October 8, 2016

Overheard at Meadhouse.

"Why don't we all just switch to Gary?"

"Because he's a stupid stoner."

127 comments:

Achilles said...

Because people who vote for Gary Johnson are saying it is ok for Hillary Clinton to be president.

At that point you are saying it is ok if we live in a country with laws that don't apply to the elites. You are pretty much worthless which is not much better than actually voting for Hillary.

Bob Boyd said...

If Johnson was a contender the Dems would find a woman to come forward and say he bogarted her joint.

MisterBuddwing said...

There's talk of writing in the name of Mitt Romney.

But apparently, most states won't allow a write-in presidential candidate.

Sally327 said...

What about a write-in campaign? It wouldn't succeed but it might be a foundation to build on moving forward. It worked for Lisa Murkowski in Alaska a few years back. Not really the same thing, I know, a Senate campaign in one state vs. the entire country but it would be something. The problem is: write-in what name? The people who ran for the GOP nomination this year all showed that they were unacceptable or inadequate in some way. Who is that new name, that person who would be willing to put his or her name out there for those of us who are lost in a dark forest and cannot find the path?

I fear there is no one and we will just have to get through this somehow. And wait for the dawn. There's always a new day.

Carol said...

Second look at Evan McMullin - ?

SukieTawdry said...

There's talk of writing in the name of Mitt Romney.

Would that Mitt Romney were president today. Chances are he would had achieved some measurable success and be therefore able to take on Hillary with ease. And Donald Trump would still be doing whatever it was that Donald Trump did.

I'm writing in Gov. Scott Walker. Hillary will carry my state running away.

Michael K said...

The Republican death wish is early this election.

AprilApple said...

The death wish started when Trump entered the race, right after his phone call with Bill. Bill's phone calls get results.

Unknown said...

One too many Aleppo moments, one too many blunts, he seems like a nice guy though.

The Cracker Emcee said...

Goodness, people panic easily.

eric said...

The goods news is, if Trump does win he'll be an impotent president.

Judging by how quickly the rats are jumping from the ship, he won't have much support for just about anything. I could stand to go for a government like that.

rhhardin said...

They'd probably dig up some ridiculous obscure thing from me if I ran for President, too.

rhhardin said...

Fortunately I don't think I've made any recordings.

rhhardin said...

I'd be a great President. Pareto optimum for everything.

rhhardin said...

Truss but verify.

rhhardin said...

That's how James Bond always escaped.

readering said...

The big news of the day is a hurricane, right?

Freeman Hunt said...

Stupid stoner > Trumpary

Zach said...

The Republicans are in danger of becoming a nativist party.

The Democrats are in danger of becoming an identity politics party.

The Libertarians are a stoner party right now. There's no danger. It already happened. It's their only policy idea anyone cares about.

tim maguire said...

The punditsphere sure is full of sound and fury today.

Which part of what Trump said 12 years ago was unexpected? Which part of what Trump said 12 years ago do you think Trump didn't know would come out in this election? Which part of what Trump said 12 years ago invalidates what you thought about Trump yesterday?

Be as disgusted as you want, I can't argue with that. But anyone saying Kaine's claim that this is not words but behaviour (criminal behaviour!) is either lying, stupid, thinks we're stupid, or (probably) all three.

The first amendment doesn't apply to words you don't like? With an attitude like that, I can see why you might vote Democrat.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Judging by how quickly the rats are jumping from the ship, he won't have much support for just about anything. I could stand to go for a government like that.

10/8/16, 11:39 AM

On the contrary, if Trump improbably wins despite the fierce opposition from the UniParty and their media stooges, I'd think it would force support from the rats. A Trump win would put the media and ruling class on notice that their tactics -taken straight from the 2012 playbook -are no longer effective. Unfortunately, I don't think that will happen. We will continue on with our stupid games until the country crashes.

cubanbob said...

Speaking of write candidates, why not Sanders? He was right about Clinton and Wall Street.

EDH said...

The media challenged Johnson when polling revealed he was taking votes away from Hillary.

Now that Johnson may be taking Trump votes away, watch the press actually feed him his next lines from now on.

dbp said...

