ChrisWeigant.com

Xi, Who Pays The Piper, Calls The Tune

[ Posted Tuesday, October 8th, 2019 – 17:10 UTC ]

I don't think I've ever used this column to comment on the world of basketball, but there's always a first time for everything. The National Basketball Association is currently struggling with a conflict between free speech and making piles of money in China. It is a struggle that many American corporations have faced before, and it boils down to one basic fact: if you want China's money, then you have to play by their rules, period. Chairman Xi is paying the piper, so he gets to call the tune. The concept is clear, and nobody's forcing any company to do business with China, but if any American company does want to tap into their billion-person market, then they've got to follow the Chinese rules for doing business there. And most of those rules are antithetical to democratic norms, which makes perfect sense because China is an authoritarian state.

What set all of this off was a tweet from the general manager of the Houston Rockets, Daryl Morey. The image read: "Fight for Freedom. Stand with Hong Kong." That's really not all that bad, at least to American sensibilities. To the Chinese, however, it was completely unacceptable, as spelled out in a message from the state television company, Chinese Central Television (CCTV), which read, in part: "We're strongly dissatisfied and oppose Adam Silver's claim to support Morey's right to freedom of expression. We believe that any remarks that challenge national sovereignty and social stability are not within the scope of freedom of speech." Got that? Free speech is fine and good as long as the Chinese government approves of what you are saying. If it doesn't agree with what you are saying, then it is nothing short of a "challenge to sovereignty and social stability." This, it shouldn't even need pointing out, is the exact opposite of freedom of speech.

China's reaction has been swift, including cancelling contracts with the Rockets and CCTV refusing to show preseason games which are actually going to be played in China.

The commissioner of the NBA, Adam Silver, tried to walk a tightrope in a press conference before one of these games. He issued a statement before his appearance which said:

We are not apologizing for Daryl exercising his freedom of expression. I regret -- again, having communicated directly with many friends in China -- that so many people are upset, including millions and millions of our fans. At the end of the day, we come with basketball as an opportunity to sell dreams, sell hopes... that we are causing disruption in people's lives and that we are causing disharmony, that's something I regret.

During the presser, he stood up for free speech a little more strongly:

"Daryl Morey, as general manager of the Houston Rockets, enjoys that right as one of our employees," Silver said. "What I also tried to suggest is that I understand there are consequences from his freedom of speech and we will have to live with those consequences."

. . .

"I'm sympathetic to our interests here and our partners that are upset," Silver said. "I don't think it's inconsistent on one hand to be sympathetic to them and at the same time stand by our principles."

Silver said the NBA did not expect CCTV to cancel plans to show the Lakers-Nets games. "But if those are the consequences of us adhering to our values, I still feel it's very, very important to adhere to those values," Silver said.

Initially, I wondered what all the fuss was about, but apparently basketball is huge in China. One report stated that in one game of last year's playoff finals, the Chinese television audience was actually larger than the American television audience. That shows the scope of how much money is involved better than anything else, really.

This is an issue that goes beyond basketball. In a little-noticed bit of irony, this week also saw the television show South Park banned in China, due to an episode ("Band In China") that directly took on Chinese censorship. The Chinese have removed all South
Park
episodes from Chinese streaming services and scrubbed any mention of the show from social media platforms. Totalitarian states don't do things by halves, in other words. All because South Park had some fun with the fact that people have mocked Chairman Xi by comparing his looks to Winnie The Pooh.

The show's creators, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, responded with a little less restraint than the NBA commissioner:

Like the NBA, we welcome the Chinese censors into our homes and into our hearts. We, too, love money more than freedom and democracy. Xi doesn't look like Winnie the Poo [sic] at all. Tune into our 300th episode the [sic] Wednesday at 10 p.m. Long live the great Communist Party of China. May the autumn's sorghum harvest be bountiful. We good now, China?

But while it's infinitely more amusing, not much attention is being paid to the South Park dustup. The same is not true over the NBA situation, as American politicians are now entering the fray, with various demands and critical statements. What's really notable, however, is the fact that it took sports to push this issue into the spotlight.

Remember when Republicans got seriously annoyed at President Barack Obama for staying silent on a nascent people's power movement in Iran? According to the GOP back then, if Obama had merely expressed support for the budding revolution, then things would have worked out magically, with the Iranian regime peacefully overthrown in a regime change, and Iran and America would have lived happily ever after. They did not factor into this equation the fact that the Iranian government would have denounced the protest as being orchestrated by the United States (something with which they're familiar, since the C.I.A. did exactly that more than half a century ago, when we installed the Shah), which would have seriously undermined the position of the protesters.

So where are the calls for President Trump to support the Hong Kong protesters now? These protests have been going on for months, and we've heard nary a peep from Trump or the White House on the subject. It has even been reported that Trump used the situation as a bargaining chip in his ongoing trade war with China, by telling them explicitly that he would refrain from backing the Hong Kong protesters and stay silent on the issue, treating it as "internal domestic affairs" that the American government shouldn't meddle in. This is exactly how China sees it, and if Trump had been tweeting his support for the Hong Kong protests, it may have completely torpedoed the trade talks. Even so, the hypocrisy from Republicans is pretty notable, seeing as how they're ignoring Trump's refusal to support a pro-democracy movement when they excoriated Obama for doing the same thing in Iran. They're now upset at a sports league for not standing tall for American values, while at the same time giving President Trump a pass on the issue.

In all of these instances, there is a common denominator. If the country in question were North Korea, nobody would really care what they thought, because American companies don't make any money there. China, however, is the world's largest marketplace, and there is indeed lots of money to be made there. However, to do so requires kowtowing to their authoritarian government at every turn. This means occasionally stomping on an employee's free speech rights, as far as China is concerned. The concept is a simple one: Want free speech? Then don't do business in China, period.

Some corporations aren't afraid of getting cut off from the Chinese marketplace, as Comedy Central just proved. South Park took direct aim at Chinese censorship, and they got banned as a direct result. The creators of the show laughed at China afterwards. Comedy Central is apparently backing them up.

The NBA, on the other hand, is agonizing over the tradeoff involved. They don't want to be seen as an arm of the Chinese censors, but in effect that's what the Chinese are demanding. An official Chinese government spokesman made this plain, while attempting to be subtle:

How can it be possible to carry out exchanges and cooperation with China without knowing China's public opinion? NBA's cooperation with China has been going on for quite a long time, so for what should be said and what should be done, they know best.

