April 30, 2016

"I have a lot of experience dealing with men who sometimes get off the reservation in the way they behave and how they speak."

"I’m not going to deal with their temper tantrums or their bullying or their efforts to try to provoke me. He can say whatever he wants to me. I could really care less."

Said Hillary Clinton. Fine. I'll just say:

1. I'm glad she's irritating the people who would like you to know that you're supposed to say "I couldn't care less." I enjoy imagining that the people who say "I could care less" mean to call attention to the smidgen less caring that remains possible.

2. I don't think Donald Trump needs the say-anything permission she gave him: "He can say whatever he wants to me." The key word is "wants." And he does say anything he wants. We're often surprised that he wants to say what he says, but Hillary may have some power to change what he wants to say, if she can figure out how. I assume she'd like her status as a woman to exerts some pressure on what he wants to say.

3. I'm surprised she used the phrase "off the reservation." I know Donald Trump has been attacking "political correctness," but he doesn't gratuitously use figures of speech that relate to groups that have been oppressed in American history. His political incorrectness is plain speech about current problems, not metaphor. For reference, here's an NPR.org piece from 2014 explaining "off the reservation":
In its literal and original sense, as you would expect, the term was used in the 19th century to describe the activities of Native Americans:
"The acting commissioner of Indian affairs to-day received a telegram from Agent Roorke of the Klamath (Oregon) agency, dated July 6, in which he says: 'No Indians are off the reservation without authority. All my Indians are loyal and peaceable, and doing well." (Baltimore Sun, July 11, 1878)

"Secretary Hoke Smith...has requested of the Secretary of War the aid of the United States troops to arrest a band of Navajo Indians living off the reservation near American Valley, New Mexico, who have been killing cattle, etc." (Washington Post, May 23, 1894)

"Apaches off the reservation...killing deer and gathering wild fruits." (New York Times, Sept. 7, 1897)
Many of the news articles that used the term in a literal sense in the past were also expressing undisguised contempt and hatred, or, at best, condescension for Native Americans — "shiftless, untameable...a rampant and intractable enemy to civilization" (New York Times, Oct. 27, 1886)....
 4.  "I have a lot of experience dealing with men..." would be a great intro into Hillary's generally good stance, which is that she's tough and experienced and she's going to just keep barreling ahead toward her longstanding goal. But it made me think of Bill Clinton. He's the man she's had the most experience with. With that in mind, "the way they behave" sent my mind reeling off topic....

72 comments:

Martha said...

Oh Hillary! You have offended the native Indian voting block.

Trump could care less what Hillary! says. He is Trump. Hear him roar.

Sebastian said...

Sorry, but lit-critting Hillary! is beside the point. She'll say and do what she needs to say and do to lock up the women's vote. As O showed, it doesn't take much. Drumpf will help -- the main reason Bill encouraged him to get into the race in the first place. And of course, racially insensitive metaphors are only a problem for Cons, never Progs. In this case, adapting an old slur for use against men to appeal to sisterhood is perfectly fine.

MPH said...

Did she really say "could care less?" That's a pet peeve of mine.

Michael said...

Trump will say what he wants to say and one of the things he will want to say, again and again, is that Hillary was not on the side of the sluts and whores and poor people who serviced her husband down through the years. The slut shaming and excuse making and stand-by-your-manning is not going to work this time, too 90s for a cohort that was not then born and shrinks at the sight of a scary word.

Trump is going to be the one to play the woman card. Watch.

Tom said...

It made me think of Bill being off the reservation. So both offensive to Native Americans and a remind of Bill dipping his wick - off to a great start, Hill!

AllenS said...

off the reservation -- those are trigger warning words to me.

Where'd I put my tomahawk?

shiloh said...

As mentioned in another thread ~ there's politically incorrect and then there's kindergarten boorish rude.

Not a fine line ...

And what does the general voting public not already know about Hillary? Again, it comes down to who looks more presidential. Plus the built in advantage Dems already have shown the last (6) election cycles.

Indeed, this election cycle nominating Trump is Reince Priebus er the Rep party's idea of "expanding the tent"! What could possibly go wrong.

