's about NOT being able to have differing opinions on how we best solve problems without having to resort to name calling and insults.

    It's about the bullshit notion that ANYTHING is fair game in a primary...

  76. [76] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick (51)-
    Yes not believing in a deity or religion is a religious belief.

    You said it yourself- we believe we don't believe.

    That is a belief aboot religion. A religious belief.

    Anyone that believes in a religion is also a disbeliever aboot other religions. That is actually part of their beliefs.

    Although I did once run across a person that told me they are both a Scientologist and a Christian.

    Why is everyone getting things backwards today/yesterday?

    Because today/yesterday is no different than most other days.

  77. [77] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yes not believing in a deity or religion is a religious belief.

    Freedom OF religion also means Freedom FROM religion... :D

  78. [78] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Sorry Liz, it is aboot feelings.

    Unfortunately there are many people that are controlled by emotion rahter than intellect.

    And unfortunately there are also many politicians that will try to take advantage of that because it is easier than actually making an intellectual case.

    All they have to do is ring the bell and the people will salivate.

    It is all part of the look here while the real trick happens somewhere else strategy that dominates our political discourse.

    As long as people are paying attention to and talking aboot the distractions like Biden's "gaffe" and the other candidates statements aboot it they are not paying attention to the fact that all the candidates are big money candidates working for the big money interests.

  79. [79] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    And an atheist is not a disbeliever.

    An atheist believes that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

    And when someone makes an extraordinary claim that there is supernatural being that existed all by itself in nothingness where there is no time, space or matter and claims this being said abracadbra and made everything appear out of nothing and says in the next breath that this being wants you to believe this is true without any evidence (the definition of having faith) an atheist recognizes that this is a GIANT RED FLAG that this is a scam.

    We don't believe in religion because we do believe in reality over fairytales and scams.

  80. [80] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Ana Navarro perhaps best summed up Biden's error, criticizing him for "dragging up these dead racists instead of talking about the live racists."

    Chris,

    I agree … Ana Navarro's criticism was valid and went as far as it should go.

    Other critics are attaching words and motives to what Biden said and in the process completely misinterpreting what he said - on the "dead racists" issue and other issues.

    I don't understand why that is but, it's not new. This sort of thing has dogged Biden throughout his career as a public servant.

    I just don't understand where the mean-spiritedness comes from.

  81. [81] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    And ironically as an atheist I actually practice more faith in a god than people that claim to believe.

    The god that people claim to believe in can listen to and answer millions or even billions of prayers all at once.

    So if this god exists it is capable of communicating any message it has for me or anyone else directly.

    Yet all the people that claim to believe are listening to other people that claim that the god has given them the message for everyone to follow.

    So they are actually having faith in those people rather than having faith in their god that their god will contact them directly if he has a message for them.

  82. [82] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Biden's gaffe came at an inopportune time for him, seeing as how the first Democratic debates are now less than a week away.

    Chris, do you still define a Biden "gaffe" as an inconvenient truth? Well, it sure is going to be inconvenient for his blatantly opportunistic Democratic rivals who are foolish enough to attach words and motives to Biden that are patently false.

    All the other candidates had been struggling with whether to attack Biden next week, since he is so well-beloved by Democratic voters. Biden is the clear frontrunner in the race at this point, regularly polling many multiples of the numbers of almost all the other candidates (excepting perhaps Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, whom Biden only outpolls by a factor of two). It was tough, before Biden stepped in it, for the other candidates to develop any debate strategy for taking Biden down a peg. But that just got a whole lot easier, due to Biden's own words.

    I think Biden's Democratic rivals throw spurious attacks his way at their distinct peril. I expect he number of Democratic candidates for president to narrow substantially by the end of June.

  83. [83] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Biden's gaffe came at an inopportune time for him, seeing as how the first Democratic debates are now less than a week away.

    Chris, do you still define a Biden "gaffe" as an inconvenient truth? Well, it sure is going to be inconvenient for his blatantly opportunistic Democratic rivals who are foolish enough to attach words and motives to Biden that are patently false.

    All the other candidates had been struggling with whether to attack Biden next week, since he is so well-beloved by Democratic voters. Biden is the clear frontrunner in the race at this point, regularly polling many multiples of the numbers of almost all the other candidates (excepting perhaps Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, whom Biden only outpolls by a factor of two). It was tough, before Biden stepped in it, for the other candidates to develop any debate strategy for taking Biden down a peg. But that just got a whole lot easier, due to Biden's own words.

    It just got a whole lot trickier for Biden's rivals due to their purposeful distraction from Biden's own words. That is what makes this entire episode so bloody despicable.

    I think Biden's Democratic rivals throw spurious attacks (and that's all they have) his way at their distinct peril. I expect he number of Democratic candidates for president to narrow substantially by the end of June.

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    It just got a whole lot trickier for Biden's rivals due to their purposeful distraction from Biden's own words. That is what makes this entire episode so bloody despicable.

    I think Biden's Democratic rivals throw spurious attacks (and that's all they have) his way at their distinct peril. I expect he number of Democratic candidates for president to narrow substantially by the end of June.

    Yep.. This is DEFINITELY going to come back and bite the Dem candidates on the ass...

    On the plus side, just think of all the gloating you will be able to do when Trump kicks the shit outta the eventual nominee..

    "Well, you Americans had your chance with a quality viable candidate like Joe Biden.. Ya'all DESERVE President Trump!!"

    Feel free to use that if you wish.. :D

  85. [85] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Biden said that Senator Eastland never called him 'boy' but did call him 'son' …

    Otherwise smart people are interpreting this very foolishly, at best, or blatantly opportunistically at worst. These are not qualities of an effective POTUS, by the way.

    Here is what Biden meant:

    The segregationist Senator Eastland never called me 'boy', a term he despicably calls African American men to demean them, but he always called me 'son' to bring me down a few pegs instead of 'Senator'.

    But, guess what. I was still able to work with him, a senior and powerful member of the Senate whom I had to work with, despite his racism, to get good things done.

    Biden's point - if he can work civilly with people who have racist views and who are indeed racists in an honest effort to pass good legislation then I can work with the Congress today without getting into insult matches or calling them my enemies. I can beat all of them!

    Anyone who truly knows Biden and what he's made of - people like Congressman Lewis and Jim Clyburn - interpret Biden's words as he meant them.

    Biden's critics on this, on the other hand, only display a certain ignorance of all things Biden and a quickness to use false statements about Biden to make their points. Again, not presidential material in my book.

  86. [86] 
    neilm wrote:

    Biden is a gaffe machine. We can do better. He doesn't have any ideas that are unique (in fact his plagiarism sank his first run for President) and he doesn't excite the crowds.

    The Democrats can, and should, do better. For me, he is the "I guess so" candidate.

    Note: He'd still get my vote, and I expect him to humiliate Trump at the election.

  87. [87] 
    neilm wrote:

    Trump is a moron and he has no idea what he is doing in the Middle East. He has no goals as far as anybody is able to tell - and all the loons have is claims of 4D chess that would be funny if it weren't sad.

    Bolton and Pompeo have a goal - start a war with Iran - they've been itching to do so for years, if not decades.

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    In South Carolina, Biden finds shelter from the storm
    Rep. Jim Clyburn’s fish fry event served as a reminder of how difficult it is for Joe Biden’s rivals to mount a sustained attack against him.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/22/joe-biden-south-carolina-fish-fry-1376705

    Looks like the Dem candidates who have the "courage" to attack Joe Biden as a racist, don't have the balls to say it to his face..

    Cowards...

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump is a moron and he has no idea what he is doing in the Middle East. He has no goals as far as anybody is able to tell - and all the loons have is claims of 4D chess that would be funny if it weren't sad.

    Says the moron who first attacked President Trump for being a loose cannon and THEN attacked him for being a pussy and letting Iran get away with it..

    It's clear you are governed solely by your hatred and your HHPTDS...

  90. [90] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    71

    Excellent.... Everyone agrees with me.. :D

    It's my post and EM's post, you fool. If you agree with us, then try not being a jerk and mischaracterizing it in a manner that is ass backwards.

    The fact is, the day you make a post as totally awesome and mine and EM's will be a cold day in Hades. *laughs* :)

  91. [91] 
    neilm wrote:

    Run away! (Trump's new election slogan).

    It's exactly what he did when he threatened to close the border with Mexico and, later, when he threatened tariffs on all goods coming in from Mexico. He retreated from both of those positions. He threatened then canceled tariffs on autos from Europe. He threatened, then fell in love with North Korea's dictator.

    Now he is provoking a war with Iran, sending out our troops, then telling them to turn back and run away.

    Even when he does the right thing (not start a war) he manages to do it in the most humiliating way to the United States.

    What a farce.

  92. [92] 
    neilm wrote:

    Oh, and remember that "secret" deal with Mexico that he was going to release last week and everybody was going to be in awe over.

    Ran away from that as well.

  93. [93] 
    Michale wrote:

    Editorial: Getting to truth, finally, of Kim Foxx and Jussie Smollett
    https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/editorials/ct-editorial-jussie-smollette-kim-foxx-special-prosecutor-20190621-5mxfsorvhbevhgofdbdog5jtze-story.html

    Right in the face of those morons who supported Jussie Smollet!!

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    Even when he does the right thing

    So, you just conceded that President Trump did the right thing..

    Good for you, Neil... Pretty soon you'll be ordering your red KEEP AMERICA GREAT hat...

    I am proud of you, Neil...

  95. [95] 
    neilm wrote:

    Are US child migrant detainees entitled to soap and beds?

    A Trump administration lawyer has disputed in court whether detained migrant children are entitled to toothbrushes and soap.

    The Department of Justice argued the government was adhering to a landmark ruling requiring migrants to be kept in "safe and sanitary" facilities.

    The attorney pointed out the law did not mention soap.

    But a panel of judges in California questioned the rationale, saying the children were sleeping on concrete.

    Trump. Making America Great Again.

    All the Trump supporters must be so proud they are using children to punish their parents.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48710432

  96. [96] 
    Michale wrote:

    All the Trump supporters must be so proud they are using children to punish their parents.

    Odumbo did much worse... Children DIED under Odumbo.

    Funny how you didn't say a SINGLE word in opposition to Odumbo and his antics..

    Which proves you don't care about the children.. You just want to USE them as a bludgeon to beat Trump over the head with..

    So, you must be proud to use those children to attack Trump...

    #sad

  97. [97] 
    Michale wrote:

    What about all the American children killed and raped by illegal immigrant criminals..

    Funny how you (allegedly) care for illegal immigrant children, but AMERICAN children who are raped and killed by YOUR illegal immigrants??

    Frak them, right?? :eyeroll:

  98. [98] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yea... That's what I thought.. :eyeroll:

  99. [99] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval-6179.html

    President Trump's approval numbers continue to rise...

    So much for the Dumbocrats' claims about President Trump..

    KEEP AMERICA GREAT
    TRUMP 2020

  100. [100] 
    Michale wrote:

    Editorialized Language Imperils Trust in Fact-Checking
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/06/21/editorialized_language_imperils_trust_in_fact-checking_140622.html

    THis is why it's impossible to believe ANY of the "fact" checking sites..

    They all have a Left Wing Anti-Trump bias...

    Which makes them useless as a reliable check for the facts...

  101. [101] 
    Michale wrote:

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/cartoons/images/2019/06/20/david_hitch_david_hitch_for_06202019_5_.gif

    EXACTLY the way ya'all (NEN) are...

    And ya don't even have the good sense to be embarrassed or ashamed by it... :eyeroll:

  102. [102] 
    Michale wrote:

    I mean.. Seriously.. Honestly...

    Doesn't ANYONE here feel ridiculous when they get hysterically excited about election polls 500 days out???

    Doesn't ANYONE realize how completely and utterly USELESS they are???

    The fact that ya don't should be a HUGE warning sign to ya... :eyeroll:

  103. [103] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ghosts of 2016 primary haunt Democrats

    Democrats are feeling a sense of déjà vu as infighting among presidential candidates intensifies.

    And with less than a week until the first 2020 primary debate, the sniping is only expected to worsen.

    Democrats are concerned they will have another 2016 on their hands, when the primary grew so bitter that some supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) intentionally sat on the sidelines instead of supporting the party’s eventual nominee Hillary Clinton.

    They are worried that a long, bruising primary season could ultimately benefit President Trump on Election Day.
    https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/449812-ghosts-of-2016-primary-haunt-democrats

    But.... But.... But....

    There is no cause for worry..

    Democrats are able to have differing opinions on how we best solve problems without having to resort to name calling and insults.

    Yea.. I know..

    I couldn't keep a straight face either.. :D

  104. [104] 
    neilm wrote:

    So ol’ bone spurs has run away again. First ICE is going to deport 2,000 immigrants tomorrow, now they aren’t.

    Must be really embarrassing for his “tells it like it is” believers.

    Run away! Run away!

  105. [105] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Just read this column again.

    I think Chris needs a couple or three weeks in Hawai'i.

