June 6, 2016

"And I would be a top-ten assassination target in that scenario because once you define Trump as Hitler, you also give citizens moral permission to kill him."

"And obviously it would be okay to kill anyone who actively supports a genocidal dictator, including anyone who wrote about his persuasion skills in positive terms. (I’m called an “apologist” on Twitter, or sometimes just Joseph Goebbels)."

Scott Adams explains his reason for endorsing Hillary (even as he maintains his prediction that Trump will win in a landslide).

By the way, here's a guessing game I made up. I took this picture from the TV yesterday (the Jake Tapper Sunday show). The question is: What word is Trump saying?



ADDED: The winner appeared at 9:05 AM. EDH:
Chi-na.

113 comments:

David Begley said...

"Crooked Hillary" or "coeval."

Marcus Carman said...

"Mexican"

Ann Althouse said...

It's one word.

walter said...

"..jail!"

traditionalguy said...

"Fire"

Mark said...

Bigly

Bob Ellison said...

Tough to read teeth, not lips, from a still photo.

traditionalguy said...

"Wall"

Ignorance is Bliss said...

Rosebud

Meeeea said...

"I"

Mike Sylwester said...

"La Raza Lawyers of California"

Bruce Hayden said...

I thought it was quite humorous. He essentially said that since Trump is now Hitler, supporting him would get you treated like a Hitler supporter, and thus maybe killed. So, he was going to support Hillary, so he wouldn't be killed as a Nazi supporter. Wasn't going to vote for her, but would support her as long as it kept him from being murdered. Something like that.

This is, of course, completely in line with his Dilbert humor, which seems to me to often involve taking things to their natural conclusions. It is that eye for absurdity that keeps his comics still funny.

M Jordan said...

"The"

tim maguire said...

I'm endorsing a North Carolina representative who stands against all that stuff I pretended to support when I needed your primary vote.

If it has to be one word, then: Suckers!

Ann Althouse said...

"Tough to read teeth, not lips, from a still photo."

I know, but what word would require so MUCH showing of teeth -- with disgust lines on the nose and inward sloping eyebrows?

readering said...

Thick

Cut It said...

eeeeeasyyyyy

Bob Boyd said...

Hillary

Carol said...

I heard my other half talking on the phone the other day, saying he wished both Hillary and Trump would be assassinated.

Nice, huh?

M Jordan said...

Adams is playing games. I get that this Clinton endorsement is a fake and connects her to the violence were seeing at Trump events. But it's also a dodge. He runs from Trump when the Twitter crowd snarl at him. He should compare himself to the Trump 45 woman who never lost her composure as a mob menaced and egged her.

Curious George said...

"guilty"

Brando said...

As if he would be spared by the race riots that Hillary will bring forth, or the Nazi takeover that Trump will definitely cause.

Or maybe neither will actually happen, we're just in for four years of corrupt incompetence, the gradual erosion of the rule of law, and governmental mismanagement continuing as we rack up more debt. A slow death, in other words.

Coconuss Network said...

A smiling "hey".

Curious George said...

"Carol said...
I heard my other half talking on the phone the other day, saying he wished both Hillary and Trump would be assassinated.

Nice, huh?"

You would need three bullets because I think most people would shoot Hillary twice.

Rumpletweezer said...

Has Adams said if Trump is ISO9000-compliant yet?

Earnest Prole said...

Either evil or one million dollars

David said...

Hitler

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I just want to let everyone know that I think Hillary Clinton is the bestest most wonderful person on the planet and is going to be a super-duper President as she guides us into the glorious future of snuggle-bunnies and cotton candy.

I do not believe, as so many people have so recklessly claimed, that she is an avatar of Cthulu.

Furthermore, even if she is, why should we vote for the lesser of two evils?

Peace out.

Amadeus 48 said...

Looks like "Obama" to me.

Rusty said...

Yuge!

damikesc said...

This is, of course, completely in line with his Dilbert humor, which seems to me to often involve taking things to their natural conclusions. It is that eye for absurdity that keeps his comics still funny.

Still love that Dilbert lost his dad to an All-You-Can-Eat Restaurant because he still hasn't eaten all he CAN eat.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

http://a.tgcdn.net/images/products/additional/large/e574_baby_cthulhu.jpg

mezzrow said...

Bob Boyd - ding, ding, ding, ding

He's saying "Hillary" - he's in the 'i' part of it and he's already said crooked.

Bet we're right.

Todd Galle said...

Rumplestiltskin ?

cubanbob said...

I don't have a clue to what he is saying but he does look like he is about to chew someone's ass off.