Sorry, there just aren't enough older white guys.

>

Keep hope alive re: Hillary getting indicted.

rehajm said...

I’m not going to deal with their temper tantrums or their bullying or their efforts to try to provoke me.

Use good money to wager this is a lie.

AReasonableMan said...

Sebastian said...
Drumpf will help -- the main reason Bill encouraged him to get into the race in the first place.


Presumably, you have, at this point, seen Trump give a speech or two. Did he look, to you, like a man who needed encouragement to run for president?

dbp said...

Women are like the federal government and men are like the red savages who need to stay on the reservations granted to them by women.

Okay, got it!

But one cannot help thinking that Hillary feels like, just being a woman, entitles her to things.

Limited blogger said...

Of course I thought of Bill. Who did she intend me to think of?

Trump's stuff sounds fresh. You have to parse her stuff to figure out what's she talking about?

Paddy O said...

Once again, another sign that she has spent too much time in Washington.

She has been desensitized by the NFL team.

tim maguire said...

"I could care less" is not logically or grammatically wrong. You can look at it as an idiom and, as Bill Safire once pointed out, idioms are always correct. You could also emphasize the could to hint at an understood "but it would be hard."

Limited blogger said...

I'm seeing Bernie Sanders and some Native American groups are actually taking issue with her using the term. Hmmmm, interesting. I'm sure CNN (Clinton New Network) will devote an hour long segment to explaining to us how it was ok.

Paul said...

Heh. She's gonna care plenty.

tim maguire said...

Hillary has to be very careful playing the women card--it's virtually impossible for her to say anything gender-related and not have people think of Bill. She gets a free pass from Sanders and the press, but she will not get a free pass from Trump or Cruz. (She probably would get a pass from Kasich.)

traditionalguy said...

Being off the Politically Correct Reservation means some man is refusing to go along with a message of guilt and shame that women often find usefull when relating to others. They are also saying to obey them or they will announce their feelings have been hurt.

When women try that it doesn't work unless they can get a crew of men to help them enforce it. When men try it, you have encountered Lucifer in the flesh...Rafael Cruz is back.

Trump simply refuses to play the games that mean he loses. Why should he.

A good way to spot this game is hearing messages that you need their approval. They send it by a constant expression of approving you that carries with it the threat of it being in their power to withhold it.

M Jordan said...

It is slowly dawning on me that Bill and Hillary were never the cool kids. They weren't quite nerds (though Bill was in the high school band and Hillary was a "Goldwater girl") but they weren't quite cool either. This is a little surprising to me after watching them all these years because I saw them through the lens of fame. I think this explains Bill's high-risk sex behavior: the nerd suddenly allowed to grab whatever he wants. And it explains Hillary's tone-deafness in saying thing like "off the reservation" and "We were dead broke when we left the White House."

Democrats have always owned "cool" in the great national political prom dance and Obama certainly fortified that. But the idea that the Clintons weren't then and they aren't now cool ... that's a delicious thought for me to ponder. And an area for Trump -- who is vulgar but somehow kind of cool -- to exploit.

Limited blogger said...

Another example of how crappy a communicator Hillary is. We can't even get to the explicit threat she was making, cause its buried under so much other misspeak.

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Paco Wové said...

"Off the reservation" was a weird choice of words, because there being a reservation to be off of implies a population that is (or should be) pacified, corralled, contained. So that's what Hillary thinks of "men", eh? Which just reminds me once more that this November the choice may come down to a loose cannon vs. a cannon aimed directly at me.

Sydney said...

The only men in her life are Bill and Sid Blumenthal. Seems like her staff is mostly made up of women. So of course, we are going to think of Bill. And how can we believe she was thinking of anyone but him?

Unknown said...

Trump's "I can be Presidential" position didn't last very long. Trump needs to be controversial continually because that is what his fans expect.

In-between talking about building the greatest wall the world has seen to bringing back all the imaginary manufacturing jobs, Trump has also said numerous times that 1) wages are too high and 2) taxes will be reduced for the rich.