    I've never known him to make mountains out of mole hills and certainly not to make up a mole hill out of whole tapa cloth.

  106. [106] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Neil,

    Do you have a favourite Biden gaffe?

  107. [107] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You have sooooooooo many to choose from, why don't you give us your top three!

  108. [108] 
    neilm wrote:

    EM 107

    1. Anita Hill: Take you pick
    2. Neil Kinnock: I mean, really?
    3. Joe Biden on himself: "I am a gaffe machine"

    https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/04/politics/joe-biden-most-qualified-person-president-2020/index.html

  109. [109] 
    neilm wrote:

    Here's a guide Elizabeth:

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bulletpoint-how-to-tell-when-biden-has-committed-a-real-gaffe/

    I really wish Joe well, but I just think there are better candidates that we will discover over the next 6-9 months.

  110. [110] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Neil,

    I would really like to understand why you think Biden's remarks about being civil and working with segregationist and racist senators was a gaffe or a mistake that he should apologize for?

  111. [111] 
    neilm wrote:

    I would really like to understand why you think Biden's remarks about being civil and working with segregationist and racist senators was a gaffe or a mistake that he should apologize for?

    Elizabeth, I'm not going to debate the definition of gaffe's individually with you. You don't think he committed a "gaffe", many people, people who mean him no harm, do.

    The biggest "tell" that a gaffe has been committed is that if most people think it is a gaffe. Most seem to.

    Why, Elizabeth, why oh why would any politician utter the following sequence of words, practices words mind you, in 2019?

    "He never called me 'boy,' he always called me ‘son,’"

  112. [112] 
    neilm wrote:

    practices -> practiced

  113. [113] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    "He never called me 'boy,' he always called me ‘son,’"

    Neil, I want to parse this out because I think it's important, to me at least, so I hope you'll bear with me …

    You quoted Senator Biden above.

    What do you think Biden meant when he said, "He never called me 'boy'?

    Is it because Biden doesn't understand that 'boy' is what racists call black men and that Eastland was being nice to him by not calling him that and that maybe Biden thinks that because Eastland didn't call him boy that maybe Eastland isn't racist?

  114. [114] 
    neilm wrote:

    Elizabeth, let me try to make my point clear.

    It isn't what he means. It is the sequence of words in a story about racists told in 2019.

    There was no need to do this. It is a controversy that didn't have to happen. Some of us call "controversies that didn't have to happen" gaffes. Like me for instance.

  115. [115] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    So, it doesn't matter to you what he said and what he means as I guess it doesn't matter to you that political pundits and analysts and the media and presidential candidates go around saying that Biden said something that he didn't say.

    I have a problem with that.!.!.!

  116. [116] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And, this blog has lost a lot of credibility for me for that very reason.

    Credibility once lost is difficult to regain.

  117. [117] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Loathe to join this internecine hate fest, don't really give a pinch of shit whom you guys nominated for 2020, but would offer the following tangential comment:

    "Controversies that didn't have to happen" constitutes one potential definition (and a revelatory one) for "gaffe".
    Another might be 'Imaginary insults invented by hyper-sensitive, hyper-PC folks who relish being offended'.

  118. [118] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,
    that's odd, since on this point most of us here seem to agree with you. i do. michale and kick BOTH agree with you - at the same time! when was the last time THAT happened? neil is on CW's side of the fence, but it should be heartening that many here are not.
    JL

  119. [119] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm just having a long moment. Pay no attention to it.

  120. [120] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Another might be 'Imaginary insults invented by hyper-sensitive, hyper-PC folks who relish being offended'.

    I think that is precisely what applies to Biden's countless critics.

  121. [121] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    joshua,

    when I wrote 'blog', I wasn't referring to any of my fellow commenters, you know

    For the last more than 30 years now I've been pretty closely following Biden and all of his public ups and downs to the exclusion of all others. I've been following Chris and his pieces here for more than 10 years now.

    His last two columns have left me in a bit of funk.

    To say the very least.

  122. [122] 
    Kick wrote:

    QUESTION

    Did anybody see Cory Booker's speech today in South Carolina? If you did, please answer something for me. If use of the term "boy" is so offensive to certain persons, then why on Earth would Cory Booker choose to use that very word in his speech today?

    https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/cory-booker-talks-grassroots-power-and-universal-healthcare-62503493559

    This is the same Cory Booker who released a statement regarding Biden saying that he was "disappointed" Biden hadn't "issued an immediate apology for the pain his words are dredging up for many Americans." And now today he is using the word himself!? Is he taunting Joe?

    So off I go to the Internet to find Booker's transcribed speech from today. I perform a search, and I am literally gobsmacked by what I find.

    If this is a word where the mere use of it "dredges" up so much pain for so many Americans, then why do I find hundreds of uses of this horrible word by Cory Booker when I was expecting to find one from today?

    Examples:

    But last night, after arguing with the most aggressive atheist in all of the United States of America, Bill Maher, I decided maybe I should offer you all a prayer. And, the simple prayer is this: I would like for you all, that my prayer and hope is that you all be you.

    My grandfather said that to me on graduation. He had this weird way, at every graduation, of saying this kind of same things over and over and over again, like, “Boy, the tassel is worth the hassle.” As I went on in college and got another degree and another degree, he said, “Boy, you’ve got more degrees than the month of July, and you’re definitely not hot.” But he would always tell me, “I want you to have the courage to be you.” ~ Pitzer College Commencement Speech, May 15, 2010

    Okay, so that was 2010. Has Cory realized this word dredges up such horrible things that he's stopped using it recently before he did today? Nope.

    My mom couldn't contain herself. She's like, "Boy, don't you forget where you came from. Don't forget the blood, sweat, and tears of your ancestors." All the way there she's finally saying to me, "Boy, don't forget that the title doesn't make the man. The man must make the title."

    I got to where Joe Biden was swearing me in, I turned to my mom, I go, "Mom, you can stop now. I'm coming back. This is not the last time you're going to see me." ~ Cory Booker, Franklin & Marshall College Commencement, May 12, 2018

    *

    And so you have to understand growing up as I did to two civil rights activist parents who were rough on me–they were like, ‘boy don’t walk around this house like you hit a triple you were born on third base.’ I, you know, I did what my parents told me to I got all these degrees from various schools and my dad’s like, ‘boy you got more degrees in the month of July but you ain’t hot,’

    [So is it his dad or his grandfather who keeps sayin this... pick a lane. Okay, it could be both of them.]

    Cory Booker, Pod Save America, March 20, 2019

    So Cory is just using this "horrible" word because somebody called him that, but isn't that what Joe was explaining... somebody calling Joe that? I find hundreds of times Cory Booker has used this word that "dredges" up such horrible things that it deserves an immediate apology from Joe Biden. Seriously. Too numerous to sit here and list them all.

    Fast forward to today where Cory Booker just had to use that horrible word again and make me search the Internet, and... boy, oh boy! :)

  123. [123] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    If use of the term "boy" is so offensive to certain persons, then why on Earth would Cory Booker choose to use that very word in his speech today?

    Because HE can. Same way he can call a black friend, “his nigga” and it wouldn’t offend the Black community, but Joe best not think he can say it and it’ll be cool!

    Also, it matters WHO said it — the examples he gave were from older family members, who were using “boy” in a loving manner.
    Biden was discussing horrible racists who didn’t call him “boy”... I can see why people might associate the term with its racial connotation.

    I think Biden screwed up his words so badly that it could be taken as much worse than he had intended for it to sound.

    Also, spot on in [45]!

  124. [124] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    51

    Yes not believing in a deity or religion is a religious belief.

    Wrong in context to your original statement, Don. You made the statement:

    Not believing in a deity or religion is in itself a religious belief so an atheist should also get a crack at an opening invocation/prayer/statement of religious belief, if they haven't already. ~ Don Harris

    Do we seriously need to cover the whole I went to college and you didn't issue? I went to college for that! Listen and learn. I'm not taking issue with the fact that atheists are obviously protected by many of the same constitutional rights afforded American citizens as well as noncitizens; I'm taking issue with your ridiculous statement that "not believing in a deity or religion is in itself a religious belief." Disbelief is not belief, and atheists know what they represent even if you're clueless about it.

    An atheist doesn't believe in religion; they are nonbelievers. If you don't believe me that atheism is not a religion, perhaps you'll listen and learn something from their official organization, but I doubt it.

    Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion.

    While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. To put it in a more humorous way: If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

    Despite the fact that atheism is not a religion, atheism is protected by many of the same Constitutional rights that protect religion. That, however, does not mean that atheism is itself a religion, only that our sincerely held (lack of) beliefs are protected in the same way as the religious beliefs of others. Similarly, many “interfaith” groups will include atheists. This, again, does not mean that atheism is a religious belief.

    ~ American Atheists organization

    https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/

    It is... and so shall it remain ever thus... never too late to go to college and stop spewing bullshit ad nauseam about a myriad of things you obviously know nothing about. :)

  125. [125] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think Biden screwed up his words so badly that it could be taken as much worse than he had intended for it to sound.

    Actually, Russ, you can't know if Biden screwed up his words because we are relying on snippets provided by press pool reports and we know that the press has perpetuated an asinine storyline on Biden for decades.

  126. [126] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    79

    And an atheist is not a disbeliever.

    Oh, FFS. Bottom line here is that atheism is a lack of belief in gods. Full stop. It's not a religious belief, though, like you asserted above.

    And when someone makes an extraordinary claim that there is supernatural being that existed all by itself in nothingness where there is no time, space or matter and claims this being said abracadbra and made everything appear out of nothing and says in the next breath that this being wants you to believe this is true without any evidence (the definition of having faith) an atheist recognizes that this is a GIANT RED FLAG that this is a scam.

    Neither the word abracadabra nor your word "abracadbra" appear in the Bible, and your definition of "having faith" is wholly insufficient.

    Also, I am not constrained to point out that your description of lacking proof and being a scam in your paragraph above reminds me of this guy and his poor attempt at political activism called "One Demand," which is actually multiple demands.

    We don't believe in religion because we do believe in reality over fairytales and scams.

    Very similar to our disbelief in "One Demand." :)

  127. [127] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    81

    And ironically as an atheist I actually practice more faith in a god than people that claim to believe.

    Regarding the entire post at 81: Just stop while you are insane.

    So they are actually having faith in those people rather than having faith in their god that their god will contact them directly if he has a message for them.

    OMG

  128. [128] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    82

    I think Biden's Democratic rivals throw spurious attacks his way at their distinct peril. I expect the number of Democratic candidates for president to narrow substantially by the end of June.

    2019? No way. There used to be no real reason for anyone to leave the campaign trail until the Iowa caucuses unless they were just flat broke; although perhaps under the DNC's new rules we'll see some of them quit before 2020 if they aren't able to make it onto the debate stage when the rules get stricter and benchmarks to qualify become harder.

    Other than that, why quit until your lose bigly in the Iowa caucuses in February 2020? <--- rhetorical question :)

  129. [129] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Yes, well, I should have said the number of VIABLE Democratic presidential candidates will narrow after the first debates, assuming said candidates throw spurious attacks in Biden's direction.

  130. [130] 
    TheStig wrote:

    DH-

    Religion is defined as the belief in and worship of a God or Gods.

    Theism is the belief in a God or Gods

    The Greek prefix "a" signifies "lack of."

    Atheism literally means "lack of belief in God or Gods."

    Since atheists do not believe in God or Gods, they cannot be religious. They have a philosophy, but that is not the same as being religious.

  131. [131] 
    neilm wrote:

    O for crying out loud, I'm not comparing uses of the word "boy" - I'm only saying that if you want to be regarded as a credible contender to be the Democratic nominee for President in 2019, bringing up stories about being called "boy" by racists isn't on anybody's "Top 10 Good Ideas To Dominate The News Cycle" - and if you don't realize that, as the front runner, you are going to be under extremely unfair criticism, so are careful not to hand your opponents on all sides easy, and preventable, ammunition, then you aren't ready for prime time.

    Frankly I think my advice to Biden is the most likely to help him in winning the primary and the election - just "think before you talk" - I have to do it all day every day as part of my job, and I'm only in marketing, not in politics.

  132. [132] 
    Michale wrote:

    @CRS

    Loathe to join this internecine hate fest, don't really give a pinch of shit whom you guys nominated for 2020, but would offer the following tangential comment:

    "Controversies that didn't have to happen" constitutes one potential definition (and a revelatory one) for "gaffe".
    Another might be 'Imaginary insults invented by hyper-sensitive, hyper-PC folks who relish being offended'.

    Well said.. VERY well said..

  133. [133] 
    Michale wrote:

    that's odd, since on this point most of us here seem to agree with you. i do. michale and kick BOTH agree with you - at the same time! when was the last time THAT happened?

    Uh... NEVER!!! hehe

    I don't think there EVER was a time that more than 1 person agreed with me at the same time.. :D

    neil is on CW's side of the fence, but it should be heartening that many here are not.

    Yup..