"Knowing China's public opinion" is a little more circumspect than "any remarks that challenge national sovereignty and social stability are not within the scope of freedom of speech," but they both mean exactly the same thing: either censor your employees and forbid them from saying anything even mildly critical of the Chinese government, or you can do your business someplace else. This is the explicit tradeoff all American companies face when doing business with China. It is nothing new. It's just getting more attention right now because the NBA is involved, but it's been there all along. Chairman Xi calls the tune, and American pipers better play what he wants to hear if they want to tap into all that wonderful Chinese money.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

108 Comments on “Xi, Who Pays The Piper, Calls The Tune”

  1. [1] 
    Michale wrote:

    Some old business...

    @Paula,

    Scaredy-cat Blotus says he won't cooperate with impeachment - too scared to testify. Coward, crybaby and guilty as sin.

    Aawwwwwwww Whassamatter???

    Big bad man won't play Dumbocrats stoopid game??

    BBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHA

    This faux impeachment coup won't survive the year.. :D

  2. [2] 
    Michale wrote:

    Some more old business...

    @Cockholster

    Shocker, the person lying about being a former LEO does not understand that authority must be granted to exist.

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    You really ARE that stoopid, ain'tcha CH... :D

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    It has even been reported that Trump used the situation as a bargaining chip in his ongoing trade war with China, by telling them explicitly that he would refrain from backing the Hong Kong protesters and stay silent on the issue, treating it as "internal domestic affairs" that the American government shouldn't meddle in.

    Yea.. I am SURE it's "been reported"...

    Is THAT what constitutes a "FACT" around here?? Simply that it's "been reported"..

    "Oh how the mighty have fallen"
    -Guinan, STAR TREK TNG, Deja Q

    :^/

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    Trump’s all-out blockade threatens Democrats’ impeachment drive

    The White House's blanket refusal to cooperate with Democrats' inquiry will test Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her caucus in the days ahead.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/08/trump-democrats-impeachment-blockade-040900

    For some reason, the theme to COPS is flashing thru my head.. :D

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    DSWS,

    Discussion for today..

    Do you think that Democrats should make available the alleged "whistle blower" for questioning and cross-examination??

    Do you feel that Democrats should actually have an impeachment vote before the White House cooperates with their witch hunt....er.. investigation??

    Do you think that, without the two afore actions by the Democrats, this impeachment is not a legitimate impeachment??

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    On another note, CW..

    You should be thrilled.. President Trump is obviously an avid reader here in Weigantia..

    He is taking my advice to the letter!! :D

    To President Trump, I say...

    "Welcome to the party, pal!!!"
    -John McClane, DIE HARD

    :D

  7. [7] 
    Michale wrote:

    Warren has topped Biden in the RCP Poll Of Polls for the first time..

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

    Biden's numbers have been in free fall since Democrats and their faux impeachment coup kicked off..

    Who was it who said this would happen?

    Oh, that's right.. :D

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:

    And in Iowa,

    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/ia/iowa_democratic_presidential_caucus-6731.html

    Joe Biden's numbers continue their downward plummet..

    Again.. EXACTLY as I predicted..

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    "President Trump and his administration reject your baseless, unconstitutional efforts to overturn the democratic process. Your unprecedented actions have left the president with no choice. In order to fulfill his duties to the American people, the Constitution, the Executive Branch, and all future occupants of the Office of the Presidency, President Trump and his administration cannot participate in your partisan and unconstitutional inquiry under these circumstances."
    -White House

    Translation: Take your faux impeachment coup and shove it up your ass...

    :D

  10. [10] 
    Mezzomamma wrote:

    Regarding today's topic: Before WWI, Great Britain (England, more precisely) called most of the shots as the dominant economic power. Through the middle of the 20th C, that power shifted to the US. Is it now shifting to China? It's not so long ago that it was often assumed that Japan would dominate, remember.
    We have seen the online giants give in to China and to other restrictive governments in a way they have refused to do in 'the West', along with other businesses such as the NBA.
    Where is the balance between over-powerful business interests and over-powerful governments? And is there much worse for an ordinary person than big business and big government being one and the same?

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:

    Mezzo..

    We don't have anything to worry about...

    China is our friend..

    So says Joe Biden..

    Although one has to wonder.. Did Joe say that BEFORE or after Hunter raked in over a billion dollars from China??

    Hmmmmmmm

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:
  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Document reveals Ukraine had already reopened probe of Hunter Biden-linked firm months before Trump phone call
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/john-solomon-says-new-hunter-biden-related-doc-shows-significant-shift-in-factual-timeline

    So much for the Quid Pro Quo theory... :D

    It's actually funny when ya'all think about it.

    The "I would like you to do us a favor though" that Dumbocrats are putting all their eggs in...?? The "favor" is actually referring to helping in the investigation of the 2016 election!! :D

    Totally blows the Democrats claims out of the water....

    Yep, this faux impeachment coup will be over and done with by the end of the year.. Most likely sooner.. :D

  14. [14] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    With apologies to Garrett Morris:

    "Basketball be velly good to me."
    -Xi

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Although I can't be sure, I think it was STIG (might have been the recently deceased, Neil) who said that if one REALLY wants to get a window into elections, it's the betting odds..

    People who are actually putting their money where their predictions are..

    BIDEN: 19.8% WARREN: 52.5%
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/betting_odds/democratic_2020_nomination/

    Doesn't look good for Team Biden..

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    If Democrats demand President Trump honor tradition and precedent by releasing his tax returns, then Democrats ALSO need to honor tradition and precedent and have a House vote on Articles of Impeachment and allow the Democrat Plant... "whistle blower" to be publicly questioned and cross-examined..

    Anything less is blatant hypocrisy..

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Once again.. Proof positive that President Trump is a secret Weigantian... :D

    Trump wants whistleblower ‘exposed and questioned’ after reports of ties to 2020 Dem
    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-whistleblower-be-exposed-and-questioned

  18. [18] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Even so, the hypocrisy from Republicans is pretty notable, seeing as how they're ignoring Trump's refusal to support a pro-democracy movement when they excoriated Obama for doing the same thing in Iran.

    If the GOP hasn't completely killed hypocrisy they sure have normalized it in this Age of Trump.

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    If the GOP hasn't completely killed hypocrisy they sure have normalized it in this Age of Trump.

    I wonder if you can appreciate the irony, considering all the WELL DOCUMENTED cases of Democrat hypocrisy.. :D

    I know, I know.. You can't concede it.. But it's factual nonetheless...

    "'Furthertheless' is not a word! STOP using it!!"
    -Charlie Sheen, SPIN CITY

    :D

    There are HUGE differences between Hong Kong and Iran..

    Not the least of which is Iran has no nuclear-armed stat backing to the extent that Hong Kong has..

    There was NO nuclear-power threat facing Obama when he decided to throw the freedom loving Iranians to the wolves..