I wish Trump fans would understand what those two things really mean: you are going to get even more screwed economically than you are now. Don't say you were not warned because Trump has told you what he is going to do.

Ultimately, people want to feel good about the candidates they vote for. Trump will be the protest vote and Clinton will be the safe hands vote.

M Jordan said...

People that complain about "I could care less" being illogical -- and that's the grammarian complaint -- are the same a-holes who complain about double negatives being illogical. But they are wrong in both cases. The logic of "I could care less" is you don't care enough to throw in the negative "n't." Your foe isn't worthy even of that. And as for double negatives, "Don't give me no lip" is more forceful than "Don't give me any lip." The hidden logic is that the second negative is actually functioning as an intensifier. It's like saying "true facts," a redundancy on one level but more striking on another. And we all know, some "facts" aren't true.

William said...

"I'm so sick of men--little boys actually--crying about their little boo-boos when I'm trying to advance the cause of world peace."......Isn't this the female version of "Don't worry your pretty little head, sweetie."

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Quick: is Elizabeth Warren offended?

Michael K said...

"Sorry, there just aren't enough older white guys."

You need to learn who is going to these rallies.

At the rally, the security presence was strong and visible. I've never seen so much law enforcement. There were protestors, some with Anarchist flags and others with Mexican flags, but not too many, not yet, and most of the "anarchists" were of the pajama boy variety--the really nasty thugs came later. The cops were trying to keep the protestors away from people waiting in line to get in. The first thing I noticed about those people in line was that it was majority women. I thought, it would be mainly white guys, but no, it was mainly women. Lots of minorities, as well; I was quite surprised.

While we waited in line, the protestors yelled cuss words, and the "usual" insults, such as calling everyone a racist and a bigot. Some of the protestors would get through the police line and run up to the people waiting, and start yelling at them. Initially the protest remained peaceful, other, of course, than the chant of wanting Trump dead.

As noted, the most interesting part of the rally proved the demographics: it was probably 60% women. Lots of minorities as well, plenty of people holding "Latinos for Trump" signs. It was a good mix of African-American, Asian, White, and Hispanic--everybody got along well. Over the loudspeaker, we kept hearing somebody saying over and over that if we saw protestors in the crowd, please do not touch them or say anything to them, just alert security by yelling "Trump! Trump! Trump!" Initially, I thought this was ridiculous, but it worked. Random protestors would get in with the rally crowd and start yelling, and folks would shout, "Trump! Trump! Trump!" The very efficient security personnel would escort the protestors out. No violence.


That's from this account of the Costa Mesa rally.

Meade said...

I'm not sitting here like some little squaw following behind my man, like Sacagawea baking pemmican.

Fernandinande said...

the term was used in the 19th century

google ngram shows usage almost linearly increasing from about 1870 to 2000.

Bill said...

LOL @Meade

dbp said...

Whether "could care less" is illogical depends on what you are trying to convey. If you can care less, this means that you currently care more than the least possible amount. The easiest way to be in a situation where you could care less, is if you care a lot. This gives you the most room for change: You could care just a little less or a lot less. If you already care hardly at all, how would you be able to definitely tell if you started caring just a smidgen less?

whswhs said...

I think you're overthinking "I could care less." We know a lot about linguistic change, and not much of it takes place through people hearing an expression, and consciously coining a variant on it, and other people choosing to adopt the variant; a big part of it takes place because people hear the expression a little inaccurately, and misinterpret it, and use the inaccurate form, and then other people learn that form. Dropping a phoneme off the end of a word, like the dropped k that turned "another think coming" into "another thing coming," is an especially common form of phonological change. And if, during the period of transition, or shortly after it, you question the newer form, people who use it will come up with elaborate rationalizations for why it means what it's taken to mean—but that's confabulation. A lot of people aren't linguistically analytic; they learn phrases as a whole and don't think about what the constituent words and morphemes mean.