  134. [134] 
    Michale wrote:

    @CRS

    Constantly putting themselves into positions that they CAN be offended and actively SEEKING those positions is a defining characteristic of a Democrat..

    I (usually) follow Sarek Of Vulcan's wise teachings..

    "There can be no offense where none is taken"

    Words to live by..

  135. [135] 
    Michale wrote:

    Neil,

    I am going to throw you a bone here..

    I have to admit, when I woke up and saw the DRUDGE headline, TRUMP CALLS OFF ICE RAIDS I rolled my eyes and thought to myself, "Jeeezus, what is this guy's PROBLEM!!!???"

    Then I read the article..

    Trump now says Congress has two weeks to reach a solution

    And I realized that President Trump is merely applying his Mexico gambit to Congress...

    Dangle out a "horrible" and "unacceptable" result and then tell the target, "You have x days/weeks to fix the problem or this WILL happen!!"

    And if the Democrats in Congress don't fix the problem, who do you think the hispanic voters are going to blame??

    Not President Trump.. LEGAL hispanics love President Trump for his jobs programs...

    But I have to admit, my gut reaction was the same as yours..

    But, I should have realized that President Trump ALWAYS has a plan...

    And you should to...

  136. [136] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'm only saying that if you want to be regarded as a credible contender to be the Democratic nominee for President in 2019, bringing up stories about being called "boy" by racists isn't on anybody's "Top 10 Good Ideas To Dominate The News Cycle" -

    "It was a stupid move!"
    "Only because it failed. If it had succeeded then it would have been a brilliant move.. That's the way life is sometimes.."

    -THE INFINITE WORLDS OF MAYBE, Lester Del Rey

    Let's face reality.. The ONLY reason this is a thing is due to the hypersensitivity of race with the Democrat Party..

    And the ONLY reason there is hypersensitivity to race with the Democrat Party is because of the Demcorat Party's past of being the Party of the KKK...

    In their infinite er... "wisdom" Democrats have decided that the BEST penance for their racist past is to be racist in the OTHER direction..

    What the Democrats fail to realize is that racism as a cure for racism is still racism and, as such, one doesn't CURE racism with racism; one only prolongs racism..

  137. [137] 
    Michale wrote:

    As an aside to JL..

    I do believe that is the FIRST time I have ever used a semi-colon in my 57 years of existence......

    Did I use it correctly?? :D

  138. [138] 
    Michale wrote:

    So, now we know why President Trump called off the raids.

    Nancy Pelosi called Trump Friday night asking him to call off ICE raids
    https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/22/politics/nancy-pelosi-ice-raids-house-speaker-called-donald-trump/index.html

    Basically, Pelosi begged President Trump to call off the illegal immigrant raids..

    President Trump said OK, fine.. You have two weeks to fix your mess...

    Once again, President Trump is the man with the plan.. Now the pressure is on Pelosi and the Democrats to take meaningful steps to fix the immigration mess...

    Win for President Trump and the American people..

  139. [139] 
    Michale wrote:

    "At the request of Democrats, I have delayed the Illegal Immigration Removal Process (Deportation) for two weeks to see if the Democrats and Republicans can get together and work out a solution to the Asylum and Loophole problems at the Southern Border. If not, Deportations start!"
    -President Donald Trump

    "Mr. President, delay is welcome. Time is needed for comprehensive immigration reform. Families belong together."
    -Nancy Pelosi

    Nice to see Democrats working WITH President Trump...

    Will it last?? Doubt it..

    But it's still nice to see..

  140. [140] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM: I wonder if Booker's criticism 'resonated' most with Biden because it was so off base and so unpleasantly surprised Biden.

    This will go down as one of Cory Booker's worst moments.

    Michale: Yep..

    And it PROVES that Booker is not fit to be POTUS....

    Cory Booker said something "so off base"... which EM rightly describes as a "worst moment." Meanwhile, Michale reasons that it "PROVES Booker is not fit to be POTUS" but hold his beer while he genuflects to the erratic, servile, indecisive, twitter trolling, mouth breathing fat bastard who says something "so off base" every time he opens his Orange Blow Hole.

    Just saying! I mean, really! :)

  141. [141] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    When Sam quantum leaped into a black man was is racist for him to "Oh boy" ?

  142. [142] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    to say "Oh boy."

  143. [143] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick-
    I guess since you equate this discussion with One Demand you decided to use the same strategy to argue by arguing against an argument I didn't make.

    I said not believing in a religion is a religious belief. Your argument is that not believing in a religion is not a religion.

    All the degrees in the world do not change the facts.

  144. [144] 
    Michale wrote:

    When Sam quantum leaped into a black man was is racist for him to {say} "Oh boy" ?

    Oooooo Nice catch.. :D

    I would have to say no... Because Sam ALWAYS said that..

    Now, it wouldn't surprise me if some hysterical moron Democrat accused Dr Beckett of being racist for it..

    That is exactly the problem with Democrats and their faux outrage to racism..

    They IMMEDIATELY jump to the racist accusation and don't even CONSIDER that other possibilities could be in play..

  145. [145] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Stig-
    Same as Kick.

    Not believing in a religion is a belief aboot religion- therefore a religious belief.

    Similar to not believing in climate change is a belief aboot climate change.

    The difference is that there is evidence that climate change is real.

    There is no evidence that God is real or that god created man.

    There is plenty of evidence, however, that suggests that man created God.

    I remember being in third or fourth grade and we were learning aboot Greek and Roman mythology.

    The teacher said some thing along the lines of they didn't understand how the world works so they made up Gods to explain things like floods, lightning, earthquakes, volcanoes, etc. and provided the example of Apollo carrying the sun across the sky each day in his golden chariot.

    I raised my hand and asked "If the Greeks and Romans made up gods to explain things that they didn't understand, does that mean that the God that we all believe in is just something we made up to explain things we don't understand?"

    After the initial shock wore off the teacher just said "I don't think we want to discuss that here. Let's just stick to the Greek and Roman mythology."

  146. [146] 
    Michale wrote:

    The difference is that there is evidence that climate change is real.

    Of course climate change is real... As you point out, the evidence is all around us...

    But humans being able to control the climate??

    There is no evidence to support that...

  147. [147] 
    Michale wrote:

    I get a kick out of the hysterical moronic Democrats who scream and yell, "WE MUST STOP CLIMATE CHANGE!!!!"

    Just as moronic as saying, "WE MUST STOP THE ROTATION OF THE PLANET!!!!"

    :D

  148. [148] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    We can't completely stop burglars from breaking into our house so there is no point in locking the door.

  149. [149] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Not sure who said it, but it sounds Carlinesque:

    If 7-11 is open 24 hours a day 365 days a year , why is there a lock on the door?

  150. [150] 
    neilm wrote:

    Nobody knew what Trump would be like as President. So a few "A" people - McMaster, Maddis, etc. signed up. Turned out Trump is a self centered "moron" (as one of them called him), and word got out.

    Then we got the grifters, and Trump undermined, humiliated, then fired or drove them out.

    Now we literally have nobody. Trump is trying to enact major immigration policies with about 1/2 of the DHS positions empty.

    Everywhere else there is "acting" this, and "acting" that - Defense Secretary, Chief of Staff - hell Kelly Craft, U.S. Ambassador to (our largest trading partner) Canada, has been absent for 300 days and it is barely news (I'll bet the right wingers didn't get that little tidbit in their filtered news bubble, for example).

    Yet Trump has nominated Kelly "Hide and Seek" Craft to replace Nicki Haley as U.N. Ambassador because nobody want to work for this clown.

    You could see why in the clip in the Oval Office where Trump acted like a spoiled teenager when somebody sneezed - who would want to work for somebody as childish as that?

    The people who are wiling to put up with Trump are people like Bolton, Pompeo, and Pence - people who ignore him and only look at his power and how they can harness it for their own ends.

    What a farce.

  151. [151] 
    neilm wrote:

    I'll bet a cheeseburger at In'N'Out that in two weeks time Trump will have conveniently forgotten about the ICE raids - he will be watching Fox News to see if he is being held accountable for the two week delay, and if he isn't then he will just move on and all his minions will have forgotten as well.

  152. [152] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    123

    Because HE can. Same way he can call a black friend, “his nigga” and it wouldn’t offend the Black community, but Joe best not think he can say it and it’ll be cool!

    I confess to already anticipating this very response, which I again confess that I believed would come from you... so bonus! Being a Texan, I am infinitely aware of this dynamic and how it would apply to certain "language." However, I'm still trying to wrap my head around why Booker would publicly call for Biden to apologize "immediately" for using the term because it was hurtful to "so many Americans" to hear that word and showed insensitivity. Then... BAM... Cory can't go 6 minutes in South Carolina without tossing out that same nugget. I get the use of the "n" word... totally... and I don't hear politicians using it in speeches ever, but if use of this one is so horrible according to Booker that it warrants an immediate apology because it is so hurtful to so many Americans, then Cory might want to stop peppering it into his every conversation too since it offends so many. Just saying.

    Meanwhile, Donald Trump took out multiple full page ads calling for the execution of five young black and Latino boys (no offense meant, but they weren't men) accused of rape and later fully exonerated, while Trump stood by calling for their deaths, Trump's full-throated embrace of the birther conspiracy theory for multiple years running, and Trump's nativist sentiments directed at nonwhite immigrants that constantly surrounds him. Meanwhile, Booker wants to torch Biden.

    The word "overkill" comes to mind. That's all I'm saying.

    Also, it matters WHO said it — the examples he gave were from older family members, who were using “boy” in a loving manner.

    So one can actually use this horrible word that demands an immediate apology in a "loving manner." Uh... okay.

    Biden was discussing horrible racists who didn’t call him “boy”... I can see why people might associate the term with its racial connotation.

    Oh, I certainly agree that Biden put his foot in it; he's got to stop doing that. I just also think it's being overblown, and then Cory dropped it into his speech in South Carolina after making such a fuss about how hurtful it is.

    Also, spot on in [45]!

    Thanks. When I found out Michale agreed, my IQ dropped an octave. Just kidding. Actually, I would wager that we all agree on a whole lot more than we disagree. In the entire line of bullshit Michale is pushing here in cut-and-paste fashion and like a broken record stuck in a rut, the fatal flaw is that he's the model of objectivity while everyone else is a hypocrite.

    So self-awareness isn't his strong suit, and there are a myriad of ways in which he has no moral authority whatsoever. Meanwhile, we're here to discuss political issues while he's just here to troll posters and discuss them. You nailed him on this too, Russ. #Awesome :)

  153. [153] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'll bet a cheeseburger at In'N'Out that in two weeks time Trump will have conveniently forgotten about the ICE raids - he will be watching Fox News to see if he is being held accountable for the two week delay, and if he isn't then he will just move on and all his minions will have forgotten as well.

    Considering you have been WRONG each and every Trump prediction.....

    Will you have my in-out cheeseburger delivered???

  154. [154] 
    Michale wrote:

    We can't completely stop burglars from breaking into our house so there is no point in locking the door.

    To use your analogy, Left Wingers want to bankrupt the family and get rid of all their stuff.. With nothing IN the house, there is no reason to lock the door..

  155. [155] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Re-145

    Again, there are two aspects of religion: belief in god(s) and worship of god(s). Belief AND Worship. Not Belief OR Worship. Both conditions must be met. That's the definition and it has a long history.

    Simply having an opinion about something doesn't mean you actually have something. You can have an opinion aboot money without actually having any money. Just as you can have an opinion aboot a political movement without actually having any followers.

    Your anecdote about the 4th grade is charming but it is a smoke screen to conceal your ignorance. Was there a 5th grade?

  156. [156] 
    TheStig wrote:

    RE-155

    Too snarky? Naaah....but's that's just my opinion.

  157. [157] 
    neilm wrote:

    Will you have my in-out cheeseburger delivered?

    It will be cold, and probably a bit green, but I'll buy one, put it in a bag, and ship it ground to you Michale :)

  158. [158] 
    neilm wrote:

    With nothing IN the house, there is no reason to lock the door

    Yeah, all us rich coastal types have nothing in our houses - but it is called minimalism and costs us a crap load of money to look so poor.

  159. [159] 
    Michale wrote:

    but's that's just my opinion.

    Yea.. They are like assholes..

  160. [160] 
    Michale wrote:

    It will be cold, and probably a bit green, but I'll buy one, put it in a bag, and ship it ground to you Michale :)

    Well, at least you concede you will be wrong.. AGAIN.. :D

    Yeah, all us rich coastal types have nothing in our houses - but it is called minimalism and costs us a crap load of money to look so poor.

    Heh

  161. [161] 
    neilm wrote:

    Considering you have been WRONG each and every Trump prediction.....

    Well I got the mid terms right. Trump tried the "scare-a-van" story and got Fox News to pump and dump it into the scared-out-of-their-depends audience and it still didn't work, as I predicted.

    He also flip-flopped on the Mexico tariffs, again as I predicted.