EDH said...

Chi-na.

Bob Boyd said...

@ mezzrow

It's either that or supercalifragilisticexpialidocious.

Bruce Hayden said...

Part of what he is remarking on is the increasing level of violence, week by week, o the part of the Dems and their partisans and minions toward, in particular, Trump, and, ultimately those most closely identified with him, notably in this case, Scott himself. Making things worse is the fact that Dem politicians are ordering their police to stand down and just watch from the sidelines as leftist mobs physically assault Trump supporters. After all, they must have been asking for a beating, or at least an egging by wearing a Trump button. Zero tolerance only works one way, because the loyal Dem supporters engaged in this sort of violence were just reacting to extreme stimuli (e.g. Trump buttons or bumper stickers).

Darcy said...

Haha. What a fun way to endorse Trump. Landslide.

Bob Boyd said...

Mexico

Luke Lea said...

Legally?

Bob Boyd said...

Easter bunny?

Static Ping said...

TEEEEEEETH

Saint Croix said...

This morning on one of the threads I was talking about the Trump University lawsuit.

Why don't you just settle the damn thing, you billionaire?

You know you're in the wrong, you know it was stupid, you can afford it. Settle it and make it go away. Instead he's fighting, fighting, fighting.

It reminds me of the Clintons and their unwillingness to settle with Paula Jones.

Why don't you just settle the damn thing, you idiot? You know you did wrong. Taking the early hit would have saved you a lot of bigger damage down the road.

In both cases, egotistical people who refuse to stop fighting made it worse for themselves.

n.n said...

Trump reconciles moral and natural imperatives. He does not support [class] diversity policies (e.g. racism, sexism, "skin color" judgments). He does not support progressive wars and opportunistic regime changes. He does not support the "final solution" including abortion rites and Planned Parenthood. He is not a pro-choice religionist who receives marching orders and sanction from gods in the twilight zone and their liberal advocates. He is also not a socialist. Unfortunately, a large minority of Americans are, and that complicates resolution of progressive corruption and dysfunction in our society.

Saint Croix said...

And then I thought about Richard Nixon. Here's a guy who quit twice! He got us out of Vietnam. How did he do that? He quit. And he's a guy who take the blame for crimes other people did. And he quit again.

So our culture dumps all this shit on Richard Nixon's head. Quitter! You quit! What a loser!

Meanwhile, people who never quit, who keep fighting, win. We like winners. Yay, he's a winner! But when you win and you're winning ugly and you are now the bad guy, I don't know if you want to win.

Saint Croix said...

Don't be surprised if you show up at heaven and Richard Nixon goes, "Sock it to me!"

Saint Croix said...

The other thing I thought about was Rick Perry saying "oops." We're like this. He said oops! He acknowledged a mistake! His career is over!

This is our culture. We celebrate winners and deride losers.

Meanwhile Donnie the Human Mistake Machine never says oops, ever. So people are like, I guess he's a winner. Well, he doesn't quit, anyway. He's relentless in his pursuit of whatever he's pursuing. Vote for the relentless guy who has no idea what he's doing! No worries!

Fernandinande said...

Scott Adams explains his reason for endorsing Hillary

Trump might be saying "dain bramage".

Quaestor said...

Trump isn't saying anything. He's demonstrating how to eat a prickly pear.

ellamentary said...

Sorry, Mr. Adams, you aren't funny any more with your Trump apologia. And you are not nearly so clever as you think you are. I knew when i saw his blog post this morning referenced somewhere else that when I got to Althouse, it would be featured here. The whole line---- trump, adams, althouse--- is getting too predictable. Somebody in the triad needs to shake things up somehow, do something fresh.

mockturtle said...

I'd guess 'Hillary'.

cubanbob said...

@Saint Croix
Trumpy could have settled but then that would have been an admission of guilt. If he weren't running for president he probably would have settled for a couple of hundred grand simply for the cost savings of a nuisance suit defense costs. But since he is running for president he isn't going to admit being a party to a fraud (if indeed this is the case). Trumpy claimed on TV that the woman who brought the suit prior to suing had raved how wonderful she thought Trump U was and Trumpy said he wasn't going to be shaken down. In the meantime an apparently biased federal judge is playing into Trumpy's hand politically.

shiloh said...

"I love Hispanics!"

But because he doesn't believe, as per usual, what he's saying ~ hence, therefore, ergo his expression.

MadisonMan said...

The whole line---- trump, adams, althouse--- is getting too predictable

Don't forget the predictable sequel to those three -- complaining about it on althouse.

coupe said...