    Frankly, I think the Brits royally scroo'ed the pooch by giving Hong Kong back to China..

    But that's a whole 'nother discussion.. :D

    Irregardless, Obama could have helped the protesting Iranians.. But he was more concerned about appeasing Iran than anything else..

  20. [20] 
    TheStig wrote:

    I think Silver has "squared the circle" pretty well on this matter.

    “the NBA will not put itself in a position of regulating what players, employees and team owners say or will not say on these issues. We simply could not operate that way.” Later, to reporters, Silver said he understands that there are consequences to the kind of comments Morey made and “we will have to live with those consequences.” He called CCTV’s decision not to air Thursday’s preseason game between the Nets and Lakers “unfortunate” but added that “if that’s the consequence of us adhering to our values, we still feel it’s critically important to adhere to those values.” -as reported by Sports Illustrated

    A modest proposal. If China decides it wants to keep chipping away at free speech in the USA, then I think the NBA should chip back. Each time China tries something like this, NBA should just dumb down the product to China a wee bit...poorer quality signal, "oopsy" cut out during a critical play, less court time for US superstars in exhibition games played in China,etc.

    Bottom line, the Chinese population wants the product, and China can't match it domestically (yet). Who is the alternative vendor? Authoritarian regimes are well aware that sports are an important diversion for maintaining citizen cooperation.

    The US government need not get involved at all. That's a lucky break for the NBA, given the quality of the executive in the Oval Office.

  21. [21] 
    John M wrote:

    [5] Michale wrote:

    "Do you think that Democrats should make available the alleged "whistle blower" for questioning and cross-examination??"

    NO

    As a self proclaimed former law enforcement officer:

    What part of, do YOU and Trump not understand??? :

    This is an INVESTIGATION, NOT A TRIAL by the House.

    Only the SENATE gets to conduct a trial. AND that is ONLY when you get to cross exam witnesses!

    Would you REALLY think that law enforcement officers should expose their informants??? That's basically what you are asking of the whistle blower.

    Since when does the criminally accused have the right to poke their nose into all aspects of a police investigation during the process of the investigation???

  22. [22] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Hey, I have an idea, let's ask Ivanka how much she likes China.

    She's got five new trademarks there, which makes her an expert on the Chinese market.

    Tell me, Ivanka, what do you think of Hong Kong?

  23. [23] 
    John M wrote:

    [10] Mezzomamma wrote:

    "Through the middle of the 20th C, that power shifted to the US. Is it now shifting to China? It's not so long ago that it was often assumed that Japan would dominate, remember."

    NO.

    What we are doing however is moving from a USA centered uni polar economic world to a bi polar economic world centered on the USA AND China.

    China is simply reasserting its historical place as the second most powerful economy in the world. A position it held hundreds of years before. Second to the Roman Empire in history for example.

    It will still be decades before China can match the depth of the American economy. Think of China's vast interior rural poor and rapidly aging but developing coastal populations.

  24. [24] 
    John M wrote:

    [16] Michale wrote:

    "If Democrats demand President Trump honor tradition and precedent by releasing his tax returns, then Democrats ALSO need to honor tradition and precedent and have a House vote on Articles of Impeachment and allow the Democrat Plant... "whistle blower" to be publicly questioned and cross-examined.."

    Anything less is blatant hypocrisy..

    Again it ONLY shows blatant stupidity on your part.

    You ONLY get to cross exam witnesses at TRIAL. The whistle blower is an INFORMANT, NOT A WITNESS subject to interrogation!

  25. [25] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Michale I have a question for ya:

    What is your purpose in commenting on this site? Is it to get the vitriol out of your system (for example by using terms like Odumbo or calling people stoopid)? If so, you've got that mastered as well as any troll.

    If your purpose is to convince then I'd like to make a suggestion or two:

    Post less. When you bap out hundreds of words in a row on a variety of topics you make my eyes glaze over. I end up just scrolling down through your series of comments to get to the folks that are not trying to bludgeon me down. You see, I want to talk with intelligent Conservatives. Clearly, you are intelligent but when you throw so much at us fellow commenters it becomes too much to address. BTW just because someone on this site doesn't reply to you doesn't mean that you "won" the argument or that you "bitch slapped" somebody off the site.

    Also, putting people down makes their defenses go up and interferes with their ability to consider the merits of your point.

    Troll on, my Brother! I'd just like you to be more effective in your trolling. No one is either right about everything nor wrong about everything. As such, I'd like to see you be more of an asset to these conversations.

  26. [26] 
    John M wrote:

    [19] Michale wrote:

    "There are HUGE differences between Hong Kong and Iran.."

    YES there are!

    China is a nuclear power. Iran is not.

    "Frankly, I think the Brits royally scroo'ed the pooch by giving Hong Kong back to China.."

    Just how do you defend a dense urban city, on a tiny spit of land, which is easily blockaded, and has no strategic depth surrounded by water, not land, with no land allies nearby??? From a position with supply lines thousands of miles long, against a hostile power that out numbers you by at least 10 to 100 to one???

  27. [27] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [25]

    ...and by all means continue with the gratuitous quatloo and John McCain references. They do spice things up!

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I won't try to change your old commenting habits but, would you do me a favour, though?

    Would you please stop the daily reports on Biden's poll numbers. I can do without these news reports. I know how to follow the poll results pretty well but I don't live and die by them, okay?

    Instead, just comment on who you think presents the biggest challenge for Trump's re-election and why.

  29. [29] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Oh, and Michale, check out number 25!!!!

    Hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe ...

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    JM,

    This is an INVESTIGATION, NOT A TRIAL by the House.

    And the House has a duty to investigate FAIRLY and IMPARTIALLY..

    By not making witnesses available, they are PROVING that the investigation is simply a partisan WITCH HUNT..

    "It is our constitutional duty to give the president the benefit of the doubt on the facts"

    Do you agree with that or not??

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If your purpose is to convince then I'd like to make a suggestion or two:

    That is not his purpose. Which can be hard to define but, not too hard.

  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    MtnCaddy,

    What is your purpose in commenting on this site?

    What is the relevance??

    Can't you just address the facts of the message without dragging the messenger into it??

    Regardless, I have known CW for going on 16 years now.. Why I comment is between me and him..

    Fair enough??

    Is it to get the vitriol out of your system (for example by using terms like Odumbo or calling people stoopid)? If so, you've got that mastered as well as any troll.

    Funny how you don't complain when others use terms like "Blotus" and BeneDICK Trump...

    Since we're questioning motivations here.. If it bothers you when I use terms like "Dumbocrats" etc etc, but it DOESN'T bother you when Party slaves use terms like "Blotus".. Well, the ONLY logical and rational conclusion is that the terms don't really bother you.. You just don't like it when those who don't toe your Party line use them..