    Trouble is you only have one incident - the 2016 election, and if you remember (and if you don't, see the link below), I gave Trump a 1/3 chance of winning - and he didn't win the vote count, but got the electoral college by a statistical fluke.

    Trump is fairly easy to predict - just watch Fox News and they tell him what to do.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2016/11/04/ftp414/#comment-87574

  162. [162] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    129

    Yes, well, I should have said the number of VIABLE Democratic presidential candidates will narrow after the first debates, assuming said candidates throw spurious attacks in Biden's direction.

    Yes! I think there are only about 6-7 of them that stand a chance at the outset for a myriad of reasons that include the order of the primary/caucus schedule, fundraising issues, and all the regular logistical reasons regarding staffing issues, etc.

    I hope against hope that it's a real debate involving political issues and ideas versus boring "I know you are but what am I" rants discussing petty shit. Candidates: Please discuss the damn issues, FFS.

    Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people. ~ Eleanor Roosevelt

  163. [163] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well I got the mid terms right.

    Nope.. You predicted a WAVE and it was barely a trickle.. Odumbo and Clinton both lost much MUCH more than Trump did..

    He also flip-flopped on the Mexico tariffs, again as I predicted.

    Again, nope.. He gave Mexico an IF/THEN deal.. If you don't do yer jobs, THEN your economy gets frak'ed..

    Mexico capitulated.. According to Trump's plan..

    Trouble is you only have one incident - the 2016 election,

    Nope, again.. Ya'all have made THOUSANDS of hysterical anti-Trump predictions.

    And ya'all have *ALWAYS* been wrong..

  164. [164] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    135

    Not President Trump.. LEGAL hispanics love President Trump for his jobs programs...

    What jobs programs are you referring to? Do tell.

    But I have to admit, my gut reaction was the same as yours..

    Trust your instincts that Trump is full of it.

    But, I should have realized that President Trump ALWAYS has a plan...

    No, he doesn't! His only plan is how he can make money no matter who he has to con or what laws he has to break and how he can garner praise in his never-ending quest to feed his needy ego. He'll easily take both sides of any issue because he has no core values except "self."

    Let that sink in, and learn to nurture your instincts, and there's hope for you yet. :)

  165. [165] 
    Michale wrote:

    New documents revisit questions about Rep. Ilhan Omar's marriage history

    Although she has legally corrected the discrepancy, she has declined to say anything about how or why it happened.

    New investigative documents released by a state agency have given fresh life to lingering questions about the marital history of Rep. Ilhan Omar and whether she once married a man — possibly her own brother — to skirt immigration laws.
    http://www.startribune.com/new-documents-revisit-questions-about-rep-ilhan-omar-s-marriage/511681362/

    Democrats are so kinky.... :D

  166. [166] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    138

    So, now we know why President Trump called off the raids.

    Because Nancy Pelosi asked him to cancel it, and in less than 12 hours, Trump did exactly as he was requested. Quite right. And you somehow interpret Nancy's request and Trump's prompt acquiescence as "a plan" on Trump's part?

    Once again, President Trump is the man with the plan..

    *laughs*

    Now the pressure is on Pelosi and the Democrats to take meaningful steps to fix the immigration mess...

    Which are bipartisan laws enacted by George W. Bush that Donald Trump had two years where he controlled both the House and the Senate where he could have easily put forward a real plan regarding his ideas to "fix the immigration mess" yet simply proposed a "Wall" that Mexico was supposed to pay for but that he couldn't even get Republicans to fund. :)

  167. [167] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The segregationist senator never called me 'boy' because, obviously, I'm not black; so, he called me 'son' instead to bring me down a few pegs; he never (well, next to never) called me 'senator' or think of me as an equal; but, guess what - at least there was civility; if we had civility back then when there were a number of racist senators who belittled black men and white junior senators, then I know we can get to the point today when we can refer to our political opponents as just that and not enemies;

  168. [168] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I suppose one could criticize Biden, as Ana Navorro did, by saying that he shouldn't have brought up segregationist senators from the seventies; he could have made the same point by talking about working with John McCain;

    But, then the point Biden was making about working together in the senate in a civil manner with the worst of the worst of that body wouldn't have been as strong.

    Of course Biden worked with McCain. They were good friends for God's sake!

    I think all of Biden's critics on this issue need to take another look at their criticism of Biden and ask if it is valid.

  169. [169] 
    Michale wrote:

    I suppose one could criticize Biden, as Ana Navorro did, by saying that he shouldn't have brought up segregationist senators from the seventies; he could have made the same point by talking about working with John McCain;

    It certainly would have been a lot less painful for Biden.. :D

    But Joe Biden is Joe Biden and he probably thought to himself, "NO ONE could possibly misconstrue this!!"

    Biden neglected to take into account the depravity of this new crop of Democrats "leaders".... :eyeroll:

  170. [170] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Stig (155)-
    Why are you still arguing the definition of religion has any bearing on the definition of a religious belief?

    Believing in a god or believing that a god does not exists are both religious beliefs.

    You don't have to have a religion to have a belief aboot the existence of a god.

    All your education has not helped you understand this simple fact, unless you're just pretending to not understand.

    Let's hope that is the case as I am pretty sure I would have been able to understand this all the way back in the fourth grade.

    P.S.- I can cipher almost as good as Jethro!

  171. [171] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Michale-
    More of a misuse of the analogy.

    What the analogy meant, just in case you are not pretending to not understand, was just because we can't stop everything bad from happening doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can do.

  172. [172] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    143

    I guess since you equate this discussion with One Demand you decided to use the same strategy to argue by arguing against an argument I didn't make.

    No, Don. I used your statement made much later about atheists recognizing that having a belief in a "supernatural being" without any evidence to support it was a "GIANT RED FLAG that this is a scam" in order to highlight the fact that "One Demand" resembled your remark about a scam that didn't have any evidence to support it.

    We don't believe in religion because we do believe in reality over fairytales and scams.

    So you don't believe in religion. Okay. Yet you keep whining incessantly that atheism is a "religious belief." Pick a lane. Otherwise, you sound like a scam artist... and not the first time either, I reiterate.

    I said not believing in a religion is a religious belief.

    Wrong. What you actually said was: "Not believing in a deity or religion is in itself a religious belief so an atheist should also get a crack at an opening invocation/prayer/statement of religious belief, if they haven't already."

    You are free to keep claiming that atheism is "a religious belief" or let it sink in that atheists believe that atheism is not a belief system nor a religion. It's neither of them, Don.

    Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion.

    While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. To put it in a more humorous way: If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

    Despite the fact that atheism is not a religion, atheism is protected by many of the same Constitutional rights that protect religion. That, however, does not mean that atheism is itself a religion, only that our sincerely held (lack of) beliefs are protected in the same way as the religious beliefs of others. Similarly, many “interfaith” groups will include atheists. This, again, does not mean that atheism is a religious belief.

    ~ American Atheists organization

    https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/about-atheism/

    Repeating to Don: "This again, does not mean that atheism is a religious belief."

    Not believing in a deity or religion is in itself a religious belief."

    OMG! Lord, please help this ignorant mortal. :)

  173. [173] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    John McCain and Biden were friends.

    Biden couldn't have made the point he was making by relating how civil he could be with his friend!!!

  174. [174] 
    Michale wrote:

    What the analogy meant, just in case you are not pretending to not understand, was just because we can't stop everything bad from happening doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can do.

    Unless what we can do might actually make things worse..

    We don't know enough to even know what we don't know..

    Seems to me it's stoopid to mess around with things..

    Humans cannot control the planet's climate... It's stoopid to bankrupt whole economies and enslave millions of people in a futile attempt to try...

  175. [175] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    144

    Now, it wouldn't surprise me if some hysterical moron Democrat accused Dr Beckett of being racist for it..

    That is exactly the problem with Democrats and their faux outrage to racism..

    Wrong and a major ridiculous assertion of epic proportions. The Democrats I know would simply explain that television characters aren't real, and neither is the reality television president.

    It's a con; please, catch on. :)

  176. [176] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Biden neglected to take into account the depravity of this new crop of Democrats "leaders".... :eyeroll:

    Well, Biden's strong faith in the American people is a two-way sword, so to speak.

    But, it has been my experience that he is often right to have that faith.

  177. [177] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick-
    So what?

    Their argument is also wrong.

    They explain why they are wrong "Our sincerely held (lack of) beliefs" and then reach a conclusion that is just the opposite that it is not a religious belief.

    A lack of belief in the existence of a god is a belief aboot the existence of a god is just as much a belief as a belief that a god exists.

    Just because someone (some people) starts an organization doesn't mean their definition is correct.

    What they should say is: ...Our sincerely held belief that a god does not exist...

    There is no way to prove or disprove the existence of a god so the only thing you can have is a belief on whether a god exists or not.

  178. [178] 
    neilm wrote:

    Is the era of populist strongmen starting to fade?

    Istanbul has rebuked Ergodan - let's hope this is the beginning of the end for right wing populism and it all takes place in polling stations and not with blood on the streets. In Turkey, Hungary, the United States and maybe even Russia, voters are waking up to the lies and the emotional manipulation.

  179. [179] 
    neilm wrote:

    Is the era of populist strongmen starting to fade?

    Istanbul has rebuked Ergodan - let's hope this is the beginning of the end for right wing populism and it all takes place in polling stations and not with blood on the streets. In Turkey, Hungary, the United States and maybe even Russia, voters are waking up to the lies and the emotional manipulation.

  180. [180] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Neil,

    Hopefully, we can expect to see a column or two here about the rise (and fall?) of right-wing faux populism.

    That would certainly generate a thoughtful discussion here, right? :)

  181. [181] 
    Michale wrote:

    Well, Biden's strong faith in the American people is a two-way sword, so to speak.

    But, it has been my experience that he is often right to have that faith.

    Agreed...

  182. [182] 
    neilm wrote:

    Steel mills are closing, coal usage is down significantly year-over-year - as usual, everything Trump touches goes wrong. The Fed is talking about a stimulus to revitalize the economy and Trump is urging them to do it quickly before the wheels come off the bus.

    The stock market has already priced in a 0.25% rate cut fully, it has priced in about a 1/3 chance of a 0.50% cut, and is frothy over the chances that the China tariffs will be lifted - I never time the markets, but if I was ever to do so, this might be a good time for a short play on S&P500 futures.

  183. [183] 
    neilm wrote:

    That would certainly generate a thoughtful discussion here, right? :)

    Right :)

  184. [184] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    155

    Simply having an opinion about something doesn't mean you actually have something. You can have an opinion aboot money without actually having any money.

    Zing.

    Just as you can have an opinion aboot a political movement without actually having any followers.

    Zing.

    Your anecdote about the 4th grade is charming but it is a smoke screen to conceal your ignorance. Was there a 5th grade?

    Charming! Spew alert. :)

  185. [185] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    One final thought on the ignorant and/or purposeful misunderstanding of Biden and the continuing devolution of the media and political culture in America:

    I just heard Jake Tapper on CNN ask Senator Castro about the controversial comments by Biden, in particular Biden saying that he was called 'son' instead of 'boy' by Eastland.

    If there is a failure to understand what Biden said about boy and son (THAT THEY ARE BOTH DEMEANING TERMS, ONE USED FOR BLACK MEN AND ONE USED FOR A POWERLESS JUNIOR SENATOR FROM DELAWARE!!!, then there is no longer any hope for the US media, not to mention the broader scope of untraditional media/punditocracy/blogosphere.

  186. [186] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS: but's that's just my opinion.

    Michale: Yea.. They are like assholes..

    Said the "hole" who posts the most opinions and the least amount of facts.

    Tell us more about "holes." It would be a nice change to hear from you regarding a subject on which you're infinitely qualified versus your usual repetitive trolling. :)

  187. [187] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @don,

    this is a question every professor poses in every comparative religion 101 freshman seminar, at most universities. many freshmen reach the same conclusion you have, for the same reasons. although some people do treat religion as if it were a science and atheism as if it were a religion, there are a few distinctions, as a result of which that conclusion ultimately fails to persuade most educated individuals.

    disclaimer: i am NOT an atheist. i choose to believe there is a god. but pretty much any atheist out there will tell you that they are open to any god out there willing to show up and prove them wrong. atheism (in most cases) is not a "faith" in the non-existence of a god or gods, it is a conscious decision to apply the scientific method and accept only those truths that are factually proven.

    faith, by definition, is accepting the existence of something which CANNOT be factually proven. logically, in order for atheism to qualify as faith, there would have to be proof of a deity for them to reject as an expression of their anti-faith. and there isn't, so it's not. QED

  188. [188] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,

    i really wish CW would reply to this thread. i think there are enough of us here who dissent with his view on biden's comments for it to be worth engaging.

    JL

  189. [189] 
    Kick wrote:

    neilm
    161

    Ouch... scorch... total burn! We have a winner. :)

    Trump is fairly easy to predict - just watch Fox News and they tell him what to do.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2016/11/04/ftp414/#comment-87574

    Yes, sir. Fox and Vlad. A large cutout makes it much easier to shove your hand up inside in order to control a puppet. :)

  190. [190] 
    Michale wrote:

    Steel mills are closing, coal usage is down significantly year-over-year - as usual, everything Trump touches goes wrong.