If you live in a swing state, vote for Trump or Clinton, whichever one seems less horrible to you. If, like me, you live in a state in which the outcome is in no doubt, vote Johnson or Stein as a protest to the shite given us by the two major parties (and the deplorable MSM).

AprilApple said...

The Democrats would panic if Trump dropped out.

rcocean said...

I find it astounding that any decent person who cared about the country would help elect Hillary.

I'm never forget that super-cucks like Ryan and McConnell stabbed us in the back and helped Hillary get elected.

Any challenger to Ryan in 2018 has my support. I've written the check - I just have to fill in the name.

Big Mike said...

"Because he's a stupid stoner."

As Glenn Reynolds would say: Analysis true.

exiledonmainstreet said...

AprilApple said...
The Democrats would panic if Trump dropped out.

10/8/16, 12:08 PM

No they wouldn't. They'd just shift their abuse to a new target.

I don't know where you get this idea that they wouldn't play just as dirty with another Republican.

They are determined to coronate Queen Hillary. Anybody in their way must be destroyed.

David Begley said...

The Quislings have all revealed themselves and that is good. Nebraska's Ben Sasse at the top of the list.

EsoxLucius said...

Rats deserting a sinking ship. So much for the pillars of the Republican party.

rcocean said...

Great quote from "The American Thinker":

I have never seen a media so in the tank. The media show every day their bias byGre what they report, how they report, and especially what they choose not to report. Our freedoms are in danger, and since they have no actual accomplishments to tout for their chosen candidate, they have to destroy the other. They also sought to destroy Bush, Palin, McCain, and Romney, so they have been at the personal destruction game for a long time.

holdfast said...

Sanders might be right in diagnosing the disease, but he has no clue about the cure.

A doctor who correctly diagnoses Lupus, but then prescribes and arsenic and hemlock cocktail, is not a doctor I'd want.

Birches said...

What Freeman said, although I still might vote for Mcmuffin.

I am more than willing to acknowledge my candidate's faults. I'm not going to downplay them. In fact, watch this for a delightful summary.

He will put in some really good SCOTUS picks though. Face it, if you don't want Hillary in the White House, Johnson is the only choice.

Mr Wibble said...

The Trump response I want to hear.

“Ladies and Gentlemen, I’m an asshole. To anyone who has paid attention in the past twenty years, this should come as no surprise. You all knew this when I started this campaign. But I didn't decide to run for President to be a milksop, or a nice guy. I decided to run because I saw decent hardworking Americans getting screwed by the establishment. The blue collar workers who see their jobs shipped overseas, the white collar workers who see their replacements shipped in from other countries. The poor blacks and hispanics whose neighborhoods are overrun with criminals exported by Mexico and South and Central America. And all those who watched their sons and daughters raise their right hands and swear to support and defend the constitution, only to turn on the TV and watch the world ignite thanks to the incompetence and stupidity of the globalist in power.

I may not be a role model for young women, but I raised two beautiful, intelligent, successful daughters who damn well should be role models, and who are far more deserving of that title than my opponent will ever be. And I’m not corrupt, while my opponent is. So America, this is your choice. You can choose the vulgar jerk who has built buildings, employed workers, and made New York City a better place, and who knows how to get things done. Or you can vote for a corrupt career politician who, by her own admission, has spent the past thirty years cultivating power by protecting worse men than me. Who has corrupted every institution that she has touched, from the White House Travel Office to the IRS to the FBI. Who left four Americans to die in a foreign city and then lied to you about her responsibility. And who blatantly undermined the very notion of accountability with her private email server. Honest government, or public corruption: that’s your choice America.”

Birches said...

You're right, rcocean, so don't stand behind the guy who brings his own rope and gets on the horse for the press mob. Binders full of women is dumb. This is Roger Ailes, Bill Clinton stuff. And I won't say it's ok because their side does it. Its wrong.

GWash said...

He gives stoners a bad name... the Republican party is done this cycle... best to regroup and try again as the Conservative party and see what shakes out... could be a couple of 4 year cycles until it is viable again, which is really a shame because you need at least two parties to tango... but as a regular reader of this blog, i can understand why the right wing is lost in space somewhere, science deniers, conspiracies everywhere, white man's party etc etc. Time to get right and start over with a sound foundation... this country needs you !

