|
Post by timothylane on Feb 4, 2020 18:42:30 GMT -8
I have Fox News on, and of course they're carrying the State of the Union speech. Much of that is the usual sort of material, and my only comment is to notice that -- of course -- the Demagogues refuse to applaud even neutral good news.
Right now he's doing his usual introductions of guests. One involved a black who dreams of joining the US Space Force -- and his ancestor, the oldest living Tuskegee airman. I rather liked that touch.
He also recognized a black girl from Pennsylvania who was a victim of the state's (Demagogue) governor vetoing any increase in school choice. He also reported some good news (I was writing this and didn't clearly hear the details, but I assume he was announcing some sort of scholarship for her).
And he recognized Melania Trump's efforts for children. That's always a good move.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 4, 2020 20:14:58 GMT -8
I watched the whole speech and it was unlike any other State-of-the-Union Speech I have ever heard.
Trump poked the Obama administration several times and W once. He also called out Dems for pushing free health care for illegal aliens, among other things. I do not recall other SOTU speeches being so specific.
He laid out the many positives of today's economy, giving details which one doesn't usually hear on the MSM.
He was clearly inviting blacks to get on board and vote for him in the November election. If Trump gets 15-20% of the black vote the Dems are done. If the Republican party could do that on a regular basis, the Dems as a national party would be finished.
I think the Dems looked bad by not standing for many parts of his speech which praised America.
The surprise return of a staff sergeant from Afghanistan to his family's arms was very powerful.
Interestingly, he did not shake Pelosi's hand when giving her a copy of the speech and she made a clear gesture of her disdain for him by tearing his speech in half after he finished it.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Feb 4, 2020 20:56:35 GMT -8
The only time I noticed Botox Nan standing and clapping came when Trump discussed family leave, which is a long-time Demagogue goal. The moving moments I mentioned didn't stir her.
As for the handshake incident, she offered her hand when Trump was already turning, so he may not have seen it. This is especially so since there was no handshake with Pence. I don't much care either way since she doesn't deserve any better. The Wicked Witch of the West said she tore up the speech because it was a dirty speech and that was the most courteous response. It would be nice if someone asked her what was so dirty about it.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 5, 2020 18:45:57 GMT -8
Mr. Kung and I had a talk about the speech. And he’s brought me around on several of his points. In retrospect, and with further thought, people are wondering why he made no mention of impeachment or withheld (for the most part) a direct attack on the Democrats (aside from his effective spiel on “sanctuary cities”). But I think the totality of his speech was a very large, ripe “eff you” to the Democrats because of the way he appealed to black voters. That was probably the central take-away of the evening. Yes, he ticked off the economic accomplishments (although I’m not feeling any of them at the moment). And he did take a verbal swipe at socialism by name. Imagine the emasculated Jeb! or Mittens doing that. That was all good. In fact, despite the somewhat top-heavy staging, it all seemed to work to purpose especially in showing Trump as a confident, careful, caring, and articulate leader…not the mercurial madman portrayed by parasites such as Rachel Maddow or the various other Leftist crazies. But I think the powerful appeal to black voters was the best revenge on the impeachment mess, if it was effective. And I can’t see how it couldn’t be, assuming there were any black voters tuning in to see for themselves instead of being told what to think by their party or the media. Otherwise, I would say his speech, tonally, was a bit boring. He’s been, as Mr. Kung noted to me, very good in some of his stump speeches. But his teleprompter speech was often dull and perfunctory. What also strikes me was how thoroughly the conversation has moved in Republican circles from ideas to simply shoveling in as much slop in the trough as you can. This speech could have easily been given by Bill Clinton. It wasn’t quite the laundry list of “free things” as is typical of a Democrat speech. But it’s clear the core purpose of American government, according to Trump, is to provide people with high-paying jobs. That’s it. There are far worse things around which to center a society. And Trump did genuflect by mentioning God, freedom, etc. That’s all good. But that was clearly the icing in the cake, not the cake. His loyalty to his friend, Limbaugh, was nice to see. Most Establishment Republicans run from controversy or strong opinions. Whatever faults Trump has, I’m mostly unmoved by them next to the craven, milquetoast “all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing” types such as Jeb!, Romney, and most of the Establishment Republicans. Trumps faults are proactive, if you will. He may swing and miss, but at least he is swinging. Neither McCain nor Romney had a harsh word to say against Obama or his core ideas or associations. Not that Trump made things personal last night. That’s the strange thing. On Twitter and in some stump speeches, he all but calls Pelosi a deranged woman. But his State of the Union Speech was completely absent personal attacks. Who would have thought?
And I don’t think this was the result of Trump being successfully managed by handlers. I think he chooses his time and place (to some extent) despite his seemingly inherent impulsivity. I think he went in there last night steaming and simmering (thus the somewhat stern look). And the greatest revenge the man could have on his deranged opponents is to steal their base.
|
|
|
Post by timothylane on Feb 5, 2020 19:37:24 GMT -8
Theoretically, the State of the Union speech is intended to cover exactly what it says. The Constitution calls for the President to report periodically to Congress on the state of the union. It doesn't say how often, but at some point it became yearly. Nor does it require a speech; for over a century he simply sent Congress a written message. (It may also have been done more often then). Starting in the Progressive era (either Teddy Roosevelt or Woodrow Wilson) resumed the speech that had been delivered the first few years.