    Whatever you have to tell yourself to make it thru the day.. :D

    Fact is, President Trump's approval rating is rising..

    How are those investigations going??

    Talk to McGhan yet???

    Talk to Barr yet??

    Talk to Mueller yet??

    See Trump's tax returns?? :D

    I understand you have to live in your delusion..

    Reality is just too painful... :D

  191. [191] 
    Michale wrote:

    If there is a failure to understand what Biden said about boy and son (THAT THEY ARE BOTH DEMEANING TERMS, ONE USED FOR BLACK MEN AND ONE USED FOR A POWERLESS JUNIOR SENATOR FROM DELAWARE!!!, then there is no longer any hope for the US media, not to mention the broader scope of untraditional media/punditocracy/blogosphere.

    Liz, ya gotta understand.. The Media has a LOT invested in their identity politics war..

    They HAVE to keep the scourge of racism alive.. Or else people might actually look around and say, "Things really aren't that bad..."

  192. [192] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua,

    I don't understand why he doesn't. Unless he continues to stand by his take on all of this and doesn't want to argue about it.

  193. [193] 
    TheStig wrote:

    DH -170

    Religion is the belief in Gods and the worship of Gods.

    Religious means that you believe in a God or Gods and you worship a God or Gods.

    I am agnostic. I do not believe in any God. I do not worship any God. I do not exclude the possibility that supernatural Gods exist, but I judge it very unlikely. I do not hedge my bets and I do not pray on the sly. Mine is not a religious belief, it is a belief aboot religion and its underlying plausibility.

    I also have beliefs about Hitler-but believing that he existed and was a monster does not make me a Nazi.

    Your logic is sloppy and it puts people into camps they don't belong in.

  194. [194] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    There are serious race issues in your country and they won't ever be solved by saying there isn't a problem.

    Just to be clear.

  195. [195] 
    Michale wrote:

    There are serious race issues in your country and they won't ever be solved by saying there isn't a problem.

    No more serious than the "hate" issues that plague this country..

    You will NEVER get rid of racism, just like you will never get rid of hate..

    Being a racist is a constitutional right...

    The problem is, one political Party has created an entire cottage industry for fighting racism.. And if they can't fight an actual enemy, they will create them...

    Like they did with Joe Biden...

  196. [196] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua,

    Or, it could be that he's just too busy.

    That's actually what I think it is.

  197. [197] 
    Michale wrote:

    Your logic is sloppy and it puts people into camps they don't belong in.

    And heaven forbid ya should put people into camps they don't belong in..

    Oh... wait... That's a Democrat Party plank... :eyeroll:

  198. [198] 
    Michale wrote:

    The MSM is NOT being kind to Joe Biden...

    Biden’s Media Strategy: Duck The Press Unless You’re Under Duress

    ‘It’s not a tenable strategy,’ David Axelrod laments.
    https://www.thedailybeast.com/bidens-media-strategy-duck-the-press-unless-youre-under-duress

    I wish I could say I was surprised.. But this is EXACTLY what I predicted would happen..

    The new Democrat Party will tear Joe Biden to shreds...

    :(

  199. [199] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    liz/michale,

    as long as there are still institutions that support injustice, there need to be institutions to fight it. that doesn't mean those institutions can't all be improved, but there needs to be balance. example: in the 1950's to 1970's, unions went too far to protect those workers who didn't put in a sincere effort. as a result, there's been forty years of anti-union backlash, to the point where workers across the nation are once again being mistreated, fired or underpaid for blatantly discriminatory reasons. things have swung too far in the other direction, and now even socialism is being given another shot at the public consciousness here. that's the nature of the system.

    JL

  200. [200] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    163

    Nope.. You predicted a WAVE and it was barely a trickle.. Odumbo and Clinton both lost much MUCH more than Trump did..

    Why did you deflect to Obama and Clinton yet leave out a comparison including George W. Bush? Regardless, we have your bullshit, deflection, and delusions, and then we have the verifiable statistical facts.

    12/06/2018

    The final votes are being counted from the 2018 election. They confirm that the Democrats crushed Republicans.

    Let's start in the seat count. Republican Rep. David Valadao of California's 21st District conceded on Thursday to Democrat T.J. Cox.

    Cox's victory combined with other election results means that Democrats have picked up a net gain of 40 seats.

    As has oft been repeated, this is the largest Democratic House gain since 1974. It's a larger gain than Democrats had in the wave elections of both 1982 and 2006.

    We can go back even further and see how unusual it is that Democrats picked up this many seats. If you go back all the way to first election of the post-World War II era (1946), there have only been three elections in which Democrats net gained more seats than they did in 2018. Put another way, this was the fourth best performance for Democrats in the 37 general House elections since President Donald Trump was born.

    Another way to judge an election is by how many votes each side wins. Democrats' position in the national House popular vote is now reaching historical proportions.

    According to the vote count from the Cook Political Report, Democrats now have a 8.6 point lead. For a party that started in the minority, this is incredibly strong. Minority parties often struggle because even an unpopular majority party is protected partially by the fact that incumbents receive a boost compared to other candidates.

    This year's 8.6 point House popular vote win for the Democrats is the greatest on record for a minority party heading into an election. This dates all the way back to 1942, when the Clerk of the House started listing the House popular vote in its after-election statistics document. That is, the Democratic performance this year was better than the minority party's in the previous 38 elections.

    The Democrats won by a wider margin this year than Democrats did in 2006 or Republicans did in 1994 or 2010. They beat the previous record of 8.5 points Republicans won by in 1946. (Note: I'm assigning the Democrats and Republicans the votes for their candidates on other lines via electoral fusion.)

    Importantly, Democrats didn't just win because Republicans turnout was low. This year had the highest turnout for any midterm election at 50.1% in the last 100 years. Turnout was about 35 million more people than it was four years ago, when Republicans expanded their House majority.

    The 2018 large turnout allowed House Democrats to win about 10 million more votes than House Republicans. That's the largest raw vote margin in a House midterm election ever.

    This wasn't just a blue wave in the House. It was a tsunami.

    https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/06/politics/latest-house-vote-blue-wave/index.html

    Criticize the source all you wish, but the statistics are irrefutable regardless. Neil is correct. You and Trump lost and lost bigly. :)

  201. [201] 
    Michale wrote:

    as long as there are still institutions that support injustice, there need to be institutions to fight it.

    I am assuming you are meaning RACIAL injustice and not general injustice... in general...

    Could you be specific as to WHICH institution we have that is racist??

    and now even socialism is being given another shot at the public consciousness here.

    Yea.. You keep telling yourself that socialism is being given a shot. :D

    The *ONLY* ones who consider socialism viable are the morons that think you can take the billions in tax credits and use that to feed the homeless... :D

  202. [202] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua wrote:

    as long as there are still institutions that support injustice, there need to be institutions to fight it. that doesn't mean those institutions can't all be improved, but there needs to be balance. example: in the 1950's to 1970's, unions went too far to protect those workers who didn't put in a sincere effort. as a result, there's been forty years of anti-union backlash, to the point where workers across the nation are once again being mistreated, fired or underpaid for blatantly discriminatory reasons. things have swung too far in the other direction, and now even socialism is being given another shot at the public consciousness here. that's the nature of the system.

    Not sure why my name is up there as I do not agree with Michale on this. I agree with you.

  203. [203] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua wrote:

    liz/michale,

    as long as there are still institutions that support injustice, there need to be institutions to fight it. that doesn't mean those institutions can't all be improved, but there needs to be balance. example: in the 1950's to 1970's, unions went too far to protect those workers who didn't put in a sincere effort. as a result, there's been forty years of anti-union backlash, to the point where workers across the nation are once again being mistreated, fired or underpaid for blatantly discriminatory reasons. things have swung too far in the other direction, and now even socialism is being given another shot at the public consciousness here. that's the nature of the system.

    Not sure why my name is up there as I do not agree with Michale on this. I agree with you.

    I just don't want any confusion about that.

  204. [204] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Joshua,

    You may have missed [194].

    Kind of like people missing what Biden said. :)

  205. [205] 
    Michale wrote:

    "AOC -- look at me. My name is Sami Steigmann. I am a holocaust survivor. I went through it. How can you -- looking at my face, telling me that the camps we have in the South are concentration camps? What you are doing is you are insulting every victim of the Holocaust. Shame on you! I'm not only a Holocaust survivor, I was in a labor camp ... I was subjected to medical experiments and, later on, a German woman saved my life, when I came to the stage of dying of starvation."
    -Sami Steigmann, Holocaust Survivor

    Occasional Cortex is REALLY a moron..

  206. [206] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    NYpoet (187)-

    Having faith is just a justification for the belief.

    In the term "religious belief" religious is descriptive of the what the belief is aboot.

    If you believe in Bigfoots it's a Bigfootian belief.
    If you don't believe in Bigfoots it's a Bigfootian belief.

  207. [207] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Stig-
    The word religious by itself is what you say.

    When combined with the word belief it becomes a term that does not. (see 206)

  208. [208] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    If you want to be picky the word religious becomes part of a term.

  209. [209] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Kick -

    Your post at [200] was exactly what I needed to start my day! Thanks!

  210. [210] 
    Michale wrote:

    Your post at [200] was exactly what I needed to start my day! Thanks!

    Too bad it was nothing but CNN bullshit.. :D

    But, hay.. I am happy I am so much a part of your life..

    The fact is, Trump is president and ya'll don't have a chance to beat him in 2020.. Especially since Dumbocrats are doing the damnest to implement the circular firing squad... :D

  211. [211] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    177

    So what?

    Their argument is also wrong.

    How does this square with your nugget:

    You don't get to define other people's choices to fit your desires. ~ Don Harris

    They explain why they are wrong "Our sincerely held (lack of) beliefs" and then reach a conclusion that is just the opposite that it is not a religious belief.

    No, they don't explain why they are wrong, and they most certainly don't mince words:

    * Atheism is not a belief system nor is it a religion.

    * This, again, does not mean that atheism is a religious belief.

    A lack of belief in the existence of a god is a belief aboot the existence of a god is just as much a belief as a belief that a god exists.

    Who said it wasn't a "belief"? Nice moving of the goalposts, Don. No one ever said it wasn't a "belief." We all said it wasn't a "religious belief." The atheists explain that it isn't a "religious belief" in multiple ways. The atheists' believe that atheism isn't a "religious belief," and according to you, you don't get to define other people's choices to fit your desires.

    Just because someone (some people) starts an organization doesn't mean their definition is correct.
    What they should say is: ...Our sincerely held belief that a god does not exist...

    Said the guy who started an organization without any substantive evidence to support it who defines "Big Money" on his terms and accuses anyone who disagrees with his definition as "part of the problem" and providing "cover" for others who donate in an amount that doesn't meet his definition.

    There is no way to prove or disprove the existence of a god so the only thing you can have is a belief on whether a god exists or not.

    Wrong again, Don. You can also live happily in the knowledge that you don't know because you actually don't know what you don't know until you know it. :)

  212. [212] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    187

    this is a question every professor poses in every comparative religion 101 freshman seminar, at most universities.

    Yes, sir, 100% correct.

    many freshmen reach the same conclusion you have, for the same reasons. although some people do treat religion as if it were a science and atheism as if it were a religion, there are a few distinctions, as a result of which that conclusion ultimately fails to persuade most educated individuals.

    Absolutely spot on, as is the post in its entirety.

    I was hoping to God that somebody would come along and explain this better than I could, and "le voilà"... there he is. Anybody need anymore proof?

    And now... time for peachy pie! :)

  213. [213] 
    Kick wrote:

    TS
    193

    … my cup runneth over. Psalms 23:5

  214. [214] 
    chaszzzbrown wrote:

    [185] EM:

    [A] failure to understand what Biden said about boy and son (THAT THEY ARE BOTH DEMEANING TERMS, ONE USED FOR BLACK MEN AND ONE USED FOR A POWERLESS JUNIOR SENATOR FROM DELAWARE!!!...

    "A powerless junior senator from Delaware" is hardly a powerless person in the big picture, so the comparison is a bit grating. That's one reason why this is considered a gaffe by many, myself included.

    And there was just no reason for the comparison either - he could have dropped the whole "boy"/"son" rhetoric and made the exact same actual point (which I take to be: he found a way to work successfully with people who openly disrespected him and who were morally questionable; and he can do it again!).

    I'll admit that it doesn't help that I disagree that his tactics would be effective in today's climate (or even that they were successful back then); but that part isn't a gaffe at all; that's just where the Senator and I have a difference of opinion.

  215. [215] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    209

    Your post at [200] was exactly what I needed to start my day! Thanks!

    Somebody slept late. ;) *hugs*

  216. [216] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And there was just no reason for the comparison either - he could have dropped the whole "boy"/"son" rhetoric and made the exact same actual point (which I take to be: he found a way to work successfully with people who openly disrespected him and who were morally questionable; and he can do it again!).