Big Mike said...

@Mr Wibble, he'd tKe every state but California, Vermont, and Rhode Island. But he won't do it.

FullMoon said...

Sure, let Hillary win, and maybe next time we get a "true conservative"-like Mitt- to run. Of course, the Supreme Court will be gone by then, maybe by a 6/3 majority.



Bob said...

Told you so weeks ago.

GWash said...

You have to start somewhere... it's our own damn fault for not making the case.. it's hard to look at the reality of the situation but as they say when you are in a hole stop digging or trying the same solution over and over and getting the same results doesn't get you too far unless you are holding on to some universal truth that will win out in the end... if that's how you see your position then you just have to suck it up, stop complaining and wait for the rest of us to catch up.. i don't see the Republicans/Conservatives/right wing whatevers holding on to some truth that is irrefutable... so stop digging and let's try something different...

AprilApple said...

The Washington Post, known democrat campaign advertisement masquerading as "news", desperate for Trump to say in.

what does that tell you?

HT said...

Zach said...

The Republicans are in danger of becoming a nativist party.

The Democrats are in danger of becoming an identity politics party.

The Libertarians are a stoner party right now. There's no danger. It already happened. It's their only policy idea anyone cares about.
10/8/16, 11:50 AM

Interesting observations, especially the first two.

HT said...

AprilApple said...

The Washington Post, known democrat campaign advertisement masquerading as "news", desperate for Trump to say in.

what does that tell you?
10/8/16, 12:52 PM

_____________

I don't know what it tells you, but it tells me that they don't give a shit about editors or journalistic value or direction. They have been quite biased against Trump, and I dislike Trump in almost every way. The paper has gotten very bad, and that's sad.

SteveR said...

People want to vote for Hillary in the same way they wanted to vote for Obama in '08. Had this latest not come out, there would be something else. Voting for her, in fact or by third party/not voting is no different. She is corrupt, he's an ass. You got two choices.

PB said...

Gary may be a stupid stoner, but he's not a criminal or a con man.

I'm voting for him.

HT said...

Who's the other contender playing this week? Indiana? Strength of schedule is kind of weak. I wish it would weaken them, but it won't. I only hope Michigan can get some O in time to beat them.

Hammond X. Gritzkofe said...

If you don't like what they do with the money, then don't give them the money.

If you don't like what they do with the power, then don't give them the power.

That, after all, was the original premise of the Constitution.

If you want the ultimate, coercive power of Government used to save the whales, you will just have to accept that some greedy capitalists will capture some of that power to enrich themselves. (After all, you ain't nothin' but a greedy SJW narcissist yourself.)

If you want the ultimate coercive power of Government used to enrich yourself, you will just have to accept that some narcissistic SJWs will capture some of that power to save the whales. (After all, you ain't nothin' but a greedy capitalist yourself.)

If you have any sense of self-respect, self-control, self-confidence, self-worth, and civic responsibility then JUST SAY NO - to the drug of Big Government.

Delayna said...

Stolen from datechguy's blog:

If we concede that Donald Trump’s character is bad, Would it be better for the country to have a President of poor character who will be under intense scrutiny by the press, pols and law enforcement agencies (Trump) or to have a President of poor character who will be given a pass and or defended by the press, the pols and apparently the FBI regardless of what they say or do (Hillary).

http://datechguyblog.com/2016/10/08/i-double-down-and-re-endorse-donald-trump-for-president-of-the-united-states/

There is no power on Earth, Heaven, or Hell that would make me lift a finger to help Lady MacDeath become President. Vulgar comments don't even twitch the needle.

sane_voter said...

Trump has to do what Mr Wibble has laid out to have a chance. However, what else is out there waiting to be released? And does Trump have anything in his back pocket to spring on Hillary?

AprilApple said...

Trumps comments will move the needle with evangelicals and undecided voters.

GWash said...

Move the needle which way?... not sure that is a winning strategy...

CatherineM said...