    If there is another explanation...

    "I am all ears"
    -Russ Perot, 1992 Presidential Election Debate...

    Post less. When you bap out hundreds of words in a row on a variety of topics you make my eyes glaze over.

    And you posting all your hatred over President Trump and Trump supports gets my blood boiling.

    But I don't ask you to cease posting such bile and hatred do I??

    If you don't like what I post, DON'T READ them..

    But to demand I comment to YOUR specifications???

    Don't you think that's a tad arrogant???

    Also, putting people down makes their defenses go up and interferes with their ability to consider the merits of your point.

    Once again, why don't you speak up when others put ME down??

    Because it's not the put downs that bother you. It's the put downs from someone who doesn't toe your Party line that bother you..

    Why not at least be honest and concede that??

    As such, I'd like to see you be more of an asset to these conversations.

    I already am the BEST ASSet (see what I did there?? :D) Weigantia can have...

    Every day I bring the FACTS to this forum that would otherwise be overrun with bile and hatred and bigotry and bullshit..

    But my value here REALLY shines during the holiday fundraiser.. I think one year (back when Weigantia was FUN before all the haters showed up) I donated close to $600 to Weigantia..

    Regardless, my reasons for posting are my own.. With all due respect (taking into account our recent detente) you haven't earned the right to question my motivations, just as I would not presume to question yours..

    I think we can, at least, respect that, no??

    Peace out...

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    MtnCaddy,

    ...and by all means continue with the gratuitous quatloo and John McCain references. They do spice things up!

    I presume you mean John McClane, eh?? :D

    You needn't worry... Doing away with my movie/TV/Song quotes will *NEVER* happen.. :D

  34. [34] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The trick is not having to convince anyone.

    The convincing happens by itself, so the doctrine goes, simply by never missing an opportunity to expose hypocrisy and party loyalty at any cost.

    The problem is that the doctrine is executed, generally speaking, with little or no regard to the all important context and, usually, with lots of spin to the point of distorting or completely obliterating the facts and unvarnished truth of the matter.

  35. [35] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You needn't worry... Doing away with my movie/TV/Song quotes will *NEVER* happen.. :D

    And, that's a good thing!

  36. [36] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz & MtnCaddy & DSWS.....

    Ya'all seem to sing similar refrains..

    "Michale, please stop posting so much..."

    To that, I ask....

    What's in it for me??

    It's well documented that, even when I post less, I am still the subject of vicious personal attacks..

    My wife, my children, even MY GRANDCHILDREN are viciously attacked...

    Hell, even when I am ABSENT from the forum, the personal attacks continue..

    NOTHING changes except ya'all get what you want and I post less..

    What do *I* get out of the deal??

    Ya'all want me to post less??

    Ya'all want me to voluntarily deprive myself of the pleasure of bringing FACTS to the fact-less??

    What's in it for me?? :D

    Quid pro quo, people.. Quid pro quo...

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Actually, that's not what I said at all. :(

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And, you should know better, Michale. :(

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, that's not what I said at all. :(

    I was speaking in general over the past years.. Not THIS specific request..

    As to your specific request..

    People here are always saying how wrong I am..

    I think reminders of my predictions are not completely out of line, given the constant personal attacks I face..

    Having said that, I will endeavor not to be so gloat-ey about Biden's drop in the polls..

    But I do reserve the right to mention the FACTS whenever someone erroneously claims that Biden is going to be the nominee...

    Unless, of course, the facts change and it REALLY looks like Biden will be the nominee..

    In that case, I'll do what I always do when confronted with the facts.. Concede the point :D

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ha!!

    Exclusive poll: Most think Trump will be impeached and win 2020 reelection
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/exclusive-poll-most-think-trump-will-be-impeached-and-win-2020-reelection

    Wouldn't THAT be the shitz, eh!!?? :D

  41. [41] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Having said that, I will endeavor not to be so gloat-ey about Biden's drop in the polls..

    Okay. Did you laugh out loud at my asking for a favour, though … though?

    But I do reserve the right to mention the FACTS whenever someone erroneously claims that Biden is going to be the nominee...

    You certainly have that right but, no one has ever said Biden's going to be the nominee … and I do mean EVER! … not even me, you know ...

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hey, Michale, are you trying to find where someone, somewhere said that Biden's going to be the nominee … you might have to back as far as 1971 ...

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:

    You certainly have that right but, no one has ever said Biden's going to be the nominee … and I do mean EVER! … not even me, you know ...

    Actually, both DSWS and JL have stated such..

    And I think a few of the hard-core haters as well.. But I really don't pay much attention to them..

    Regardless..

    Conventional wisdom DOES indicate that Biden will be the nominee..

    But anything involving Trump is ANYTHING but conventional.. :D

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hillary Clinton muses about 2020 'rematch' against Trump: 'I can beat him again'
    https://www.foxnews.com/media/hillary-clinton-2020-trump-rematch

    Looks like Hillary is musing for a re-match.. :D

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    "So maybe there does need to be a rematch. Obviously, I can beat him again. But, just seriously, I don't understand, I don't think anybody understands what motivates him, other than personal grievance, other than seeking adulation."
    -Hillary Clinton

    So, WHO was it that said Hillary running is "out of the question"??? :D

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Again!?

  47. [47] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    That might have been me. :)

  48. [48] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think Biden has more than earned the right to knock her upside the head if she ever started to think seriously about that - figuratively speaking, of course.

  49. [49] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Obviously?

  50. [50] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [32] et Al

    What is your purpose in commenting on this site?

    This wasn't asked to drag the messenger into the message. I'm a great believer in dealing with the message regardless of whom the messenger

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    think Biden has more than earned the right to knock her upside the head if she ever started to think seriously about that - figuratively speaking, of course.

    Agreed....

    The woman needs a huge dose of REALITY if she even thinks that she could prevail against President Trump...

    Her numbers are worse than Trump's...

  52. [52] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Conventional wisdom DOES indicate that Biden will be the nominee..

    I'm not sure that is true. If it is, it would be a first for conventional wisdom.

    But anything involving Trump is ANYTHING but conventional.. :D

    Now, THAT is a fact. However, I think we need a different term that more matches his persona.

  53. [53] 
    Michale wrote:

    Now, THAT is a fact. However, I think we need a different term that more matches his persona.

    Keep in mind, it was the SAME "persona" that Trump had when he had a -D after his name...

    And Democrats LOVED him then.. :D

  54. [54] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Not buying that, Michale.