    If all of Biden's critics saw it that way, the right way, then we wouldn't have had two columns here about it arguing the opposite and we wouldn't have had Democratic candidates going around putting words in Biden's mouth and making outright false statements about what he said.

  217. [217] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Sorry, the above was for chaszzz!

  218. [218] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Trump is president and ya'll don't have a chance to beat him in 2020..

    That's your argument? Might as well post an image of a MAGA hat and say, "it's all there".

  219. [219] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That's [Michale's] argument? Might as well post an image of a MAGA hat and say, "it's all there".

    Well, it's a pretty good argument if the Democrats devour their best candidate.

  220. [220] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Balthasar,

    That's [Michale's] argument? Might as well post an image of a MAGA hat and say, "it's all there".

    Well, it's a pretty good argument if the Democrats devour their best candidate.

  221. [221] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    it's a pretty good argument if the Democrats devour their best candidate

    So, you don't think that ANY of the remaining candidates can beat Trump? I disagree.

    The current flap over Biden's poor choice of metaphors is mostly about field position. Liberals have to have something to go after him with. Something to wake up the 'woke folk' who have too many demons already.

    I think this will be over in just a week.

  222. [222] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    218

    That's your argument? Might as well post an image of a MAGA hat and say, "it's all there".

    M Y...... A T T O R N E Y...... G O T...... A R R E S T E D
    and imprisoned for following my orders ~ Individual 1

    It's all there! :)

  223. [223] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think I must have missed something along the way here, but what does woke, woked, wokable, wolk folk mean?

    Finally attuned to the issues, capable of being convinced??

    When did this become a word?

  224. [224] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Balthasar,

    I think this will be over in just a week.

    And, then Booker et al. will find some other thing that Biden says to lie about.

    They got nothing else on him?

    I'm waiting for the first one of the candidates to say he voted for the war in Iraq and, in so saying, betray a fundamental ignorance on their part. Just like candidate Obama did when he first ran for president.

    As for any of the others winning the nomination? Yes, I believe that Biden is the only one capable of not only beating Trump but of reversing course, domestically and internationally.

    And, no, he most decidedly won't be the next VP or Secretary of State. Because, if he isn't the next president, Trump will.

  225. [225] 
    Kick wrote:

    Balthasar
    221

    So, you don't think that ANY of the remaining candidates can beat Trump? I disagree.

    Balthy is right. There are several who could beat Trump. The 2020 Democratic ticket will be a tag team of exactly what we're seeing now. All they're doing is jockeying for position on a muddy racetrack.

    I think this will be over in just a week.

    Sounds about right. Remember Bernie unleashing his "women" on Joe in April before Joe announced? Did it hurt Joe? Nope. Because we all knew that about Joe already, and the people accusing him were being disingenuous and overblowing what happened. Every attack like this will do nothing more than make Joe stronger. EM, we already know that Joe is prone to gaffes. He'll be okay making whatever gaffes as long as his opposition is overblowing whatever the gaffe is... because we all know that about Joe already.

    The only thing that can hurt Joe is a new revelation that he can't survive because it's a genuine "new revelation" versus an overblown political "piling on."

    All this shenanigans needs to happen now. The more the better, in fact. Whomever survives it and wins the nomination will be toughened up. If Joe survives it, he should pick Stacey Abrams or Kamala Harris as his running mate, and full steam ahead to 11/2020. :)

  226. [226] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Wrong, just wrong on the running mate choice. But, let's save that robust discussion until after he wins the nomination.

  227. [227] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Just for the record, I'm in on KH getting VP. But as you say, we're way ahead of ourselves!

  228. [228] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And I second the notion that this needs to happen now, and not just to Biden, he just happens to come first. Excruciating to Democrats, but good for candidates.

  229. [229] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It doesn't need to happen now or ever based on false statements by fellow candidates.

  230. [230] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    KH for VP?? Wouldn't AG make more sense?

  231. [231] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Kick (211)-
    I'm not defining anyone's choice, I'm defining the meaning of religious belief.

    Repeatng the same quotes still does not address that the belief is the subject and religious is descriptive.
    It describes that the belief is aboot the existence of a god.

    Really grasping for straws on the One Demand comparison.

    Both One Demand have definitions. The atheist organization defines what they think it means and people that agree with them can join their organization and accept their definition of whether believing a god does not exist is a religious belief.

    They do not demand that I accept their definition anymore than One Demand demands that everyone accept the One Demand definition of a small donor and whether those that exceed the limit are part of the problem and whether big money donors with good intentions provide cover for big money donors with not so good intentions. Those that agree can join and those that don't agree are free to not join.

    You may or may not be an a-theist, but you are without question an A-hole that obviously can only entertain themselves by being an a-hole because you are incapable of rational discussion.

    I believe that religiously.

  232. [232] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    not a-hole, unless that's short for anti-troll. look it up. or better yet, put some pie in your pie-hole.
    :)
    JL

    source:
    http://airshipdaily.com/blog/92620136-ways-to-fight-trolls-instead-of-starving-them

  233. [233] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    on another note, i just read an explanation why the citizenship question on the census really matters. why on earth hadn't this occurred to me before?

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/23/republicans-census-2020-election-gerrymandering

  234. [234] 
    Michale wrote:

    That's your argument? Might as well post an image of a MAGA hat and say, "it's all there".

    That's the only argument needed..

    Look at the facts..

    What meaningful legislation has Democrats put out that made it to law???

    NADA...

    They were voted in on a platform of investigating Trump...

    Have the talked to Barr?? Nope..

    Have they talked to McGhan?? Nope..

    Have they even talked to MUELLER who is their hero, their shining knight in armor?? Nope...

    Have the even looked at President Trump's tax returns???

    A really REALLY big NOPE...

    To paraphrase Janet Jackson, WHAT HAVE THEY DONE FOR YOUR LATELY???

    I won't even bother going into the FACT that Democrats in the House are supposed to work for ALL Americans..

    But these morons you elected haven't even done anything for you Democrats!!

    Your "wave" (BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA) election of Dumbocrats has net'ed ya'all precisely DICK... :D

  235. [235] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Well, it's a pretty good argument if the Democrats devour their best candidate.

    Thank you, Liz.. It IS a pretty good argument when these Dumbocrat candidates do exactly what I predicted they would do...

  236. [236] 
    Michale wrote:

    on another note, i just read an explanation why the citizenship question on the census really matters. why on earth hadn't this occurred to me before?

    It's long on high-winded accusations and hysterical conspiracy theories..

    But it has nothing in the way of facts...

    It says some conservative died, left behind a bunch of notes and these notes, according to the author say A, B, C, D and E

    Why aren't the actual notes posted so the reader him (or her) self could see them and make their own mind up about what they actually say??

    Because THAT would mean the reader would likely come to the conclusion that these notes don't say what the author says they say...

    Sorry, JL.. But you appear to have nothing but another anti-GOP anti-Trump conspiracy theory with no facts to back it up...

    The citizenship question in the census is a GOOD thing.. There is nothing nefarious about wanting an accurate count of who are American citizens and who are not..

    Of course criminals don't want to declare themselves.. But any country would want to know who they are...

  237. [237] 
    Michale wrote:

    And President Trump approval numbers continue to move upwards...

    So much for the claim that President Trump is LOSING support of the American people.. :D

  238. [238] 
    Michale wrote:

    A civil war is coming for the Democratic Party — and it won't be pretty

    It is perfectly fine to be a party of and for the affluent in America, but at least don’t simultaneously pretend to be the party of the little guy.

    Brace yourself; there is a civil war coming soon in the Democratic Party.

    At the heart of today’s Democratic Party is an identity crisis and an ideological struggle. In recent election cycles, these were pushed underground for the sake of party unity.

    We heard the first rumblings of it during the 2016 election when Bernie Sanders gave Hillary Clinton a serious run for her money.

    And now those differences threaten to come out in the open during the upcoming primary debates at an importunate moment when the party needs to unite to defeat President Trump.

    But now is as good a time as any to solve the identity crisis in the party.
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/06/23/democratic-party-civil-war-donald-trump-column/1525623001/

    The problem can't be solved.. Because one part won't take back seat to the other part.. And ONLY one part can be in the front seat at a time...

    It's either Party Purity or Electability... Dims can't have both..

    And it's increasingly clear that Party Purity is running the show..

    Just as I predicted it would..

  239. [239] 
    Michale wrote:
  240. [240] 
    Michale wrote:

    I left the Democratic Party in 2016 because I couldn’t stomach the dishonesty and duplicity. When you rip of their mask, what is revealed is troubling: the Party of Davos masquerading as the Party of Scranton, Pennsylvania, that essentially hoodwinks much of the electorate.

    Yes, the establishment Republicans are no better, but this is a discussion about the Democratic Party.

    It is OK, by the way, to be a party of and for the affluent, but at least don’t simultaneously pretend to be the party of the little guy.

    I, for one, am looking forward to the coming civil war and some resolution.

    Americans are leaving the Democrat Party in droves by the millions...

    And, if Democrats start impeachment, which is likely, Independents will also leave the Democrats in the dust on their way to President Trump's camp...

    Once again, the Dumbocrat Party will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory in 2020...

  241. [241] 
    Michale wrote:

    Marchers confront Pete Buttigieg, police chief with frustrations after South Bend shooting
    https://www.southbendtribune.com/news/local/marchers-confront-pete-buttigieg-police-chief-with-frustrations-after-south/article_25ff0d24-c317-53ed-9999-4f51ac5bcf36.html

    And the ONLY Black Lives Matter terrorists rear their ugly heads again..

    Of course, they don't have a SINGLE FACT to support their claim that this was not a good shoot..

    The mere fact that Buttagig can't handle this proves he is not ready for the Presidency...

    The rally was another gathering this week in the wake of Sunday’s shooting of Eric Logan, 54, by Sgt. Ryan O’Neill in the parking lot of the Central High Apartments. While responding to a call for someone breaking into vehicles, O’Neill confronted Logan, who reportedly had a knife. O’Neill shot Logan when he went toward the police officer, officials have said.

    “I’m mad because my brother died,” Tyree Bonds, brother of Eric, said in the middle of the loud, intense dialogue. “People are getting tired of you letting your officers do whatever they want to do.”

    Do whatever they want to do?? Like what?? Like LIVING???

    Your brother attacked a police officer with a knife!!

    Does your brother have any responsibility here???

    Shirley Newbill, Eric’s mother, asked Buttigieg and the city to act on her son’s death.

    “I have been here all my life, and you have not done a damn thing about me or my son or none of these people out here,” she said. “It’s time for you to do something.”

    The police DID do something. They defended themselves against a violent subject..

    What these people need to learn is that it's THEIR actions that cause interaction with police..

    If you attack a cop with a weapon, you are going to be shot..

    It's really THAT simple...

    I am at a loss to understand why these people can't understand such a simple concept...

    Com'on, Russ.. I know you are on my side in this.. Why are you afraid to speak out???

  242. [242] 
    Michale wrote:

    Maybe Buttajig should say, "If I had a son, he would look like Eric Logan.." or maybe, "The cop acted stupidly"...

    Those choice quotes have worked for a Dumbocrat in the past... :eyeroll:

  243. [243] 
    Michale wrote:

    (CNN)The line from Donald Trump's reelection campaign kickoff rally that most stuck with me was: "Don't ever forget this election is about you. It's about your family, your future and the fate of your country."

    Scott Jennings
    Scott Jennings
    That sentiment -- that voters should be thinking about themselves and their families when they vote -- is the key to illustrating how the healthy economy, which has blossomed on Trump's watch, has tangible effects on the lives of voters. While the media and Democrats will relentlessly focus on Trump and whatever they perceive as the outrage of the day, the President's idea to get voters to think of themselves is a way around the Trump treadmill we've been on for four years. It's a brilliant argument: All they care about is destroying me, and I just care about building your future.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/19/opinions/trump-reelection-campaign-kick-off-message-opinion-jennings/index.html

    And this is why President Trump will win... Democrats are about nothing but hate and intolerance...

  244. [244] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    valid point, the author was lazy and didn't post excerpts, as NPR did. it's kind-of a long read though. far too long and winding to post in an opinion article, but essentially confirms the factual basis for it. hofeller wrote that he intended the census question to be "advantageous to Republican and Non-Hispanic Whites."

    https://www.npr.org/2019/06/06/730260511/redistricting-gurus-hard-drives-could-mean-legal-political-woes-for-gop

    JL

  245. [245] 
    Michale wrote:

    valid point,

    Thank you..

    he intended the census question to be "advantageous to Republican and Non-Hispanic Whites."

    Actually, no..

    It's the concentrating on voting age population would be advantageous to Republican and hon-Hispanic whites, according to Hofeller...

    However Hofeller offers no supporting facts to support that claim. To me, it comes across as simply marketing tricks..

    I don't see anywhere how citizenship question is tied to that marketing trick.. Granted I just perused the documents.. I may have missed it..