"Lawyers"

Brando said...

"Trumpy could have settled but then that would have been an admission of guilt."

Settling isn't an admission of guilt, and most people are well aware that people often have to settle nuisance suits. If he'd said "I'm settling this because I don't need the distraction right now" do you think that'd really put him in a worse position than letting all this info come out about what a complete scam that "University" was? (And if you don't think it was a scam, then congratulations, nothing will change your mind about Trump, but keep in mind there's still a lot of the voting population left out there to reach).

We all like a fighter, but more precisely we like fighters who fight worthwhile fights and do their fighting well. If you saw a spazz flailing his arms around the playground only to get clocked by another kid, you wouldn't admire the spazz for being a "fighter". You'd be saying "what a spazz!"

Quaestor said...

I too would feel that way if an actual Hitler came to power in this country. I would join the resistance and try to take out the Hitler-like leader. You should do the same. No one wants an actual President Hitler.

People who think history can be swayed by the assassination of a key personality haven't paid attention in class. There is hardly a single example of an assassination that advanced the goal of the assassin. Did Brutus and Cassius save the Roman Republic, or did they kill it when they stabbed Caesar? Did John Wilkes Booth inspire a prostrate Confederacy to renewed resistance with that bullet he administered to Lincoln's brain, or did he hand power to the South's most inveterate enemies? Did Mary Stuart's schemings with Anthony Babington return England to the Catholic fold?

The British SOE considered assassinating Hitler. The German Abwehr considered the murder of Churchill and Eisenhower. Higher authority in both cases rejected those projects for the good reason that they would be counter-productive to their respective war aims.

The "kill Hitler" idiots are usually the same people who think Marxism is the most benign societal philosophy yet conceived, but has unaccountable suffered from fanatical tyrants. They used to be called Trotskyists. There are probably dozens of them lurking in the gentrified neighborhoods of Madison. They are all crock full of shit.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

And ?

I mean. That is the word that I think he is saying. He grimaces his mouth widely when he says...aaaand

Legally is another good option.

CStanley said...

I skimmed through video of the interview and didn't catch that expression, but he was at his most animated when talking about the Trump U lawsuit and especially in expressing disdain for the initial plaintiff. He repeated a couple of times that there were "thousands" of good reviews and it seems like he may have said that word with a similar expression.

I found it interesting that among the other topics where he was speaking about Issues facing our country he wasn't as emotional as he was about the unfairness of the Trump U case. This fits with my overall impression that he doesn't necessarily distinguish between what is good for himself and what's good for the U.S., but when it comes down to it his personal interests are his priority.

elcee said...

n.n:
"He does not support progressive wars and opportunistic regime changes."

The "opportunistic regime change" with Iraq was compelled by that the evidentially rearming, terrorist al Qaeda-supporting, ambitious, unreconstructed, noncompliant Saddam regime was, by 2000-2001, evidently breaking free of the post-Operation Desert Fox 'containment'.

The preferred alternative to OIF was Saddam complying and disarming volitionally as mandated by the Gulf War ceasefire in his "final opportunity to comply" (UNSCR 1441).

However, once Saddam chose to reject "full and immediate compliance by Iraq without conditions or restrictions with its obligations" (UNSCR 1441), the only alternative to Operation Iraqi Freedom that remained was to compromise the "governing standard of Iraqi compliance" (UNSCR 1441) to effectively free the evidentially rearming, terrorist al Qaeda-supporting, ambitious, unreconstructed, noncompliant Saddam regime from the evidently broken 'containment'.

To understand the decision for OIF and its alternatives, see the answers to "What were President Bush’s alternatives with Iraq?" - "Why did Bush leave the ‘containment’ (status quo)?" - "Why not free a noncompliant Saddam?" - "Why did resolution of the Saddam problem require a threat of regime change?".

Comanche Voter said...

So Scott Adams chickens out. Better to tug the forelock and be a serf to the Clinton machine. Keep your head down and don't say anything and maybe the boogeyman or boogeymen won't notice. He's gone all Chinese on us--the nail that sticks up gets hammered down and all that.

Original Mike said...

"What word is Trump saying?"

Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

kjbe said...

Blogging world develops a severe case of the sadz as Scott Adams declares that he is the center of the universe.

Bob Boyd said...

@ Original Mike

Great minds think alike.

Bob Boyd said...

Althouse said..."I know, but what word would require so MUCH showing of teeth -- with disgust lines on the nose and inward sloping eyebrows?"

Meade!

Ron Winkleheimer said...