  55. [55] 
    TheStig wrote:

    mtncaddy-25

    As you are finding out first hand Michale's posts are a hyper extended exercise in the practical application of rhetorical fallacies. He pretty much covers all the bases (see link below):

    http://www.mvrhs.org/englishdept/shark/links/General%20Information/Rhetorical%20Fallacies%20U.%20Texas%20@%20Austin.pdf

    Keep reading him and you'll tick all the fallacy boxes in a few weeks.

    Nothing ever goes away from CW.com comments section. If you get tired of scrolling past 50 or so of his comments per column you can collapse his entries to just his name and a timestamp by using a handy Tamper Monkey script helpfully provided by long time reader chaszzzbrown.

    You can get the script by going to the reply from Sept 21, 2016, comment 62. That will get you started. Comment 86 has a few helpful hints as well. Your scroll mouse scroll wheel will thank you.

    If you should ever want to actually read a blocked comment, that is merely one click in the Name and timestamp line of any given post. Some days you may feel like slumming:)

  56. [56] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And, if you feel the need to bypass Michale's comments. then you must also give up your privileges with respect to responding to any of Michale's comments. And, THAT, will make it easier for the rest of us to use out scroll mouse - if you know what I mean and I'm not sure that you do.

  57. [57] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [25] [32] [50] etc

    What is your purpose in commenting on this site?

    This wasn't asked to drag the messenger into the message. In fact, I'm a great believer in dealing with the message regardless of whom the messenger is. It was to find out if reaching and convincing people is Job #1.

    You make an excellent point about "Blotus" versus "Odumbo." I gotta admit I don't mind it when my side does it. Obviously we are all effing PASSIONATE about politics and sometimes it's hard to not name call and bitch slap those with whom we disagree. I shall endeavor to not do so in the future. And let's leave the hottie wives and precious grandbabies out of it, for sure! (See, this was a useful discourse in that you convinced me, you showed me something that I didn't recognize before.)

    What's in it for you, IMO, is greater effectiveness in reaching folks. Whatever your motivation, drive on Soldier!

    Didn't I type McClane? Well, at least I spelled John right.

  58. [58] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [57]

    And,for the record, Joe Biden is my last choice for the Dem nomination. He's way too Centrist for my taste (Bernie or Elisabeth/Elisabeth or Bernie - either will do) and I'm not confident that he can hang with Trump in general and the debates in particular.

  59. [59] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [55]

    Brother Stig thanks for the heads up!

    But I'ma try to hang with Michale as I learn more from those with whom I disagree.

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    MtnCaddy

    This wasn't asked to drag the messenger into the message. I'm a great believer in dealing with the message regardless of whom the messenger

    And yet.. Here we are.. :D

    So, deal with my messages.. If the facts are all just too overwhelming then I guess that says something right there, eh? :D

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    But I'ma try to hang with Michale as I learn more from those with whom I disagree.

    Birds of a feather...

    I have said the EXACT same thing on so many different occasions.. :D

  62. [62] 
    Michale wrote:

    You make an excellent point about "Blotus" versus "Odumbo." I gotta admit I don't mind it when my side does it.

    Then speak out about it..

    I bet if you were to do so, you would get a little taste as to what it's like to be me.. :D

    And let's leave the hottie wives and precious grandbabies out of it, for sure!

    Totally and 1000% agree.. I mean, sure I am proud of my wife and I shared a LOT about us and our life together back when Weigantia wasn't a bombed out battlefield..

    But it's a far cry from mentioning the fun the wife and I had on our last cruise and having someone drag her into discussions and start attacking her...

    Same with my grandchildren.. Sure I am proud of my kids and grandkids.. Sure I talk about them occasionally.. But does that give some hater the right to attack them in the most vile and disgusting ways imaginable??

    I think not... And yet, it's what happens here..

    (See, this was a useful discourse in that you convinced me, you showed me something that I didn't recognize before.)

    And you have as well.. THIS is what Weigantia USED to be about..

    Ask Liz.. Ask JL (NYpoet).. They can tell ya..

    We used to have FUN here..

    What's in it for you, IMO, is greater effectiveness in reaching folks. Whatever your motivation, drive on Soldier!

    Hooooooaaaaaaaaaaa :D

  63. [63] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Michale

    Don't tell my Comrades but I think I typed McCain because for some years I've had a secret mancrush on the late Senator from Arizona haha

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    MtnCaddy,

    Nothing ever goes away from CW.com comments section. If you get tired of scrolling past 50 or so of his comments per column you can collapse his entries to just his name and a timestamp by using a handy Tamper Monkey script helpfully provided by long time reader chaszzzbrown.

    You can get the script by going to the reply from Sept 21, 2016, comment 62. That will get you started. Comment 86 has a few helpful hints as well. Your scroll mouse scroll wheel will thank you.

    Keeping in mind that the script opens your computer up to a lot of nasty things..

    The originator runs an internet marketing firm and I am sure everyone's Weigantian and all other information on their computers is stored in some market research domain somewhere..

  65. [65] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [62]

    Right on, Bro! I'm glad to hear about what it used to be like here at CW, as that means it may possibly return to that state.

  66. [66] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [64]

    Thanks for the heads up!

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Not buying that, Michale.

    That's the great thing about FACTS..

    They don't HAVE to be bought to be valid..

    It's well documented the praises that Jesse Jackson sang about Donald Trump's "lifetime commitment to black Americans"...

    Donald Trump was awarded a prestigious award by NY Democrats along side such black luminaries as Rosa Parks and Muhammad Ali..

    These are but 2 examples..

    Democrats LOVED and honored President Trump...

    Right up until the time he had a -R after his name..

    This is well-documented fact..

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    Right on, Bro! I'm glad to hear about what it used to be like here at CW, as that means it may possibly return to that state.

    Yea, it was really nice circa 2006....

    Then Obama got elected and we still had lots of fun..

    But we have what he have and hope for the day when we have it again.. :D

    Peace Out.. :D

  69. [69] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [56]

    I do understand Elizabeth

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    [64]

    Thanks for the heads up!

    "One is honored to be of service."
    -Robin Williams, BICENTENNIAL MAN

    :D

  71. [71] 
    Michale wrote:

    Don't tell my Comrades but I think I typed McCain because for some years I've had a secret mancrush on the late Senator from Arizona haha

    Yer secret is safe.. :D

  72. [72] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Peace out, everybody. And to think that I read CW for a couple of years before I discovered how much fun the comments section can be. Thanks to all!

  73. [73] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Democrats LOVED and honored President Trump...Right up until the time he had a -R after his name..This is well-documented fact..

    Michale, you can obscure the facts of a matter very well in the same way that the factually correct 6+4=10 is not in any way the same as 6+6-5+3-4+4-6+2+4=10.

    Do you see what I mean?

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You're most welcome, MtnCaddy!