Mr Wibble - more like, "I raised 2 beautiful daughters...who let's face it, if I wasn't their father I would date, ok? Right? I mean, look at the figure on Ivanka. I mentioned this on the View. Right? I mean I would totally try to date her, believe me. Believe me. Now Ivanka is hotter, but I would try to date Tiffany too. As I said publicly when she was a baby, I hoped she would have the legs and breasts of her mother Marla, but she's ok, right? I'd still date her if she wasn't my daughter. That guy in the front with the beard gets me right? I mean, as I told Stern, only if Melania was disfigured in a horrible car accident would I dump her... I mean, perhaps I wouldn't if her boobs still looked good. Right? I mean....this guy over here gets me, right? So the media has dug up these things I said...."

He's a vulgarian. He's a con man and you fell for the con. Don't compare and deflect. it's not the media's fault. It's not the hot mic. It's Trump.

Character is who you are when no one is watching or recording.

Bob Boyd said...

Did Team Hillary release this oppo or was it team Never Trump?

buwaya puti said...

You all are missing it.
There is really one party, the Democrats, at the Fed level there is nothing else, because it is the party of the system. It is a corporatist-bureaucratic system with tremendous financial interests in mutual dealing. Everyone else is a flea on this beast.
You cant win an election against this thing, except, for now, things that dont matter much.
Give them a few more years and you wont have that. This is an authoritarian system that is working through ad hoc means for personal and institutional control. But that will be regularized.
This is government for its own sake, and its owners, in a symbiosis.
This is not the system you imagine it to be. There are no normal politics. You are, most of you, living in the past.

HT said...

"He's a vulgarian. " Yep. Tacky too.

"He's a vulgarian." Maybe he's no one and nothing.

EMD said...

Maybe a stupid stoner wouldn't feel like doing too much in the White House, which might be a good thing for this country.

EMD said...

The Libertarians are a stoner party right now. There's no danger. It already happened. It's their only policy idea anyone cares about.

Shrinking the size and scope of the government ring any bells?

Used to be what the R's where kind-of-but-not-really about.

buwaya puti said...

To add, its a mistake to consider personalities as in any way significant. There is no Trump, there is no Clinton, and for all it matters they have no personalities. All these are mere rhetorical trivia. They are merely symbolic.

Even the email issue. There is no question of personal judgement here, that is just a symptom of how the system works, an inadvertent opening of the window. And that part of the mechanism is just the skeezy, old fashioned ad-hoc part, just as Hilary Clinton is a system tool of an obsolete pattern.

In this case politics is not people, but crowds, not individuals but systems.

tim maguire said...

CatherineM, sure, he's a vulgarian and a con man, but how far does that get you? This election is not a referendum on Trump, much as Hillary's fans would like it to be. It is a referendum on Clinton. Talking about, "hey, you should't like him!", well, we don't. Most of us. But he's not Hillary and, sadly, in 2016, that is enough.

Nothing new happened yesterday, nothing to talk about, nothing, certainly, to change a vote over.

buwaya puti said...

If it helps, think of yourself as one of Althouse's rats.
Sure they have personalities, they have urges, they have goals and strategies - within the context of the cage and the maze.
Among these are Trump-rat and Hilary-rat. They are rats like you.

But above that you have imponderable powers who will not be moved by your squeaking. You have annoyed them with the Trump-rat business, so they will squash that and make sure it doesnt happen again.

Delayna said...

What Tim said. The Clintons have been displaying their lack of (taste, morality, decency--whatever) on the national stage for 25 years. Trump would require expensive excavation equipment to FIND the bar, much less get below it. Maybe at the end of his second term I would be as sick of him as I am of the Clintons. Let's find out!

Static Ping said...

It does say something that the two main party candidates and the two main third party candidates are all detestable.

This is going to end very badly.

rcocean said...

"The Republicans are in danger of becoming a nativist party."

Yeah, wouldn't that be awful? A party that stands up for Americans as opposed to foreigners.

/sarcasm off/

rcocean said...

"Trumps comments will move the needle with evangelicals and undecided voters."

Based on comments for evangelical leaders this wont' 'move the needle'.

As for undecided voters, I assume you mean the stupid women vote and the male cucks.

