Sitting this one out on account of some deadlines today, but thanks again for the interview yesterday, David. Assuming no big surprises this week, your episode should be up by the end of the week.
I still owe some replies to Curtis and Cameron on the prior thread, and I'll be circling back to those later today (after I finish paying bills - Soros has stiffed me yet again).
Seems to me that “no kings” was a preternaturally American concept and founding impetus. So it’s pretty ironic and fairly hilarious that the GOP is on the side against it now. Really shows you how far they’ve fallen in their subjugation to Trump. #sad.
That said, it’s fine to be against something. But at the ballot box, you’d like to be able to vote “for” something. And I’m not sure how coherent an alternative the other side has presented thus far.
OK, so you lost me in about the second paragraph when you started in on how Trump should be 25th-Amendmented.
Seriously?
These was an example in the not so distant past of someone who really should have been 25th-Amendmented - but crickets.
Is it some odd form of 21st C. projection, to project one’s own guy’s EXACT flaw onto one’s nemesis? Jeez, at least be a little creative, come up with something different. Heaven knows Trump has flaws, but just because Joe was senile, doesn’t make everyone else senile too.
It smacks of “I know you are but what am I?” -ism.
Do an honest analysis of what he says and thinks, and you either have someone very insulated or very much delusional. Especially with the family history of dementia.
Right. He’s got dementia because of a family history. Got it.
Claiming a speaker has dementia because the listener vehemently dislikes the speaker and thus, disagrees with anything the speaker might say, including that the sky is blue and the earth is round, is possibly a clearer indication of dementia in the listener rather than in the speaker.
He has a family history of dementia, and is displaying signs of the onset - yes. That has nothing to do with policy disagreement, which I would address solely on the policy itself.
As I said, really analyze what he says and thinks (because he says what he thinks) - and then think about the measures that need to be implemented to ensure the people know the actual health of POTUS in general (e.g. mandatory brain scans and the like that are released to the public).
Saying and doing things with which you may disagree (I disagree with a lot of what he does too) isn’t a sign of dementia. Wandering offstage, staring like a deer in headlights - those are signs of dementia.
I thought much of what Clinton and Obama did and said was delusional too, but I’m not about to say they were in early dementia, or diagnosable mentally ill. I vehemently disagree with Karl Marx, but I’m not prepared to call him nuts; just woefully misguided.
I disagree with you, and I criticized Democrats when they were in power. This mess is all GOP, and the GOP is currently much more dangerous than Democrats.
It seems the Constitution is being squeezed from both sides, hence when Trump descended from Trump tower in 2015 to announce his candidacy, i immediately switched my party affiliation from republican to independent.
When Trump came down the escalator, I said that I would be #nevertrump, and i have kept my word. And I don't defend him as much as I criticize you for having nothing but rabid disdain for him. If you would devote even one of your columns every so often to how awful the democrats are, then we probably could be much more on common ground.
Easy to say, but then actually look at what the GOP is doing vs what Dems want to do - not what the GOP says the Dems want to do - and I don't see how that's anywhere near true.
'cause it ain't just about Trump: it's also about the GOP, their enablement of Trump, and their devolution form principled American conservatism to base tribalism.
Mamdani is a candidate for mayor of a single city, and NYC mayors - while powerful in NYC - ultimately have little/no effect on the national landscape.
Meanwhile, POTUS is acting without legal authority and enacting outright Communist policy - but "Dems are always worse".
Sitting this one out on account of some deadlines today, but thanks again for the interview yesterday, David. Assuming no big surprises this week, your episode should be up by the end of the week.
I still owe some replies to Curtis and Cameron on the prior thread, and I'll be circling back to those later today (after I finish paying bills - Soros has stiffed me yet again).
Seems to me that “no kings” was a preternaturally American concept and founding impetus. So it’s pretty ironic and fairly hilarious that the GOP is on the side against it now. Really shows you how far they’ve fallen in their subjugation to Trump. #sad.