  75. [75] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    [56] I do understand Elizabeth

    Excellent!

  76. [76] 
    Michale wrote:

    Do you see what I mean?

    I do not...

    Either Trump WASN'T honored by Democrats when he had a D after his name or he was..

    The FACTS clearly show he was...

  77. [77] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I think your problem, Michale, is that you like to concentrate on only SOME of the facts while leaving out many more.

    The more facts that you leave out, though, the farther away from reality your assertions based on only some of the facts go.

    You leave out facts all the time, Michale, thereby increasingly distorting reality with each fact you leave out.

  78. [78] 
    chaszzzbrown wrote:

    [64] Michale

    Keeping in mind that the script opens your computer up to a lot of nasty things.

    Well, yes; potentially, in a general sense. I wouldn't personally run scripts without understanding what they do.

    The originator runs an internet marketing firm...

    Ha ha. No.

  79. [79] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    MtnCaddy[25]

    You asked,

    Michale I have a question for ya:

    What is your purpose in commenting on this site?

    I asked that question of him in the past, and here was his response to me:

    But, as usual, my comments are NOT a judgment on the actions of Odumbo OR President Trump..

    My comments are on the fact that ya'all's condemnations are totally and completely one sided...

    He isn’t here to have an honest political debate, he is not interested in the truth, facts mean nothing to him, and he doesn’t honestly believe the majority of what he posts...

    He is just a troll interested only in trolling others!

  80. [80] 
    Michale wrote:

    I think your problem, Michale, is that you like to concentrate on only SOME of the facts while leaving out many more.

    The more facts that you leave out, though, the farther away from reality your assertions based on only some of the facts go.

    You leave out facts all the time, Michale, thereby increasingly distorting reality with each fact you leave out.

    OK.. Fine..

    PLease relay to me the facts I am leaving out..

    IE that show Donald Trump was as hated and despised and reviled by the Democrat Party when he had a _D after his name, as he is today..

    I'll be around.

  81. [81] 
    Michale wrote:

    I asked that question of him in the past, and here was his response to me:

    But, as usual, my comments are NOT a judgment on the actions of Odumbo OR President Trump..

    My comments are on the fact that ya'all's condemnations are totally and completely one sided...

    Of course, Russ didn't really ask the same question you asked..

    Russ asked my why I don't condemn Trump for the actions he (Russ) wants me to condemn Trump for.

    That is when I explained the reality to Russ that, in the context of wanting condemnation of Trump from me..

    That's when I said:

    "But, as usual, my comments are NOT a judgment on the actions of Odumbo OR President Trump..

    My comments are on the fact that ya'all's condemnations are totally and completely one sided..."

    Russ always leaves out context because it proves that he is a hypocrite and a liar..

  82. [82] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [76]

    (Caint stay away)

    Michale you are correct. But now Trump is decidedly NOT a Dem, but rather, as President, he's governing in some ways like a hard-core Republican (i.e. another tax cut for the rich, Judicial appointments etc.) It's seems completely irrelevant that back in the day the Dems liked Trump and his campaign donations.

  83. [83] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Okay, Michale, I'm going to try to explain it … like you're a six-year-old …

    I'll stipulate to the fact that Democrats loved or even honoured (in public, at least … begging for money, even) Trump when he had a D after his name - I'll even stipulate to the fact that he had a D after his name and was a card-carrying member of the Democratic party.

    And, of course and obviously, Trump is now despised by most Democrats … well, let's just say they don't love him anymore, now that he has an R after his name.

    So, I'm agreeing with you on the simple facts you assert.

    Where you go wrong is when you leave out all that happened between the Democratic love and hate for Trump.

    You make it seem as though Democrats changed their opinion about Trump based solely on the letter that follows his name. And, you know as well as I do that is a false assertion but an easy one for you to make because you don't have to bother yourself with the details of any of the other facts about how and why Democrats changed their opinion of Trump after he put an R after his name.

  84. [84] 
    Michale wrote:

    (Caint stay away)

    Addicting, isn't it.

    Actually sharing information, bouncing ideas and thoughts and facts off each other, without rancor or name-calling or personal attacks..

    THAT's why I post here.. :D Among other reasons. :D

    Michale you are correct.

    YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!!.... oh.. er.... Uh... Whaa???

    Ummm... Thank you... :D

    But now Trump is decidedly NOT a Dem, but rather, as President, he's governing in some ways like a hard-core Republican (i.e. another tax cut for the rich, Judicial appointments etc.) It's seems completely irrelevant that back in the day the Dems liked Trump and his campaign donations.

    But Trump himself hasn't changed..

    He was the same man as a Dem as he is as a Republican..

    He is the same asshole now, the same arrogant prick now that he was when he had a D after his name..

    Democrats LOVED him then because he was THEIR asshole... He was THEIR arrogant prick...

    Which brings us back to my overall over-arching point..

    When you scratch the surface of EVERY attack on Trump, EVERY demonizing of Trump, EVERY slam and EVERY insult..

    Scratch the surface of it and it's ALL because of the -R after his name..

    99% of the time... That's the ONLY factor at work here..

    Once you understand that dynamic, everything falls into place and makes perfect sense..

    The recent soul-rending whining about the poor Kurds is simply another example of it..

  85. [85] 
    Michale wrote:

    I'll stipulate to the fact that Democrats loved or even honoured (in public, at least … begging for money, even) Trump when he had a D after his name - I'll even stipulate to the fact that he had a D after his name and was a card-carrying member of the Democratic party.

    As we say to dispatch...

    "So far...."

    :D Go on... We agree so far..

    And, of course and obviously, Trump is now despised by most Democrats … well, let's just say they don't love him anymore, now that he has an R after his name.

    So, I'm agreeing with you on the simple facts you assert.

    Good.. We have to agree on the foundation or all is lost...

    Where you go wrong is when you leave out all that happened between the Democratic love and hate for Trump.

    I submit that nothing much happened.. Trump is the same arrogant price he was then.. Trump is the same asshole he was then..

    But he was the DEMOCRATS' asshole.. He was the DEMOCRATS' arrogant prick..

    And THAT makes all the difference..

    Trump hasn't changed one bit..

    You make it seem as though Democrats changed their opinion about Trump based solely on the letter that follows his name.

    They did.. Because NOTHING ELSE changed..

    Trump didn't undergo a personality transplant.. He didn't wake up one morning and SUDDENLY become evil..

    President Trump is the same man he has always been..

    Asshole... Arrogant prick... Prima donna.. Narcissistic...

    Democrats LOVED that about Trump because those qualities worked FOR the Democrat Party agenda...

    Take Joe Liebermann... Al Gore's running mate... Democrats LOVED Lieberman... Right up until he became NOT a Democrat anymore..