The British SOE considered assassinating Hitler. The German Abwehr considered the murder of Churchill and Eisenhower. Higher authority in both cases rejected those projects for the good reason that they would be counter-productive to their respective war aims.

My understanding is that assassinating Hitler would have been counter-productive because he was an incompetent military leader who thought he was a military genius.

If he died there was a distinct possibility that someone competent might be put in charge of military planning and therefore slow down the Allies and increase their casualties to such a rate that they might have had to forgo a total surrender, thus leaving the Nazis in power and giving them time to rebuild and rearm.

dreams said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Linda at nooneofanyimport.wordpress.com said...

It's gotta be a "long e" word. Beat?

Char Char Binks said...

"Raza"

Vote for Hillary to Save Dilbert

mockturtle said...

Quaestor is right and our military leaders still maintain that the 'head of the snake' theory works when clearly it does not.

n.n said...

elcee:

My reference to "opportunistic regime change" does not refer to Saddam Hussein who was offered an opportunity to reform after a failed foreign incursion, then stood trial for crimes committed against his people and before the international community for violation of the ceasefire agreement.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

The question is: What word is Trump saying?
Hammond says that's EASY.

n.n said...

The lawsuit should be escalated to a class action lawsuit against all public universities and colleges, and public schools generally, that have misrepresented the content and value of their certifications to a captive market, as well as the federal government and affiliates that have enabled progressive debts with diminishing returns held by America's younger generations at a time when they can least afford to reconcile family and civil priorities. Still, irrespective of advocacy for planned parenthood and secular incentives, the former and latter are ultimately personal choices. Mom and dad should not let their daughters and sons grow up to be dysfunctional.

Miriam said...

Trump is saying Scott Adams is an eeeeediot. So even Adams is scared of what may happen if Trump wins ...in the landslide....lol. Adams is an idiot,

Mary Beth said...

Comanche Voter said...

So Scott Adams chickens out. Better to tug the forelock and be a serf to the Clinton machine. Keep your head down and don't say anything and maybe the boogeyman or boogeymen won't notice. He's gone all Chinese on us--the nail that sticks up gets hammered down and all that.

6/6/16, 10:16 AM


Did you read his post? Or just not get it?

damikesc said...

My understanding is that assassinating Hitler would have been counter-productive because he was an incompetent military leader who thought he was a military genius.

That's a big part. He could read people well (but the drugs he was taking certainly dulled that), but militarily, he didn't know what he was doing. He was helped by Europe demanding that people who COULD defend themselves not do so --- then hitting France when they thought they'd lose at the start of the entire conflict.

If he died there was a distinct possibility that someone competent might be put in charge of military planning and therefore slow down the Allies and increase their casualties to such a rate that they might have had to forgo a total surrender, thus leaving the Nazis in power and giving them time to rebuild and rearm.

We'd have done Germany a FAVOR killing Hitler during his Soviet invasion.

Char Char Binks said...

@damikesc

Such practicalities don't figure in the social justice imperative to kill Dilbert.

elcee said...

n.n:
"My reference to "opportunistic regime change" does not refer to Saddam Hussein"

Mistaken inference by me. I guess you meant the Libya intervention.

If that's the case, then yes, President Obama did severely stretch an already controversial novel application of the "Responsibility to Protect" theory to effect the Libyan regime change. I wouldn't characterize the Libya intervention as "progressive", though, given Obama's decision to abstain from the peace operations in Libya that are basically necessary to secure and build a "progressive" peace.

Original Mike said...

"assassinating Hitler would have been counter-productive because he was an incompetent military leader who thought he was a military genius."

It was impossible to kill Hitler.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

@Original Mike

Can't find it, but there is a hilarious cartoon with Hitler's guard wondering why all these time travelers keep showing up trying to kill the Fuerher.

Ann Althouse said...

EDH got it.

Rob McLean said...

"Snuckles".

Brando said...

Why are you guys assuming that a dead Hitler would have meant a more competent German leader? Scott Adams proved last week that we cannot judge any leader because we have no idea what the hypothetical alternative leader in that time or place would have done. Maybe Hitler would have been replaced by a goofy incompetent!

Imagine a universe where Stalin was assassinated before WWII, and never made a deal with Hitler to divvy up Poland. Would the Germans have risked their Poland first, then strike at the west strategy if they had no non-aggression pact with the Soviets?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Found it.


http://www.jokeoverflow.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/home-of-adolf-Hitler-600x427.jpg

Dust Bunny Queen said...

@ Original Mike

That time travel message board you linked to is hilarious. Saving that to send to others. Thanks!

Original Mike said...