That said, it’s fine to be against something. But at the ballot box, you’d like to be able to vote “for” something. And I’m not sure how coherent an alternative the other side has presented thus far.
OK, so you lost me in about the second paragraph when you started in on how Trump should be 25th-Amendmented.
Seriously?
These was an example in the not so distant past of someone who really should have been 25th-Amendmented - but crickets.
Is it some odd form of 21st C. projection, to project one’s own guy’s EXACT flaw onto one’s nemesis? Jeez, at least be a little creative, come up with something different. Heaven knows Trump has flaws, but just because Joe was senile, doesn’t make everyone else senile too.
It smacks of “I know you are but what am I?” -ism.
Biden was low energy, but seemed lucid and rational compared to Trump, who quite often seems to inhabit a fantasy world.
Do an honest analysis of what he says and thinks, and you either have someone very insulated or very much delusional. Especially with the family history of dementia.
Right. He’s got dementia because of a family history. Got it.
Claiming a speaker has dementia because the listener vehemently dislikes the speaker and thus, disagrees with anything the speaker might say, including that the sky is blue and the earth is round, is possibly a clearer indication of dementia in the listener rather than in the speaker.
Just a point to ponder.
He has a family history of dementia, and is displaying signs of the onset - yes. That has nothing to do with policy disagreement, which I would address solely on the policy itself.
As I said, really analyze what he says and thinks (because he says what he thinks) - and then think about the measures that need to be implemented to ensure the people know the actual health of POTUS in general (e.g. mandatory brain scans and the like that are released to the public).
Saying and doing things with which you may disagree (I disagree with a lot of what he does too) isn’t a sign of dementia. Wandering offstage, staring like a deer in headlights - those are signs of dementia.
I thought much of what Clinton and Obama did and said was delusional too, but I’m not about to say they were in early dementia, or diagnosable mentally ill. I vehemently disagree with Karl Marx, but I’m not prepared to call him nuts; just woefully misguided.
Again, the statement is not about saying things with which I disagree - it's about the actual speech and cognitive issues he displays while speaking.
😜🤪😜 I celebrate no kings. Congratulations you’ve allowed the reality to continue now well into its 250th year. Well done, well done 😵💫
Trump is bad, but democrats(communists) are worse, yet crickets from Mr. Thornton.
I disagree with you, and I criticized Democrats when they were in power. This mess is all GOP, and the GOP is currently much more dangerous than Democrats.
Republicans have a lot more ground to cover to be "much more dangerous than democrats." So, we will have to agree to disagree on this.
Ah, the evergreen ethos of the GOP: no principles, just tribalism.
And who's the actual Communists? Trump's literally enacting Communist policy of state-ownership of the means of production.
I said he was bad, but Democrats are worse. I give you Mamdani...
It seems the Constitution is being squeezed from both sides, hence when Trump descended from Trump tower in 2015 to announce his candidacy, i immediately switched my party affiliation from republican to independent.
Did you vote Trump andGOP though? You’re obviously here to defend him on a regular basis.
Trump is a lot like Mamdani, but Mamdani’s authority will only affect one city.
When Trump came down the escalator, I said that I would be #nevertrump, and i have kept my word. And I don't defend him as much as I criticize you for having nothing but rabid disdain for him. If you would devote even one of your columns every so often to how awful the democrats are, then we probably could be much more on common ground.
Easy to say, but then actually look at what the GOP is doing vs what Dems want to do - not what the GOP says the Dems want to do - and I don't see how that's anywhere near true.
'cause it ain't just about Trump: it's also about the GOP, their enablement of Trump, and their devolution form principled American conservatism to base tribalism.
Mamdani is a candidate for mayor of a single city, and NYC mayors - while powerful in NYC - ultimately have little/no effect on the national landscape.
Meanwhile, POTUS is acting without legal authority and enacting outright Communist policy - but "Dems are always worse".