Bad Lieutenant said...

No, the Access Pussywood thing is not detestable. It is icky, in poor taste, an ape beating his chest.

What is detestable, then, you ask?

How about, "We came, we saw, he died!"

Gutless cowards that will not stand. Run away with your pinkies lifted in the air.

Trump's shit is correctly diagnosed with the word: foibles.

Hillary's shit is correctly diagnosed with the word: 1984.

Anyone who is not voting to stop 1984 is voting for 1984. And damn you all to hell for it, you people with your clean hands and your high moral tone.

AprilApple, please, drop the fantasy. It is not possible for Trump to drop out, not if you mean that he would then be replaced by a viable candidate on 50 ballots who would stand a chance. He's it. Trump is all we've got.

What Trump needs is to be forgiven. You first.

Thorby said...

The GOPe appears to be staffed with 'summer soldiers'. They appear to be perfectly willing to leave a wounded colleague behind. With 'friends' and colleagues like these, who needs enemies?

sinz52 said...

rcocean sez: "Yeah, wouldn't that be awful? A party that stands up for Americans as opposed to foreigners."

No, a nativist party would stand up for white Christian Americans. Just like the UKIP and the French National Front.

America isn't a white Christian nation. It's a constitutional and capitalist nation in which anybody can play, regardless of skin color or ancestry.

Clayton Hennesey said...

Trumps comments will move the needle with evangelicals and undecided voters.

Evangelicals and undecided voters will remain undecided, dicks in hand, long past November 8. These responses hurt Hillary, not Trump.

sinz52 said...

Thorby: "The GOPe appears to be staffed with 'summer soldiers'. They appear to be perfectly willing to leave a wounded colleague behind."

1. This is NOT a war. It's not a physical fight between soldiers, but a contest of ideas between proponents.

2. We're civilians.

3. Even in wartime, we've left plenty of soldiers behind. Google "General Wainwright."

Ken B said...

I probably will support Gary, even though it's likely he'd make a worse president than Trump or Hillary. He has the advantage of not having a chance. A vote for Gary is a vote the major parties will feel the want of, especially the GOP. In a way his unsuitability makes a vote for him more eloquent: see what you made me do?

Mark said...

This piece says it all --

America, You Have No Right to Judge Donald Trump

. . . I find this reaction to Trump's private conservation rather ironic. It's ironic coming from a secular culture that long ago declared objective morality dead. It's ironic coming from politicos and media bottom-feeders who defended the abusive and disgusting behavior of Bill Clinton, not when he was a private citizen but when he was a sitting president.

It's ironic coming from a Republican political elite that has told its religious base that social and moral issues don't matter in politics. "It's all about the economy, stupid. Leave your morals in the church but don't voice them in the public square."

The creep of moral relativism in America has been steady for many decades, increasing in speed to the point that the "slouching toward Gomorrah" has become a sprint. The notion that there is objective truth or absolute morality has been universally panned to the point that everything is tolerated except standards of right and wrong. "Everyone decides for himself what is right, especially when it comes to sex" is the mantra of today's culture.

For years, Christians in particular have been attacked and silenced as they've tried to challenge the immorality that is pervasive in today's society. When they tell people casual sex is wrong, they get the inevitable, "You have no right to tell me what I can or can't do." If they oppose sexual immorality in any form, including adultery, they’re maligned as sanctimonious puritans by lovers of libertinism.

How ironic, then, that a culture which rejects moral standards has suddenly become so pure and pristine, sitting in judgment of someone they deem too immoral to become president because of something he said in private. As a logical person, I have to ask these paragons of newly found virtue where this standard by which they've judged Trump is found. . . .
(read more at link above)

Tank said...

The Big V:

"My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere," Clinton told Banco Itau, a Brazilian bank, on May 16, 2013.

In other words, the end of America. But let's talk about some locker room bravado instead.

Sara D said...

The Washington Post got the result they wanted, by releasing the sex tape
nobody is talking about Mrs. Clinton's paid speeches.

*Clinton: “But If Everybody’s Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position.”*

Then she better make sure nobody is recording "the private position." If not, well. we all know what happened to Trump

AprilApple said...