    But I have to ask.. Don't you think Democrats use marketing tricks to augment THEIR voters??

    As you pointed out with Gerrymandering, BOTH sides are guilty of it..

    I would postulate that this is more of the same..

    Finally, I would think that EVERY American would WANT a citizenship question on the United States census..

    America First and all that.. :D

    I'm heading into work... If I don't get to your response right aways, don't worry...

    "If I'm not back in 5 mins....Just wait longer.."
    -Jim Carrey, ACE VENTURA PET DETECTIVE

    :D

  246. [246] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sanders to propose canceling entire $1.6 trillion in US student loan debt
    https://www.stamfordadvocate.com/business/article/Sanders-to-propose-canceling-entire-1-6-trillion-14032094.php

    Oh yea....

    THAT will go over good with those Americans who worked their asses off to pay off their loans..

    Will THEY get a refund???

    This is the problem with Democrats and their ludicrous ideas... They don't think them thru...

  247. [247] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    NYpoet (232)-
    Not anti-troll. It stands for asshole.

    Though based on your link, I should just use VC (that stands for Venereal Cunt).

    This just another example of your inability to understand definitions and changing the subject when you can't make a rational argument.

    By definition Kick is the troll here.

  248. [248] 
    Michale wrote:

    By definition Kick is the troll here.

    That's true...

    But it's acceptable because she says what most people want to hear...

    Put her in a Pro-Trump forum and she wouldn't last a day...

  249. [249] 
    Michale wrote:

    The citizenship question in the census is a GOOD thing.. There is nothing nefarious about wanting an accurate count of who are American citizens and who are not..

    Of course criminals don't want to declare themselves.. But any country would want to know who they are...

    Again, I invite ya'all to look at the immigration laws in other countries..

    It would be an eye opener...

  250. [250] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Michale-
    While I agree that it deosn't seem fair that those that sacrificed and worked their asses off to pay their loans don't get anything, many of those that didn't pay off their loans also sacrificed and worked their asses off but were unable to pay off their loans because they couldn't find or get a job that paid enough to pay off their loans- they weren't all just lazy people that didn't make an effort.

    What Bernie doesn't address with loan forgiveness and free tuition schemes is that the premise for sending them to college in the first place is a scam.

    The reason to send them to college and provide the loans was that if they went to college they would get higher paying jobs that would enable them to not only pay off the loans but make a better living after paying off the loans.

    This was not thinking things through if it was a mistake because people used to go to college for the extra education required to be able to do the limited amount of higher paying jobs that required that extra knowledge.

    Simply sending more people to college for a degree did not increase the amount of those jobs available.

    So instead of providing the income promised, the degree just buried the recipient with debt they could not pay off if the degree they got could not or did not secure them a higher paying job.

    But if it was not caused by not thinking things through then it was a scam that worked perfectly to create a class of indentured servants that would work their ass off for lower pay.

    And it even lowered the value of the higher paying jobs because if you send 1500 people to college to get the degree required to fill 1000 higher paying jobs you may get about 1200 that complete their degree to compete for those jobs. If you send 10,000 people to college for those degrees and get 7,000 or 8,000 people with degrees to fill those jobs then the employers can pay less for those jobs.

    So what we should be doing if we are going to forgive loans for anyone is go after the colleges and loan companies rather than rewarding the colleges and loan companies by letting them keep their ill gotten gains or providing free college to allow them to continue profiting off their scam.

  251. [251] 
    Michale wrote:

    While I agree that it deosn't seem fair that those that sacrificed and worked their asses off to pay their loans don't get anything, many of those that didn't pay off their loans also sacrificed and worked their asses off but were unable to pay off their loans because they couldn't find or get a job that paid enough to pay off their loans- they weren't all just lazy people that didn't make an effort.

    It's not that it doesn't seem fair..

    It ISN'T fair.. Period.. No way, no shape, no how is it fair..

    But life isn't fair, so.....

    As to the rest, I agree completely

    A free shitty education IS a step up from a shitty education you have to pay thru the nose for..

    But not if the goal is to provide worthwhile employment in the aftermath..

    In THAT regard, a shitty education is still a shitty education...

    My personal view???

    People who want to go the college path?? 4 years mandatory service in the US Armed Forces.. Any college after that is paid in full...

  252. [252] 
    Michale wrote:

    People who want to go the college path?? 4 years mandatory service in the US Armed Forces.. Any college after that is paid in full...

    Of course, as you point out, the first step is to fix the shitty colleges..

    Actual real-world learning, as opposed to the shit-hole Left Wing Indoctrination camps they are now..

  253. [253] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joe Biden Faces the Most Dangerous Week of His Campaign So Far
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-24/joe-biden-faces-the-most-dangerous-week-of-his-campaign-so-far

    This is a MAKE or BREAK week for Joe Biden..

    So far, my predictions have all been dead on ballz accurate..

    Sure hope I am wrong about this....

  254. [254] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale,

    i'm all for mandatory service, but it need not necessarily be military service. if by "indoctrination" you mean exposure to critical thinking skills, then sure. but as far as i know there's never been a correlation established between the quality of an educational institution and how liberal or conservative it is. by your service you've earned the right to comment on its usefulness relative to other career paths. however, those who have neither higher education nor service of any kind have no business commenting on the validity of either.

    JL

  255. [255] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    So those that have a higher education or military service have no right to comment on the validity of not having a higher education or military service?

    I eagerly await a display of the application of your critical thinking.

  256. [256] 
    Michale wrote:

    i'm all for mandatory service, but it need not necessarily be military service.

    I speak of service in the context of compulsory service.. Service that you sign a commitment to perform and you keep that commitment..

    If there are civilian agencies that meet that criteria and they are in service of this country, then I would be all for allowing those to meet the Free College criteria..

  257. [257] 
    Michale wrote:

    I eagerly await a display of the application of your critical thinking.

    I believe what JL is saying is that if you don't have military service under your belt then, while you can make all the comments you want, the fact of your NON-service can be used to determine the validity of your comments or the weight they should be given.. Same goes for college education...

    That's just my take on what JL may mean..

    I could be totally wrong on that. It has been known to happen occasionally.. :D

  258. [258] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again..

    Supreme Court rejects challenge to Trump’s steel tariffs, leaving them in place
    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/24/supreme-court-wont-hear-challenge-to-trumps-steel-tariffs.html

    Supreme Court sides with President Trump and the Trump/America haters LOSE...

    AGAIN...

  259. [259] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joe Biden May See Sharp Knives on Crowded Debate Stage

    Democratic front-runner has experience, but his rivals are likely to home in on recent controversies

    South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg, meanwhile, will be at Mr. Biden’s right, and by his mere presence, the 37-year-old will offer a generational contrast with Mr. Biden.
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-biden-may-see-sharp-knives-on-crowded-debate-stage-11561378904

    Rut Roh.. That's not gonna be good for Joe Biden...

  260. [260] 
    Michale wrote:

    Joe Biden Is Bad At Politics

    Why do Democratic Party leaders keep backing bad candidates?
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-bad-politics_n_5d0d43a3e4b0aa375f4c7974?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016&section=politics

    Why did ya put yerself thru this, Joe...??? :(

  261. [261] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    No business commenting sounds like shut up to me.

    Though I did use right instead of business, a mistake that has now been corrected.

    And while those that feel that higher education is required to comment on higher education can certainly consider the source if they wish, if that is the only criteria they use they did not do a good job of developing their critical thinking skills when they were afforded the opportunity.

    Colleges and universities providing higher education do not have a monopoly as the only way to acquire critical thinking skills and can not guarantee that every student develops critical thinking skills while in attendance.

  262. [262] 
    Michale wrote:

    No business commenting sounds like shut up to me.

    Troo..

    Perhaps a more polite way of saying it would be:

    Since you have neither the training, the expertise, the experience nor the education to render an intelligent response, perhaps you should remain quiet and be thought a fool rather then engage communication and remove all doubt.

    Amounts to the same thing, I spose.. :D

  263. [263] 
    Michale wrote:

    Who needs Russia to interfere with an election, but not the actual results..

    Insider Blows Whistle & Exec Reveals Google Plan to Prevent “Trump situation” in 2020 on Hidden Cam

    Insider: Google “is bent on never letting somebody like Donald Trump come to power again.”

    Google Head of Responsible Innovation Says Elizabeth Warren “misguided” on “breaking up Google”

    Google Exec Says Don’t Break Us Up: “smaller companies don’t have the resources” to “prevent next Trump situation”

    Insider Says PragerU And Dave Rubin Content Suppressed, Targeted As “Right-Wing”

    LEAKED Documents Highlight “Machine Learning Fairness” and Google’s Practices to Make Search Results “fair and equitable”

    Documents Appear to Show “Editorial” Policies That Determine How Google Publishes News

    Insider: Google Violates “letter of the law” and “spirit of the law” on Section 230
    https://www.projectveritas.com/2019/06/24/insider-blows-whistle-exec-reveals-google-plan-to-prevent-trump-situation-in-2020-on-hidden-cam/

    Now you have GOOGLE who will simply anoint the candidate they want..

  264. [264] 
    Kick wrote:

    EM
    226

    Wrong, just wrong on the running mate choice. But, let's save that robust discussion until after he wins the nomination.

    Oh, no, I am correct about this VP choice, but perhaps we won't even have to discuss it. I hope we do, though.

    Quick short discussion preview: It's 2020 in America; women are going to have to save our democracy, and women of color are the backbone of the Democratic Party. You can take that to the bank. :)

  265. [265] 
    Michale wrote:

    END OF WATCH

    Police Officer Michael Langsdorf
    North County Police Cooperative, Missouri
    End of Watch: Sunday, June 23, 2019

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/13839e8d10b9303c8d9aee50576e15b15f4844be91d15073a21097a85b780c50.jpg

  266. [266] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    231

    I didn't read this. You are hereby being given the full Elizabeth Miller now because I'm done with you on this. :)

  267. [267] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale[257].

    no need for the qualification, your comment is, what is it you say... dead-on-ballz-accurate?

    @don,

    some sort of experience in any field (be it politics, higher education, military or what have you) isn't necessarily the only way to evaluate its quality, but in most cases it is at least one of the prerequisites.

    no, i'm not telling you to shut up, but it wouldn't do you any harm if you did, and might even help. one never knows when CW will decide to take his comment policy the way of barry ritholtz:

    https://ritholtz.com/comment-policy/

    JL

  268. [268] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    232

    not a-hole, unless that's short for anti-troll.

    Well, I declare... somebody who knows exactly what he's talking about. How deliciously refreshing.

    look it up. or better yet, put some pie in your pie-hole.

    I know, right!? That same place from whence all his BS is pulled out. Do you think there's a big enough spoon?

    source:
    http://airshipdaily.com/blog/92620136-ways-to-fight-trolls-instead-of-starving-them

    Man Boobz! Oh, this is priceless... a veritable cornucopia of facts... truly a must read.

    Tag team! *laughs* :)

  269. [269] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    233

    on another note, i just read an explanation why the citizenship question on the census really matters. why on earth hadn't this occurred to me before?

    Good article. Sad, isn't it, though? The GOP has been infinitely aware for quite awhile that when Texas flips, it's all over for them... I mean, the GOP as we know it now will cease to exist, but if you think about it, hasn't their spineless embrace and acquiescence to Hair Dick Tater hastened that inevitable fate?

    Although I hope to be pleasantly surprised by any other outcome, I would wager the SCOTUS will simply turn a blind eye to the damning evidence they've been given and allow the citizenship question on the census form that will kneecap several states which will become underrepresented in the House and also take a hit regarding funding for multiple programs that are federally funded using the census data... particularly regarding education funding... thereby shifting the burden squarely onto the taxpayers in those states... California, Texas, New York, Florida, etc.

    The SCOTUS has largely been ignoring the animus behind many of the decisions of the current administration and bowing to deference of the Executive Branch... to the detriment of the people.

    At what point does the constitutional rights of "we the people" figure into a SCOTUS decision? Let's hope it's this issue or we're positively FUCT. <--- Surely if that guy has a right to be heard, so do we all. :)

  270. [270] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    240

    Americans are leaving the Democrat Party in droves by the millions...

    I would wager you supplied no proof of your assertion since the facts prove otherwise.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/15370/party-affiliation.aspx

    And, if Democrats start impeachment, which is likely, Independents will also leave the Democrats in the dust on their way to President Trump's camp...

    Tell them to bring their own soap and toothpaste. :)

  271. [271] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    246

    THAT will go over good with those Americans who worked their asses off to pay off their loans..

    Will THEY get a refund???

    You sound like a socialist whining about a handout and equal treatment.

    This is the problem with Democrats and their ludicrous ideas... They don't think them thru...

    Bernie Sanders isn't a Democrat. You should have thought that one through. :)

  272. [272] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    247

    By definition Kick is the troll here.