Thus, explicitly partisan messages are probably a bad idea. Trump gave a (rosy) portrayal of the state of the union and discussed some of his goals. And he made great use of his guests, often to make political points such as the harm done by a recently deceased Iranian terrorist. And he provided a pleasant tone, always a useful thing politically. Even his failure to shake Botox Nan's hand (after she insulted him in introducing him) was properly inadvertent, since he was already turning when she offered it and didn't shake Pence's hand either.
I suspect the Wicked Witch of the West deliberately offered it when she didn't think he would see it, particularly given that she undoubtedly intended all along to rip up his speech as dirty and dishonest. Of course she counted on no one asking her what in particular was either dirty or dishonest.
And of course the Demagogues rarely cheered, and some occasionally booed. The professional race-baiters (i.e., virtually the entire party and its propaganda corps, the synoptic media) especially zeroed in on giving Rush Limbaugh the Medal of Freedom during Black History Month. I wonder what James Golden aka Bo Snerdly (his call screener) and Clarence Thomas (who officiated at one of Rush's weddings) thought of the reflexive Demagogue smear.
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 5, 2020 20:37:23 GMT -8
And I don’t think this was the result of Trump being successfully managed by handlers. I think he chooses his time and place (to some extent) despite his seemingly inherent impulsivity. I think he went in there last night steaming and simmering (thus the somewhat stern look). And the greatest revenge the man could have on his deranged opponents is to steal their base. President Trump has gone a long way on the philosophy of, "never let them see you coming". It is a key element of his policy foreign and domestic. I think he learned it the hard way at construction sites in NY and around the world. Anyone who thinks he is managed doesn't know trump about Trump. He keeps his own counsel and acts as he deems appropriate. Last night was pure DJT. Had the speaker introduced him in the accepted protocol and cordially he would have shaken hands. She chose to snub him so perhaps there was a little more venom in the words than intended. For nearly 5 years media, democrats, and RINOs have attacked him as stupid, clumsy, hateful, and clueless. The opposite is more true. It is they who are clueless . . . President Trump has maneuvered the democrats into an impossible political position. To oppose him they have to oppose America. And they are walking eyes wide shut directly into it. This fall could see the greatest electoral landslide in history and a stunning reversal of the House to majority Republican control, again by landslide numbers. Seats that have been traditional democrat for decades could switch. It is even possible that the Senate republican count could go over 60. The last year of Democrat control of the House capped with the most venial impeachment in history will, IMHO, prove a death rattle for the democrat party. What arises from the ashes will not in any way resemble the party of old or the insanity of the current. A minority of the American people have gotten drunk on democrat policies and the vomiting is happening along with a case of the DTs. It is going to take a real 12 step program to just get back to the middle.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 5, 2020 21:48:53 GMT -8
Article 2 Section 3, in part, reads:
I would be okay with them basically phoning it in although it’s become good spectacle. I wonder how long it will be until some president decides to do it twice a year. It’s a great opportunity to speak directly to the American people.
Yes, he did score some non-namby-pamby political points, including regarding that late terrorist and the assaults by illegal aliens. An Establishment Republican would probably chew glass before he’d let anything like that come out of his mouth.
The Kungian Rule of “crazy enemies” might have aided Trump last night. The Democrats seem like a pack of wild children. If something is good for America, they’re grumpy about it.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 5, 2020 22:02:43 GMT -8
National Review has forever — and I know that’s a long time — disgraced itself as a supposed conservative publication because of the anti-Trump edition they put out.
There are a lot of “ifs” and “buts” to wade through. But I was thinking about the same thing today: Will a Trump re-election also bring the House to the Republicans? Your predictions seem quite sensible. But given that Nancy Pelosi is Speaker of the House and that the Democrat Party is run by radicals and lunatics (and yet still get elected), is grounds for questioning what passes for “sensible” these days.
That is a truly interesting paragraph. You would think, for instance, the Californians would tire of being turned into an over-priced 3rd world country. Your analogy of a 12 step program is entirely apt. The addiction to Leftist politics is such that it would take a shift as fundamental and large as a sex change to get many of these libs to vote Republican.
Dennis Prager has more than once articulated how profoundly difficult it was for him to go from liberal Jew to conservative Jew. He says he actually went through a sort of “bad boy” phase which he sees in retrospect was a necessary process of rebelling. (I think he even said he ate some bacon.) It’s one thing to think about these issues theoretically. It’s another to hear from a trusted and articulate soul about the down-to-earth reality of it.
Obviously this is not unique to liberal Jews. It applies to liberal anybodies. The sense of righteousness is so high on the Left, their disdain for “the enemy” so overblown and long established, it’s a very difficult paradigm shift — especially when that shift inherently admits you’ve been a shit and a fool to support such ghastly people who you once thought were so good.