Trump needs to win the 2nd debate. If he can do this - he still has a chance. If not - let Pence have it and step aside. Otherwise - that horrid liar shrew the corrupt she-Chavez will get in.

AprilApple said...

I can forgive Trump - whatever that means. Exactly nothing. I'm not going to forgive the masses of idiots who fell for the con and delivered us the horrid Hillary based on a wall fantasy.


Eric the Fruit Bat said...

"Because he's a stupid stoner."

Overheard at Meadhouse by whom, then?

Harold said...

Zach said...

The Democrats are in danger of becoming an identity politics party.


The Democrats are, and always have been, an identity politics party. They are the party that created Jim Crow, segregation, and miscegenation laws. As the party elite found whites slipping away, they simply changed their focus.

As for why I'm not changing my mind on my presidential vote, DaTechGuy said it best. Title of his post: I double down and re-endorse Donald Trump for President of the United States!

SukieTawdry said...

The Democrats are in danger of becoming an identity politics party.

Oh, they became that long ago. Blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, trial lawyers, public employees, unions (public and private), media and entertainment, academia, the social justice crowd, single women, environmentalists, Democratic constituencies all. Group identity politics is a minefield, though. Many of their constituencies have competing interests. It's important to keep as many of their voters as possible ignorant and dependent. They're succeeding rather well at that.

The Republicans are in danger of becoming defunct.

AprilApple said...

-He can't get out because he promised Bill he'd lose to Hillary.
-He can't get out because of his massive ego.
-He can't get out because of the Hannity-Media business deals on the other side of a loss.

It's not too late. If he cared about the nation, he'd step aside and let people who know how to debate-prep win. Fantasy. I know. See above list.

Rhythm and Balls said...

"Why don't we all just switch to Gary?"

"Because he's a stupid stoner."


I take it Ann and Meade were always 100% current on their knowledge of arcane Syrian geography (because you should always be prepared to know where to bomb. How can you know to bomb a place if you don't love it enough to learn everything about it).

Re: Stupidity, what's Meadehouse's excuse? Wine? The things those two don't know could fill an encyclopedia.

madAsHell said...

Aleppo was one of the Marx brothers. No??

Bob Ellison said...

A young classical-liberal friend tells me this latest Trumplosion will not affect the vote at all.

It does seem like something people younger than 50 or so would tend to dismiss. If someone were to come forward, like that weird Miss Galaxy woman, then it could last a day or two, but without that, it smells like stale beer.

320Busdriver said...

I would vote for Tom Coburn in a NY minute.

He understands what the real threats are.

Bad Lieutenant said...


AprilApple said...
-He can't get out because

Because there is no mechanism to handle this, and no conceivable path to victory. No getting on the ballots. Many states wouldn't allow your Romney or whoever onto the ballot or even accept them as a write-in; those voters would just spoil their ballots and you lose the Senate and the House. Moreover, a groveling GOP would be lucky to get a third of the vote. Not even. A quarter. Millions of Us would vote D in protest.

It's a joke, AA. A fantasy. Let someone walk you through it. You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.


It's not too late. If he cared about the nation, he'd step aside and let people who know how to debate-prep win. Fantasy. I know. See above list.
10/8/16, 3:50 PM

Really, describe it to me, how would this work? You can't. Because it won't.

Who knows how to debate, anyway - Romney? Ryan? They got melted in 2012.

And you really, really think that the debates would matter that much, and not the candidate and the positions?

Rhythm and Balls said...

How ironic, then, that a culture which rejects moral standards has suddenly become so pure and pristine, sitting in judgment of someone they deem too immoral to become president because of something he said in private. As a logical person, I have to ask these paragons of newly found virtue where this standard by which they've judged Trump is found. .

From Alinsky. Or whomever it was who told them it was right to shelve all integrity and fairness for the sake of a political cheap shot. Go take a look at the coverage today in the NYT, that veritable Vatican-on-the-Hudson. Because anyone who's ever been to New York City knows just how sexually restrained and noble and holy and matrimonial a place it is. From Girls to Sex and the City, everyone knows that the entire world, if not just the country looks to Manhattan for its cues on decency when discussing sexual matters between confidants about reacting to the women that throw themselves at men in glamorous settings.