Now, I don't definitely know that no one ever consciously coined "I could care less" as a witticism to make the point you suggest. But it sure looks to me like a commonplace linguistic error becoming standard usage through linguistic drift. For one thing, to fit the explanation you offer, the prosody really needs to be different—"I COULD care less"—and I've never heard it said that way; but also because the added point you perceive just needs too much explanation to strike me as a genuinely funny joke that people would repeat because it made them laugh.

robother said...

Revealing metaphor. The Feminazis of Hillary's generation have created PC reservations for men. Men who stray off the reservation like Bill and Anthony Weiner are rounded back up. But even men like Trump, who never surrendered, are now referred to as "off the reservation."

The pass given to leaders of the Left to use metaphors like this with impunity is further evidence of who's in charge of the culture: a little ambush set for someone like Trump to assume that the metaphor won't blow up in his face just because Hillary gets to use it.

Chris said...

"1. I'm glad she's irritating the people who would like you to know that you're supposed to say 'I couldn't care less.'"

Of the things about Hillary Clinton that irritate me, that one is far down the list.

"I enjoy imagining that the people who say 'I could care less' mean to call attention to the smidgen less caring that remains possible."

Imagine, sure. But to actually credit them with that intent is generous.

Big Mike said...

I'm surprised she used the phrase "off the reservation."

I'm only surprised that she used "reservation" instead of "plantation."

I know Donald Trump has been attacking "political correctness," but he doesn't gratuitously use figures of speech that relate to groups that have been oppressed in American history. His political incorrectness is plain speech about current problems, not metaphor.

Yup. The US government under Barack Obama's executive leadership allowed a woman who had written on social media about her intense desire to kill Americans, resulting in the San Bernardino massacre. Trump's response was to point out that there's something wrong with our vetting procedures and we need to suspend Muslim immigration until we figure out what's wrong and fix it. The Dumbocrats liken this to racism. The more sapient members of the American public think he's got something there.

Big Mike said...

Sorry. Should have written "allowed to immigrate"

Someday I'll be a decent proof reader of my own comments. Someday. A man can dream, can't he?

Birkel said...

The communism forced on my ancestors by the US government has been a travesty.

Hillary uses reservation without any thought. Screw her.

mockturtle said...

She has long accused Trump of being anti-woman but her contempt for men is obvious.

Michael said...

"I’m not going to deal with their temper tantrums or their bullying or their efforts to try to provoke me." Please. How much temper or bullying has Hillary ever personally seen (outside the home)? She's lived an isolated and privileged existence since forever. No one bullies the First Lady, even of Arkansas. She hasn't driven a car in 20 years. This is just another bogus attempt to appropriate the experiences of ordinary people to glorify herself. She is the least authentic person on the planet.

mockturtle said...

Her 'off the reservation' remark probably cheered Sanders followers. Her 'I could care less' gaffe just made my stomach churn a bit.

traditionalguy said...

Hillary really means The Reservation that Obama has turned the USA into. The Government gives or withholds food. The rebels are tracked down and punished . The TPP Treaty like many other Obama deals has turned over ownership to International Authority. We are the North American Provence. Ask Heidi Cruz.

TA said...

That kind of talk from Hillary will remind a lot of men of the bitch school teacher they had, who hated boys, and was resolved to whip them into meek obedience.

Freeman Hunt said...

Wouldn't a person want to be "off the reservation?" Doesn't being on the reservation imply that one has been coerced and oppressed?

AllenS said...

Very good, Meade @ 9:40.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Oh Dear. This is the best you've got? She really is going to win, isn't she?

But at least we'll have some intellectually masturbatory entertainment in the background while it happens.

I do hope that Camille Paglia's pen stays pretty sharp over the next 4 - 8 years. I'm sure I'm going to go through boxes of Alka-Seltzer like they were Tic Tacs.

Drago said...

Please, lets not have any criticism of Hillary lest we drive Chuck (the "lifelong republican") to desperation.

Remember, all "lifelong republicans" must be united in their continuous criticism of Trump while refusing to criticize Hillary.

Why, just the other day, "lifelong republican" Chuck accused me of being "obsessed" with Hillary for daring to offer criticism of her.

Such is the nature of Chuck's "lifelong republicanism".