But it does happen. The Establishment Republicans are 100% feckless at making this happen. Rush Limbaugh has countless examples of facilitating this change. Trump might also facilitate this change in many — at the cost, most likely, of simply further liberalizing the Republican Party. His support for paid child leave (long a Democrat desire to add to the entitlement list) is just his Medicare Part D. If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. But then because the Republican Party has been so feckless (at least on the national scale), this is the best we can do for now.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 8:23:24 GMT -8
I don’t know if Matt Vespa, in his article We Couldn’t Have Asked For A Better Start To The 2020 Election, coined the term or not. But he writes of Nancy Pelosi being a “tore loser.” It looks like this site is begging for money now so I don’t know if the article is available for free at the moment. It was available via my iPad.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 8:42:59 GMT -8
Here’s an article by Andrea Widburg. It notes that Romney voted “yea” on one of the articles of pissed-off-ness. Romney is worse than a flake. He is a traitor to his party and the country. President Trump tweeted: Interestingly, the article also notes that the Utah GOP disavowed Mittens and tweeted: Civility has its place. But I would not have been disappointed had they used the words “idiot,” “coward,” or “moron.” But that’s just me.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 9:06:49 GMT -8
Jonah is trying to dress up his TDS in his latest article.
|
|
|
Post by artraveler on Feb 6, 2020 9:12:56 GMT -8
Civility has its place. But I would not have been disappointed had they used the words “idiot,” “coward,” or “moron.” But that’s just me. Well, I won't hold my breath waiting and it will be years before Romney is up for reelection. I'm not an expert on Mormonism but I suspect that the more conservative LDS will remember and the progressives will conveniently forget. In that way they mirror the bulk of the American people. Payback, if it happens at all, will be in party support with policy and money as reelection nears. All he should get is nothing.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 6, 2020 9:27:20 GMT -8
In his pre-vote note to other Senators, Romney gave an oily explanation why he had to vote the way he did.
Flip Wilson used to use the line, "The Devil made me do it." Romney is now basically using the line, "God made me do it." What a blaspheming scumbag.
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 6, 2020 9:39:22 GMT -8
Don't insult "idiots and morons." At least they have the excuse of lacking mental capacity. No, Mittens is much worse than either. Coward is probably the kindest label you can give him. I think to come close to the debased nature of this man, one must avail oneself of a Thesaurus.
As synonyms for "scoundrel," which is the baseline from which one should start, the "Oxford Compact Thesaurus" lists:
Rogue Rascal Miscreant Good-for-nothing Reprobate Cheat Swindler Fraudster Trickster Charlatan
The informal synonyms are
Villain Bastard Beast Son of a bitch SOB Rat Louse Swine Dog Skunk Heel Snake Wretch Scumbag
Rat fink Rotter Hound Bounder Blighter Blackguard Knave Varlet Whoreson
That list should give us all a good choice of words with which to describe the wretched reprobate of a scumbag blackguard charlatan known as Mittens Romney.
I like the sound of some of the old English terms.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 9:54:55 GMT -8
Artler, it was an interesting tweet from Mitten’s former press secretary during the 2012 presidential campaign, Rick Gorka. This was a continuation of a tweet where he mentioned Mitten’s desire to “pander to the chattering glass”:
This sound likes something that would have been said at StubbornThings. Certainly Rush Limbaugh often noted John McCain’s propensity for pandering to “the chattering class.”
You would *think* that with Romney’s stern moral upbringing he would have learned that supporting a president (regardless of party) against Communists would be the moral act.
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 9:55:41 GMT -8
Okay. I'm on board with all that and stand corrected!
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 9:57:34 GMT -8
Hahahaha. And, oh, you've got to find that quote.
Maybe it was this quote:
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 6, 2020 10:02:22 GMT -8
|
|
Brad Nelson
Administrator
עַבְדְּךָ֔ אֶת־ הַתְּשׁוּעָ֥ה הַגְּדֹלָ֖ה הַזֹּ֑את
Posts: 11,047
|
Post by Brad Nelson on Feb 6, 2020 10:02:57 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by kungfuzu on Feb 6, 2020 10:13:35 GMT -8
In addition to the list of synonyms for scoundrel, which I previously listed, I believe the following list also applies to Jonah.
Deceitful Dishonest Untruthful Mendacious Insincere False Disingenuous Untrustworthy Unscrupulous Unprincipled Two-faced Duplicitous Double-dealing Underhand Crafty Cunning Sly Scheming Calculating
Treacherous
Machiavellian
Sneaky Tricky Foxy Crooked
Bent Counterfeit Fabricated Invented Concocted
Made up Trumped up Untrue False
Bogus Fake
Spurious Fallacious Deceptive Misleading
I think it is pretty clear that Jonah is what the Red Chinese used to call a "running-dog lacky," and is running for his Globalist masters and others who keep him in cash.
|
|