    THEN Democrats hated him..

    It's *ALL* about the -D/-R

    Trump's personality did not change one iota between the time he was a Dem and the time he was a GOPer...

    The Democrat Party changed.. And changed CONSIDERABLY..

    This is an undeniable FACT...

  86. [86] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale, when did Trump start putting an R after his name?

  87. [87] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Was it about the same time he started calling President Obama a non-citizen?

  88. [88] 
    Michale wrote:

    Addicting, isn't it.

    Actually sharing information, bouncing ideas and thoughts and facts off each other, without rancor or name-calling or personal attacks..

    THAT's why I post here.. :D Among other reasons. :D

    Wait til we have a STAR TREK debate! :D

    Did you know that STAR TREK: ENTERPRISE actually takes place in the Mirror Universe???

    :D

  89. [89] 
    Michale wrote:

    Was it about the same time he started calling President Obama a non-citizen?

    Probably.. Which I thought was pretty stupid of Obama..

    It didn't MATTER if he was born in Kenya or not...

    So why try to hide it???

  90. [90] 
    Michale wrote:

    In August 2001, Trump changed his party affiliation to Democratic. In September 2009, Trump changed his party affiliation back to the Republican Party. In December 2011, Trump changed to "no party affiliation" (independent). In April 2012, Trump again returned to the Republican Party.

    It's safe to say that President Trump owes or feels no allegiance to ANY Party..

    He is a lot like me.. NPA all the way baby!!! :D

  91. [91] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I was just thinking the exact same thing.

  92. [92] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    It's also safe to say that Democrats got along with Trump when he had an R, D or I after his name right up until he made his political views very, very public starting with his asinine plan to bring down the Obama presidency.

  93. [93] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Next time you make an argument in a comment here, try to state ALL of the facts of any given situation and not just the facts that fit your sense of the world as you would like it to be.

  94. [94] 
    Michale wrote:

    I was just thinking the exact same thing.

    Doesn't surprise me.. Yer a very intelligent person.. :D

    It's also safe to say that Democrats got along with Trump when he had an R, D or I after his name right up until he made his political views very, very public starting with his asinine plan to bring down the Obama presidency.

    Well, it was stupid..

    But it was also stupid of Obama to give credence to the claim by not addressing it honestly and openly..

    It didn't matter that Obama was born in Kenya.. He was still, by law, a natural born American by law..

    Such is my understanding that ANY person born to an American parent is a natural born American not matter where that birth takes place..

    I could be wrong... Don't think I am..

  95. [95] 
    Michale wrote:

    What's yer thoughts on all the Hillary talk??

    'Crooked Hillary should try it!' Donald Trump dares Clinton to enter crowded Democratic presidential field a third time after she claims she could beat him 'AGAIN'

    Trump dares 'Crooked Hillary' Clinton to enter the 2020 presidential race

    She had tweeted 'Don't tempt me,' after he jabbed that she should challenge Elizabeth Warren but only if she came clean about her email scandal

    Clinton has said she won't run for president a third time

    But she said Tuesday night on PBS that 'maybe there does need to be a rematch; I mean, obviously, I can beat him again'

    Clinton lost to Trump in the Electoral College that determines American presidents

    She collected more votes overall, by running up the score in liberal California and New York – winning bragging rights but constitutionally losing the election
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7555029/Donald-Trump-says-Hillary-Clinton-run-2020-claims-beat-again.html

    Think she'll do it again??

    I am sure we all agree that she would be utterly stoopid to do it and Democrats would be utterly stoopid to nominate her, eh?? :D

  96. [96] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Do we have to talk about her?

  97. [97] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Most Americans had no clue what Trump’s political affiliation was prior to his decision to jump into the political fray in the hopes of growing his brand appeal. Trump saw how much influence and money Alex Jones and Rush Limbaugh had earned from peddling lies and misinformation by channeling the frustrations and anger of white Americans struggling to stay afloat and he wanted in.

    And before you claim that isn’t true, then maybe you can explain why someone you think was so beloved by Democrats would choose to run as a Republican? Trump is a con-man, pure and simple! Trump knew that the easiest marks in this country were poor/middle class whites —the GOP’s base! Just look at who he targeted Trump University at and it is clear that Trump knew they were the easiest folks to get to believe anything he told them.

    While New Yorkers might have known Trump was a registered Democrat, he was never a political figure prior to his attacking Barack Obama’s citizenship status. I, personally, knew he was a Democratic supporter before this, but I only learned that after finding out he was an early supporter of marriage equality...and I was shocked to learn both! And, Michale, while I was grateful he supported marriage equality (at least he did then), I DID NOT LIKE TRUMP!

    Trump never had a “-D” after his name, because that is only used when identifying politicians. No plumber or surgeon places their political party affiliation on the business cards, only politicians do.

    Which is why your argument that Democrats are hypocrites because they “loved” Trump when he claimed to be a Democrat (and more importantly, when he supported their causes), but Democrats hate him now — not because he not only no longer supports their positions; he now openly opposes them...no, that is not what you think made Democrats lose their love for Trump — it is simply because he claims to be a Republican! That is beyond RIDICULOUS!!!

    YOU are obsessed with partisanship. You claim to hate it, but you sure seem to love reveling in it. You know Trump is a lying con-man who only ran as a Republican because he knew they were too stupid to realize that he is playing them, yet you go right along with it???

    Try to claim that what you said was taken out of context, the fact is that you come here to troll others for their stance on positions while never taking a stand on anything, yourself.

  98. [98] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM - 56

    With all respect, this site is titled CW.com. Neither you nor I make the rules we just post comments.

    As I noted in comment 55, I can unblock any post with a single click. I will sometimes unblock a post by M if another commentator makes me think M has written something new and of genuine interest. This unusual, maybe once a week, since M is not only prolific, he is very repetitious. That said, I will sometime respond to a commentator who piqued my interest about an M-isim. I am not basing my response to M on hearsay, I am referring to M's original comment. I would point out that this occurs very,very infrequently.

    A Troll's mission is to sow discord within a community. I do not respond directly to M because directly feeding a Troll only encourages more trolling.

  99. [99] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Lighten up, TS, with all respect.

  100. [100] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    New column up!

  101. [101] 
    TheStig wrote:

    EM-100

    :-)

  102. [102] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    John M [21]

    As a self proclaimed former law enforcement officer:

    What part of, do YOU and Trump not understand??? :

    Ohhhhhhh, this is gonna be soooooo good, it’s gotta be fattening

    This is an INVESTIGATION, NOT A TRIAL by the House.

    Only the SENATE gets to conduct a trial. AND that is ONLY when you get to cross exam witnesses!