When it comes to Hillary and Bill, the Shiloh's and Amanda's of the world will always become extremely upset at the thought that somehow, somewhere, some pressure might be brought to bear on Bill to stop sexually assaulting women and on Hillary to stop trying to destroy Bill's victims.

And dare we even get started in on Bills many travels to pedophile island?

Seems as though Bill has been playing the "little women" card...over and over again.

Rhythm and Balls said...

If Trump wants to play really dirty, and with the only hope of being effective on this line of attack, he'd hold rallies with Monica Lewinsky or use her as a surrogate.

Bill Clinton basically thinks the country can go suck his dick. Back in the day, it was about him being Seducer in Chief, and boy oh boy, was our sexually dysfunctional country in need of some seduction!

But now, it's all about the favors. And Hillary's obviously very asexual. The only form of gratification she knows is adulation. Having that much power will be like the first time she manages to have an orgasm, I would bet. The Chief Justice might as well ask her, "Was it good for you?" once he's done administering the Oath of Office. She will be quivering.

These people are so fucking obnoxious it's obscene.

Mary Beth said...

Sebastian said...
Drumpf will help -- the main reason Bill encouraged him to get into the race in the first place.


That assumes that Bill wants to be living in the White House again and all the public scrutiny that comes with it. No more jetting off to pedophile island with Jeffrey Epstein.

Quaestor said...

Men are by nature "wild Indians" who need to be "on the reservation" for the sake of an orderly society. The enforcement used something called manners. Any man who wanted to be respected and regarded as honorable would conduct himself appropriately, else he lost respect, lost honor, lost access to the higher echelons of society, and probably could not achieve his potential.

Then came feminism. If a man held a door open for a woman he risked an insult instead of the reward of an approving smile. Many feminists reacted to mannerly behavior as if they were being insulted. "I don't need your protection!" was the hue and cry. But in reality things did not change as much as Gloria Steinem claimed or imagined. Woman still demanded protection, but not through the informal and voluntary mechanisms of the mannerly society, but through the coercive mechanisms of law, which is ultimately enforced by creditable possibility of deadly violence against the non-compliant, much like Indians confined to reservations stayed where they were because of the coercive influence of the United States Cavalry.

mockturtle said...

There are times to elect a 'gentleman' to the presidency and times to elect a kick-ass blowhard. Guess what time it is?

shiloh said...

"You need to learn who is going to these rallies."

Having previously told "you" about Trump supporters:

40/50 percent of core Rep cons who believe Obama is/was a Muslim born in Kenya.

Then take into account Reps currently make up 25% of party affiliation.

So, being generous, Trump has 50% of 25% of the electorate. Indeed, he's well on the way to forming a winning presidential coalition!

btw, Dems including leaners is up to 49%.

I yield back the balance of my time ...

rcocean said...

Trump's on the warpath and all Hillary can do is talk like a squaw with a forked tongue.

Bad medicine.

rcocean said...

I can't wait till Hillary and bill return to the white house and we can revisit their never ending soap opera.

Does Bill still have "Bimbo eruptions"? Or does he just make regular visits to Epstein's Island?

Rhythm and Balls said...

Oh boy. Shiloh the DINO is here to fight the last election and give all glory be to the DNC!!! Our corruption is our salvation!

I've been hearing from/"debating" a lot of Hillary supporters lately. Dumber than a bag of rocks. Low info voters to the core, every last one of them. And basically all upholding the Koch agenda.

The truth is that Trump is both more nationalistic and probably less corrupt or conservative or militaristic than Hillary.

But it don't matter. There are psychological issues that America needs to sort out. And their chief protagonist, Hillary's therapy comes in the form of a nice Oval Office to occupy.

Bill used the office to work out his issues and now Hillary has some issues of her own to work out. You know, as an example to other corrupt, young women who would seek to blame their problems on other people, or on America at large.

Rhythm and Balls said...

Shiloh: Won't it be great to win an election and then have no idea what to do the next day?

I bet you have a nice butthole to insert your thumbs into once you're done twaddling them.