@DBQ: Its an oldie but goodie.

@Ron: Like it.

There's another time travel cartoon I like but can't find right now. It's something like "Why time travel can't exist". A time machine is invented, followed by the arrival of a multitude of time travelers at that location resulting in so much mass that a black hole is created, swallowing up the time machine.

Balfegor said...

I guess the answer has already come out, but why, when I search for "KHAN!!" in this thread, has no one suggested it? Come on -- doesn't he look like Kirk in that scene from Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Wikihistory: Everybody Kills Hitler their First Time

damikesc said...


Imagine a universe where Stalin was assassinated before WWII, and never made a deal with Hitler to divvy up Poland. Would the Germans have risked their Poland first, then strike at the west strategy if they had no non-aggression pact with the Soviets?


Want terrifying? Imagine if Churchill died from his injuries when he was hit by a taxi in NYC.

William Chadwick said...

Not a trump fan; but always find it funny that the biggest State-f*ckers are always the first to point to someone and yell "Hitler!"

Bill Peschel said...

Fortunately, I did read Adams this time, so I saw what he was doing.

I don't like him as a person very much, but this was funny.

The only thing I'm worried about is Tuesday. The California primary. With the alt-left ginning up a little ultra-violence, we just need some commie punk to make a name for himself.

Thank God Trump doesn't have to stand at the podium and say "on to the convention." And that the Ambassador's been torn down.

n.n said...

elcee:

Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Egypt, and others through overt and covert operations. The refugee crises and mass exodus of people from second and third-world nations are correlated with the wars and anti-native policies.

Progressive as in monotonic, unqualified change (e.g. increasing). The popular connotations can be attributed to partisan appropriation in association with what they consider to have "positive" qualities.

mockturtle said...

I think Bernie will give Hillary a run for her money [and that's a LOT of money!] in California tomorrow. While I would like to see him beat her, I'm afraid he might be a stronger candidate against Trump than would Hillary.

n.n said...

Original Mike:

It depends on what time is. It may be merely a perception of motion or a virtual dimension. In that case, time travel would require rearranging all the significant objects (e.g. atoms) inside an isolated frame of reference in order to create or recreate an environment.

Earnest Prole said...

The mouth position is identical: “one million dollars”

BudBrown said...

Yeah, ok, but he was thinking Stella.

Miriam said...

Trump is imploding. It happened sooner than I thought.

Unknown said...

Miriam, why is your profile hidden, sockpuppet?

Miriam said...

Gee Unknown, your profile sure is revealing.

Miriam said...

A new devastating anti Trump ad from pro Hillary super pac. Whoa. And this is just the beginning.

FullMoon said...

Clinton actually using a little girl with no legs to attack Trump. Class, pure class.

mikee said...

As a white male and thus a privileged part of the patriarchy, and also obviously racist, sexist, and lotsa-other-bad-things-ist-ing beyond my own comprehension, all I can say is that racism, sexism, etc., have lost their power as epithets.

I don't care what Trump is saying, I know what Hillary has said already, and I won't stand for it.

Rhythm and Balls said...

The only thing Republicans know how to run are their mouths. Ergo: Candidate Trump.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

The only thing the Left knows how to run is out of other people's money. Ergo: Greece (or INSERT NAME OF BROKE NATION/STATE/CITY [Detroit, etc]).

Moneyrunner said...

There’s a new Trump ad coming out that features an image of a dead Libyan child washed up on shore with the headline: “the real Hillary foreign policy. What you get when Hillary’s in charge”

Moneyrunner said...

There is an ad in the works that shows images of German women being assaulted in Munich with the tag line “Hillary thinks we’re not importing enough Muslims.”

Moneyrunner said...

I don’t want to give anyone ideas but I could see the pictures of Saudi children being driven back into a burning building because their head were not properly covered with the words: “these are the people who gave Hillary millions.”

EMD said...

"A new devastating anti Trump ad from pro Hillary super pac. Whoa. And this is just the beginning."

That's it?

narciso said...

shirley they can't be serious, her boss mocked the special olympics on late night tv, his death panels would eliminate the disabled through triage,

narciso said...

of course, the whole boko haram empowered because chagoury and tinobo's contributions to the foundation, meant more than those poor girls in maidiguri, is another area of investigation,

Terry said...

From the Guardian, which considers itself a serious newspaper:
"Donald Trump has 'fascinating parallels' with Caligula, says historian"

tim in vermont said...

The only thing Republicans know how to run are their mouths. Ergo: Candidate Trump

We know, Hillary will make the trains run on time. We get it!