    Would you REALLY think that law enforcement officers should expose their informants??? That's basically what you are asking of the whistle blower.

    If he had any actual experience in law enforcement, he’d know better...

    Since when does the criminally accused have the right to poke their nose into all aspects of a police investigation during the process of the investigation???

    They do not! That is something you don’t need experience in law enforcement to understand, and that anyone with actual law enforcement experience definitely knows cannot happen! Any degrees in law that either one claims to hold could have only come from Trump University, which explains a lot.

    Michael continues to refuse to answer this question: Did you not admit to me that while you claim to have served as an MP in the military, you never actually worked as a commissioned civilian LEO???

    He resorts to name calling and changing the subject typically when I ask him this. He won’t accuse me of lying about this, but still insists that I am a “liar”...only he can’t point to any examples to justify his claim.

  103. [103] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    97

    Most Americans had no clue what Trump’s political affiliation was prior to his decision to jump into the political fray in the hopes of growing his brand appeal. Trump saw how much influence and money Alex Jones and Rush Limbaugh had earned from peddling lies and misinformation by channeling the frustrations and anger of white Americans struggling to stay afloat and he wanted in.

    Despite all Trump's lies to the contrary, he ran for the presidency in 2000 to become the nominee of Ross Perot's Reform Party but dropped out because he said he didn't want to be a member of a Party that would accept David Duke and the racist aspect. He was referring to Pat Buchanan -- who went on to win the nomination. Fast forward, and you need look no further than the campaign rhetoric of Pat Buchanan wherein Trump embraced the white male grievance spew and hatred of the "others" he claimed was abhorrent in 2000. Trump is an opportunist who knew exactly where to peddle the hatred spew.

    Trump began the Obama birther lies/nonsense and was contemplating a run for the presidency in 2012 when his pal Jeffrey Epstein was arrested and Trump reconsidered.

    Trump is a con-man, pure and simple! Trump knew that the easiest marks in this country were poor/middle class whites —the GOP’s base!

    Spot on... Trump is an opportunist. He knows an easy mark and couldn't give two shits about anybody not named Trump (and only some of them).

    While New Yorkers might have known Trump was a registered Democrat, he was never a political figure prior to his attacking Barack Obama’s citizenship status.

    Actually, he ran for the nomination of Ross Perot's Reform Party... said he would like to have Oprah Winfrey as his running mate and -- not kidding -- John McCain for Secretary of Defense. He was a proponent of universal health care and gun control:

    His naming of Oprah Winfrey as his dream running mate reinforced the non-seriousness of his effort. He also touted Colin Powell for Secretary of State, John McCain for Secretary of Defense, General Electric CEO Jack Welch for Secretary of Treasury and Congressman Charles Rangel for HUD Secretary, names that defied traditional left-right labeling, which was the point. Trump likes to break new ground.

    He hurried into print, “The America We Deserve,” a cornucopia of policy positions touting his opposition to NAFTA, a cornerstone of the Reform Party since Perot famously declared the loud sucking sound Americans hear is jobs going to Mexico. He highlighted his support for gun control and for universal health care, along with his view of social security as a “giant Ponzi scheme.” He said the retirement age should be increased to 70, and that privatization would be “good for all of us.”

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-last-time-trump-wrecked-a-party

    Trump never had a “-D” after his name, because that is only used when identifying politicians. No plumber or surgeon places their political party affiliation on the business cards, only politicians do.

    Russ makes a good point here. Donald Trump identified as an Independent when he ran in 2000 for the Reform Party where he highlighted gun control and universal health care.

    Which is why your argument that Democrats are hypocrites because they “loved” Trump when he claimed to be a Democrat (and more importantly, when he supported their causes), but Democrats hate him now — not because he not only no longer supports their positions; he now openly opposes them...no, that is not what you think made Democrats lose their love for Trump — it is simply because he claims to be a Republican! That is beyond RIDICULOUS!!!

    Trump is nothing but an opportunist. He'll switch allegiances on a dime.

    Try to claim that what you said was taken out of context, the fact is that you come here to troll others for their stance on positions while never taking a stand on anything, yourself.

    Oh, I don't know, Russ. The board troll is pretty fond of whining incessantly about what a victim he is while constantly making shit up... just like the Big Liar of The United States... BLOTUS. :)

  104. [104] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    [84]

    Yo Michale

    Yes, highly addictive. I wish I could do this for a living since I spend so many hours a day on politics. I get 50+ email bulletins a day, from far-Left to far-right. Can't read most of them but I got em and archive them.

    Dude, don't be silly. I'll tell you you're right when I think you are, and likewise call you out when I think you're wrong. Balls and strikes, you know.

    Yes Trump hasn't changed. What's changed is that now he's President and his relatively unchanged personality and demeanor isn't up to the task.

    Are you really a NPA? I'd never have guessed based on your viewpoint.

    And finally...

    Which brings us back to my overall over-arching point..

    When you scratch the surface of EVERY attack on Trump, EVERY demonizing of Trump, EVERY slam and EVERY insult..

    Scratch the surface of it and it's ALL because of the -R after his name..

    99% of the time... That's the ONLY factor at work here..

    While my I initial reaction is to disagree with this, I'ma gonna chew on this because the idea merits consideration. I will get back to you once I've done a little political soul searching and a lot of thought.

    (thinking)
    "Day-yam! Now I've gone and given myself a homework assignment cuz of Michale of all people!"

  105. [105] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick,

    It’s funny, he was talking about how wonderful the board was years ago — no snarkiness, debates that stuck to the issues, etc. — so I decided to hit the archives in an attempt to share in the nostalgia.

    No matter the year, you did not have to look too hard to find that HE has made been using the same arguments and deflections since the very beginning, yet he has not gotten any better at it!

    Check out the posts on April 4, 2014 for a good laugh — people complaining about his posting links to articles without reading them and then missing what their message actually was, telling him to stop with the false equivalencies, chill with the name calling — all of the classics in one day’s posts! It’s one of the many times that everyone had just gotten tired of his BS and he was sulking, threatening to run away since no one was willing to stop calling out his dishonesty!

    Seriously, the only change I could find that stood out was that since Trump has taken office, the number of his posts repeating the same article’s quotes has increased quite a bit.

  106. [106] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Commenting on old threads is frowned upon.

  107. [107] 
    Kick wrote:

    Russ
    105

    Yep! :)

  108. [108] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    106

    Commenting on old threads is frowned upon.

    Frown away, sweetie. Meanwhile, Russ and I will take great comfort and joy, secure in the knowledge that we're prime contributors to your furrowed brow and sagging jowls.

    You're welcome, doll face. :)

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]