I'm sure Hillary will find that inspirational, and will follow suit. Winning elections, the war on sexism and navel gazing.

Surely a recipe for all the right things. These are the things that long-term political and national success are built upon!

Michael K said...

"btw, Dems including leaners is up to 49%.

I yield back the balance of my time .."

That's not all you're going to yield. Hillary has fewer primary votes than she had in 2008.

I have no idea what Trump will do as president but I know why is he is going to win.

One of you guys accused me of wanting a revolution. No, I was just predicting one.

I think this may be it.

cubanbob said...

It used to be said that God loves drunks, fools and the United States Of America. Considering who is our current leader and those who are running to be our leader, it's looks like God is having a change of heart.

As for the reservation, does getting outside the bounds of the prison farm constitute being off the reservation? Hillary is going to need precise legal definitions in her future.

Jupiter said...

Dear Althouse,

You make a fundamental error in your political analysis. You keep saying "women" when you mean "unmarried sluts". Of course, you come by this honestly, as despite your fairly sound instincts, you have steeped for decades in the thinking of the institutional Left, and the Left regards anyone who refuses to climb into the victim role the Left has assigned them as inauthentic. According to the Left, stay-at-home wives, who don't wish to see their husbands' income taxed away to support some whore's bastards, are not "women". They belong in reservations (or maybe "camps"), right along with their husbands.

Nonetheless, the truth is that if the only people allowed to vote were married women, John McCain (and Sarah Palin) would have been elected in a landslide in 2008. Romney would have won 2012 (except that if McCain didn't stand for re-election, I rather think America's married women would have been delighted to elect Sarah Palin as America's first female President). And Trump would most assuredly beat Hillary! like a gong in 2016. The Left is a cobbled-together coalition of life's losers, looking to plunder the winners. Which is, I suppose, exactly what we should expect from Democracy as a political system.

But don't write men off as a political force, just because the women we didn't marry (or divorced) are bitter about it. There are lots of honest women in America. And they vote.

Drago said...

R&B's: "Bill Clinton basically thinks the country can go suck his dick. Back in the day, it was about him being Seducer in Chief, and boy oh boy, was our sexually dysfunctional country in need of some seduction!"

Wasn't there an Alan Alda movie plot that ran along those lines?

Unknown said...

Poor Hillary is so tone deaf, she actually thinks being a cuckold is somehow empowering and shows strength. I never thought I would say this but I don't think Trump will have any problem dismantling her in the general elections. She will keep handing Trump the cream pies to get hit in the face with.

shiloh said...

"That's not all you're going to yield. Hillary has fewer primary votes than she had in 2008."

And Hillary has 12 million primary votes, whereas Trump has 10 million.

And Trump could break the Rep all-time record of 10.8 million set in 2000.

What do all (3) of these statistics predict? Nothing.

And there was no way Obama could win PA/FL/OH according to 2008 pundits.

Of course 8 years of Cheney/Bush ineptitude/incompetence changed everything. As always MK ~ keep hope alive!

>

btw, noboby has a clue what Trump will do including Trump.

mikee said...

..."Hillary's generally good stance, which is that she's tough and experienced and she's going to just keep barreling ahead toward her longstanding goal"

Hillary is tough in that she oppresses others, has avoided jail and the near occasions of jail for her corrupt practices, and is an extremely vindictive believer in both "to the winner go the spoils" and "to the loser goes the free ride in the cart to the guillotine."

Hillary is experienced in her corruption, granted.

Hillary has a goal. It is an extremely personal goal, to attain enough power to exact retribution on all those who oppose her for her corruption and enabling of corruption. I don't find that a goal worthy of support.

Still, she will win the election through her corrupt practices, so get ready for a wild ride after November.

William Chadwick said...

"I want those men back on the re-education camps--I mean, reservation!" (Cackles maniacally as her elite squad of flying monkeys swoops down and starts herding men back to the reservation.)

Jupiter said...