    Said the guy with the shitty idea trolling the author to shill for him. :)

  273. [273] 
    Michale wrote:

    New High in U.S. Say Immigration Most Important Problem
    https://news.gallup.com/poll/259103/new-high-say-immigration-important-problem.aspx

    And WHO has the upper hand when it comes to illegal immigration??

    President Trump or the Dumbocrats??

    President Trump wins by a landslide...

    And Dumbocrats are left sucking the hind tit.. :D

  274. [274] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    Michale

    Kick thinks BS is running for the nomination of the Independent Party.

  275. [275] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    248

    Put her in a Pro-Trump forum and she wouldn't last a day...

    This is a pro-Trump forum because of the genuflecting, Trump cockholstering troll. :)

  276. [276] 
    Michale wrote:

    Kick thinks BS is running for the nomination of the Independent Party.

    I know..

    Delusional trolls..

    Whatareya gonna do?? :eyeroll:

    Easiest thing to do is ignore them.. :D

  277. [277] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    255

    So those that have a higher education or military service have no right to comment on the validity of not having a higher education or military service?

    That's exactly the opposite of what he said, VC.

    I eagerly await a display of the application of your critical thinking.

    We've all seen your bio, and you're quite obviously asking JL for that which you're not willing to proffer... even if you had the ability. :)

  278. [278] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    257

    I believe what JL is saying is that if you don't have military service under your belt then, while you can make all the comments you want, the fact of your NON-service can be used to determine the validity of your comments or the weight they should be given.. Same goes for college education...

    He was specifically referring to Michale's service and acknowledging Michale's "moral authority" to speak on the subject to which he was speaking. In a word: Deference.

    Then Don got his knickers in a twist over something that was never said nor implied.

    That's just my take on what JL may mean..

    He was making a comment about you personally, and then Don's head exploded over nothing. :)

  279. [279] 
    Kick wrote:

    Okay. I cannot go on like this. He actually did say people with no higher education and no military service to speak of have no business commenting.

    And then Don's head exploded.

    Probably because he resembles that remark. :)

  280. [280] 
    Kick wrote:

    Don Harris
    261

    No business commenting sounds like shut up to me.

    Oh, come on! He was acknowledging Michale's service and so-called "moral authority" to speak on the subject.

    Quit your whining and shut up about it. ---> That's what "shut up" sounds like. :)

  281. [281] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump 'should not be worried' by polls because Dems are 'nowhere near mainstream America:' John Sununu

    Former Republican White House Chief of Staff John Sununu said pollsters must rebuild their data metrics across the board if they hope to obtain more accurate polling in future elections -- and predicted President Trump has nothing to worry about despite some recent results.

    Sununu appeared on "America's Newsroom" Monday, and host Sandra Smith cited a Fox News poll showing Biden out in front of Trump by 10 points. She then asked what Trump can do turn the tide, and Sununu replied by attacking the validity of the polls.

    Sununu said voters are fed up with pollsters and will usually avoid giving them information, or will purposely give a false answer out of spite. He also urged the industry to reform its current model to gain a more accurate understanding of America's pulse.

    "There are folks who deliberately don't answer their phones when they're called," Sununu said.

    "There are folks who give wrong answers to the pollsters, and this is becoming more and more of a problem in the polling process," he said. "Until we get six months away from the election, none of the polls even hint at what is going on in the public."

    "[Trump] should not be worried. Look, the far left path that the Democratic party has become is nowhere near mainstream America. And it is mainstream America that elects presidents."
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-polls-not-worried-democrats-john-sununu

    One would think that Americans would realize how utterly FRAK'ed the polls are where President Trump is concerned..

    But yet, the Left is still giddy about Presidential Election polls more than 500 days out and treat them as gospel!!

    It's hilarious.. :D

  282. [282] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    262

    No business commenting sounds like shut up to me.

    Nope. It's simply pointing out the pointlessness of your comments.

    Perhaps a more polite way of saying it would be:
    Since you have neither the training, the expertise, the experience nor the education to render an intelligent response, perhaps you should remain quiet and be thought a fool rather then engage communication and remove all doubt.

    Yes. I am pleasantly surprised you are correct. :)

  283. [283] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    267

    no, i'm not telling you to shut up, but it wouldn't do you any harm if you did, and might even help. one never knows when CW will decide to take his comment policy the way of barry ritholtz:

    This blog is not a forum where I am obligated to give equal time to every crackpot conspiracy theorist, birther or intellectually lazy wanker out there. To be blunt, I don’t give a flying fuck at a rolling donut about these jackhole’s opinions. These folk need to rapidly disabuse themselves from believing other people’s blog’s are an open invitation for whatever ignorance or ill thought out nonsense they are peddling.

    https://ritholtz.com/comment-policy/

    He said "wanker" and "rolling donut." *laughs*

    JL is right about this, of course. It would be sad if CW had to resort to applying a "full Ritholtz." Oh, who am I kidding; that would be freaking awesome... I'd supply the popcorn for that! :)

  284. [284] 
    Kick wrote:

    C. R. Stucki
    274

    Kick thinks BS is running for the nomination of the Independent Party.

    Said the admitted registered Republican who claimed not to have anything to do with Republicans, but I digress.

    Seriously, though, Stucki... if you want to know what I think, you are free to ask versus the asinine exercise of making it up.

    I said that Bernie Sanders wasn't a Democrat because he is isn't a Democrat. Despite the fact that Bernie likes to portray himself as an "outsider," he's indeed been an Independent serving in the House and Senate for multiple decades now.

    If Bernie ever wins the presidency, I will then refer to him as a Democrat... but I don't think that'll ever happen. Maybe I have a different opinion than others here, but I happen to think Trump would beat Bernie because Bernie would play right into the GOP rhetoric regarding socialism... there's nothing quite like a video wherein you praise Fidel Castro to hammer that nail home.

    In March 2019, Bernie Sanders filed the requisite paperwork to become a candidate for the Senate in 2024... as an Independent. Any more questions? :)

  285. [285] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    276

    Delusional trolls..

    Yet another topic for which you are infinitely qualified to opine.

    Easiest thing to do is ignore them.. :D

    Said the guy for which Charles S. Brown, Esq. bestowed us all with his fabulous Tamper Monkey device to filter you out when necessary; however, the use of Neil's excellent scrolling advice regarding your multiple spamming/trolling posts is equally effectual. :)

  286. [286] 
    MyVoice wrote:

    [267] nypoet22

    Upvoting the Ritholtz policy for this blog.

    I, too, appreciate and learn from spirited debate, differing perspectives, and new information; that's what keeps me reading beyond the blog post. Oh, and I'm a fan of intelligent humor as well.

    The dross Ritholtz enumerates is something I've accommodated as the price for the thoughtful, insightful responses here. Would I rather not have to accommodate? You betcha.

  287. [287] 
    Michale wrote:

    Jussie Smollett news: Chicago police release investigative files, video of alleged staged attack
    https://abc7chicago.com/cpd-releases-investigative-files-video-of-alleged-staged-attack-on-jussie-smollett/5361979/

    The Dumbocrat Party hero..

    Jussie Smollet....

    Epitomizes everything WRONG with the Democrat Party and it's adherence to identity politics...

  288. [288] 
    Michale wrote:

    MyVoice wrote:

    A bunch of insignificant blather shouting out to Weigantia how much he ignores people he doesn't agree with, thereby completely refuting his own claims..

    luser :eyeroll:

  289. [289] 
    Michale wrote:

    Closing Time... One last call for alcohol so finish your whiskey or beer...

    Closing Time... You don't have to go home buy you can't stay here...

    Ni ni Ya'all.. Hope ya'all have better luck tomorrow..

  290. [290] 
    Kick wrote:

    MyVoice
    286

    As if on cue. Very well said, I might add <--- and so I did.

    Don't be a stranger. :)

  291. [291] 
    Kick wrote:

    MyVoice
    286

    MyVoice wrote:

    A bunch of insignificant blather shouting out to Weigantia how much he ignores people he doesn't agree with, thereby completely refuting his own claims..

    luser :eyeroll: ~ Michale

    I am sincerely gobsmacked at the utter cluelessness of your troll. ;)

  292. [292] 
    MyVoice wrote:

    Kick
    290, 291

    Thank you; it appears I may have hit a nerve (and, possibly, learned a new definition for accommodate), however. You can just imagine how crushed I was that a simple, straightforward expression of my opinion was deemed "insignificant blather."

    The psychic ability demonstrated to read between the lines of my statement deserves only one response (and this is a direct quote):

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  293. [293] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Well, I see this has devolved, as it is so wont to do, into a kind of anti-Enlightenment discussion.

    Great.

  294. [294] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @liz,

    oh come on. michale was right, and kick acknowledged that michale was right. let's all sing kumbaya already!

    JL

  295. [295] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    294

    Kumbaya!?

    Any reason you picked this true old Song of the South... creole from the Carolinas that was literally a cry for help sung by African slaves? Tread lightly, my boy, lest you be accused of insensitivity and asked for an apology like Joe Biden.

    Jes kidden ;)

    Kum ba h'ya
    Come by here

    It was a cry for help.

  296. [296] 
    Kick wrote:

    MyVoice
    292

    Heh.

    Sneaker! <--- my highest praise

  297. [297] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You come on!

  298. [298] 
    Michale wrote:

    I don't know if I can handle MyVoice ignoring me so much..

    BBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    Hay MV, since you are so graciously allowing me to live in your head, rent free, you don't mind if I redecorate here, do you??

    Funny how you don't post often, but when you do you can't resist mentioning me.. :D

  299. [299] 
    Michale wrote:

    oh come on. michale was right, and kick acknowledged that michale was right.

    Not only that, but she acknowledged my military expertise..

    Kumbaya indeed...!

  300. [300] 
    Michale wrote:

    I have to say.. One of the best FTPs we have had..

    All the original founding members are in agreement and a JEEP was along for the ride.. :D

  301. [301] 
    MyVoice wrote:

    [298]

    BBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    You flatter yourself

  302. [302] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    There is no place here for your special brand of nonsense.

  303. [303] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    299

    Not only that, but she acknowledged my military expertise..

    You think so? Does not surprise me.

    Perhaps then this is a prime example of how reading comprehension problems can rear their ugly head and provide the catalyst for miscommunication and the resultant issues that arise therefrom. So let's review, shall we?

    [254] nypoet22 wrote to @michale:

    ... by your service you've earned the right to comment on its usefulness relative to other career paths. however, those who have neither higher education nor service of any kind have no business commenting on the validity of either.

    JL

    Then Don got his knickers in a twist because JL nailed it. Fast forward where Michale responded with his opinion regarding "perhaps a more polite way of saying it"... where "it" is JL's comment at 254:

    Michale: Perhaps a more polite way of saying it would be:

    Since you have neither the training, the expertise, the experience nor the education to render an intelligent response, perhaps you should remain quiet and be thought a fool rather then engage communication and remove all doubt.

    Kick: Yes. I am pleasantly surprised you are correct. :)

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/06/21/ftp532/#comment-138069

    Hmmmmm. On second thought, now that I see these statements placed one next to the other, perhaps my assessment that Michale's verbiage was "more polite" appears to have been a hasty decision, but I digress.

    Now I ask you: However did you deduce that my agreement that your wording about Don's admitted lack of training, expertise, experience, and education to "render an intelligent response" would have been a "more polite" way of saying JL's comment at 254 was the equivalent of an acknowledgement of your so-called "military expertise"?

    *facepalm*

  304. [304] 
    Kick wrote:

    MyVoice
    301

    BBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    You flatter yourself

    Such is the life of your board troll. Cluelessness and low self-esteem are a wicked mixture. :)

  305. [305] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    302

    There is no place here for your special brand of nonsense.

    Wait, what? *laughs*

    I wholeheartedly and most assuredly disagree. There is definitely a place for you here... it's most definitely your kind of place. :)

  306. [306] 
    Michale wrote:

    @MyVoice

    You flatter yourself

    And yet.. Here you are... Responding to someone you claim to ignore!! :D

    Face the facts, sunshine.. You read my every word.. I own you...

  307. [307] 
    Michale wrote:

    There is no place here for your special brand of nonsense.

    Awwww give MyVoice a break...

    She has no voice of her own and merely just parrots her Party slavery.. :D

    She's a necessary evil...

  308. [308] 
    Kick wrote:

    Oh, this is rich. :)

  309. [309] 
    Michale wrote:

    Nice ta see an FTP with more than 300 comments..

    What was the total when I was away?? 50?? 60??? Lucky to hit 100?? :D

    My worth here is well established.. :D

  310. [310] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale

    My worth here is well established.. :D

    Flooding the zone with a cornucopia of ignorant bullshit and then bragging about your own pathetic spew!?

    Delusional Fantasies of a Board Troll

  311. [311] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    What a pair! The "Board Troll" and the 'Troll Broad'!!

  312. [312] 
    Kick wrote:

    C. R. Stucki
    311

    What a pair! The "Board Troll" and the 'Troll Broad'!!

    You said that as if he's the only board troll! *laughs*

Comments for this article are closed.