It is significant that the people who want to see that vicious, lying, sack of corruption back in the White House always say that she would be the first "woman President". Never the crisp precision of "female", always the clunky dysfunction of the noun used as an adjective. This is because "female" is too immediate a reminder that sexual identity is an aspect of biology. The Left is committed to the denial and suppression of biology. They want "woman" to be an identity, chosen, perhaps (--perhaps!) by genetic lottery, but otherwise completely arbitrary, albeit nonetheless extremely honorable and worthy of deep admiration. Just as "brother" is to retain its persuasive power, but not its genetic basis.

Women are not, like the females of every other mammalian species, destined and specially equipped to play a particular, highly necessary role in the continuance of the species. No, a woman is -- What? If a woman is not a female, then perhaps she is just a small man? With tits? Or Hell, how about an Olympic athlete with a Y chromosome in a dress? Could I interest you in a shaven chimpanzee with poorly-applied lipstick? How women are supposed to be defined, or why indeed they require definition, if not on the basis of their genetically determined physical characteristics, is a puzzle the pointy-heads continue to struggle with. As is her role in society. A woman is every bit as strong as a man, and can in fact, do anything a man can do, only better. Except pay for her own birth control, of course. Only a man can do that. Preferably, some Christian man she doesn't even know, let alone fuck. A woman needs a man -- like a fish needs a bicycle! Hah! Just as long as she can have the benefit of some other woman's man's earnings, seized for her at gunpoint by a just and competently-run government, rightly solicitous of her special but entirely not-unusual and indeed completely superfluous and barely-even-there physical condition as a frail waif in need of protection from and support by the men that she is better than in every conceivable way. On campuses across the Nation, on they toil, incomprehensible contradiction piled atop glaring inconsistency, in a tax-supported Tower of Babel. It would be Hilar!ious, except that those guns I mentioned are real.

Fernandinande said...

William Chadwick said...
Flying Monkeys for Hillary!

mockturtle said...

Cackles maniacally...
Oh, man, I don't want to listen to that for four years!

Molly said...

Personally, I take sexual harassment much too seriously to vote to put Clinton back in the White House. I'm surprised that so many liberal democrats take the view that sexual harassment is not really a big issue.

Michael K said...

"As always MK ~ keep hope alive!

>

btw, noboby has a clue what Trump will do including Trump."

The lefty kid always has an answer.

Bush had no idea that 9/11 would happen. If you knew any history you'd know the famous quote from MacMillan about "events, my dear boy, events" are what drives an administration.

Harold Macmillan, was once asked what was the most difficult thing about his job. ‘Events, dear boy, events’ was his now famous reply.


Too bad you know no history.

Birkel said...

Michael K:

He don't know much about biology...

🎶🎵🎶

shiloh said...

MK, you are the king of non-sequiturs. Congrats!

tim in vermont said...

When there exists a 20 point IQ difference, a lot of seeming non-sequiturs seem to pass in both directions. I don't know, I didn't bother following the argument between you guys, so I have no opinion on the current argument, but as an aside, I have just noticed that accusing the other side of a "non-sequitur" is many times a bad move; after all, proving a negative is often difficult.

shiloh said...

"I don't know, I didn't bother following the argument between you guys, so I have no opinion on the current argument"

MK, when he's not makin' a personal snide comment or otherwise telling the world how intelligent he is, has a bad habit of responding with totally irrelevant info ie please tell me what a MacMillan quote has to do with Trump being totally clueless re: his agenda if he would be elected president.

Again, MK in no way disagreed with me that Trump has no idea what he's gonna do if elected. And yes, Bush was clueless also. So what does Bush being clueless have to do with Trump being clueless other than they both ran as Reps.

In a nutshell, MK has never disagreed w/me re: facts.

>

btw, history tells me Hillary, warts and all, should defeat Trump quite easily. Whereas most Althouse cons think the reverse is true ie Trump will win in a landslide. And they thought the same (4) years ago re: mittens and (8) years ago re: McCain.

Again, die hard Reps/cons er posters at con blogs feel they will win every presidential election regardless. That's their mindset from the get go. Which is why I find this blog somewhat entertaining.

Even Althouse was convinced mittens would win quite easily ...