This blog has officially gone bonkers and jumped the shark.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Millions of Us = Millions of Rs

Rhythm and Balls said...

Trump.

He ain't no Lewinsky.

He can't be slut-shamed into stepping off the stage - just for talking casually about casual sex.

But Hillary has a history of going after women (and now finally, a man!) who committed this supposed ultimate evil of talking casually about sexually casual encounters.

Trump is the Lewinsky that Hillary always wanted Lewinsky to be. So much easier to direct hatred at a man for doing what her husband's mistress did than it is to direct it at her husband himself.

What a shitty woman. You guys are all pretty much doing her dirty work for her. Enjoy the selling off of state secrets and the continued sinking of the middle and working class when you're done. Hope it's worth it.

Purity is worth everything.

Bad Lieutenant said...

R&B, I fully expect you to vote for Trump, then. No symbolism will get through. Trump is the only vote that can't be ignored.

tim in vermont said...

Vote for the stoner, throw it to the House.

tim in vermont said...

Overheard at Meadhouse by whom, then?

Skeemo.

khesanh0802 said...

If no one else has said Scott adams is worth a read again today. Whether he turns out right or wrong he does a nice contrarian job.

cubanbob said...

All this fake outrage. Yes he is a boor but all those who gleefully carp on his boorishness willfully ignore that fact that besides being a grifter, a criminal, a liar and a traitor as if these things were minor details in comparison to Trump's boorishness she is still married to a rapist. I want Trump to win so I can hope the Clinton's go to prison.

Real American said...

The choices are Trump or Hillary. You don't have to like either one but you do need to decide which is preferable to the other and vote accordingly.

khesanh0802 said...

@eric 1139 You are not cynical enough. Everyone who jumps ship today will be swarming Trump should he win. They will prove, once again, that politicians are first and foremost power hungry scum buckets.

rcocean said...

Sorry, but Ms. Perfect Candidate didn't run this year. So, unless you want Hillary, vote Trump.

khesanh0802 said...

@ R&B 4:10 Well put. Though apparently effective this move by Clinton is disgusting. Absolutely unnecessary and degrades everyone.

khesanh0802 said...

Lat word: Forget Gary what's his name. The choice is still binary as it always has been.

tim in vermont said...

Meanwhile Assange, peace activist, delivers what should have been a knockout blow to Hillary:

When Hillary Clinton was interviewed by the FBI this past summer about classified information contained in her private Blackberry emails, she told agents she could not recall concerns during her tenure at the State Department that foreign hackers were trying to access top government officials' private email accounts.

Her memory was apparently a lot better two years earlier when she was paid by Wall Street firms to give speeches, according to purported excerpts of those speeches made public by WikiLeaks.

In a June 2014 speech at the University of Connecticut, Clinton told the audience that she was aware that foreign actors "were going after the personal emails of people who worked in the State Department" and that she was also aware that it was "still against the rules" for State Department foreign service officers overseas to use Blackberrys for their email service.


But no, we are talking about some locker room bravado by Trump during a supposedly private conversation.

tim in vermont said...

Hillary's public position is "feigned shock" her private position is "They are all bimbos, so how we react depends on what helps us in our route to power." Yes, she uses the royal 'we' in her internal dialogue.

The release by WikiLeaks, which the Clinton campaign has said it will not confirm, appears to show Mrs. Clinton discussing how she seeks to “balance” her public rhetoric on Wall Street reform with her actual positions, and with the reality that wealthy bankers and investors must partner with government to enact change. The documents also show the former secretary of state admitting that she’s out of touch with average Americans and is “kind of far removed” from the lives of the middle class.

She also claims it’s an “oversimplification” to say that the banking sector was responsible for the 2008 financial meltdown

Drago said...

R&B is completely spot on in this thread.

People are actually talking about walking away from Trump and okay with putting the Clinton's in the White House.

Astonishing.

Of course, it was never a given that the US was going to survive as a Republic for all of eternity. We are already at the precipice of becoming a full-on banana republic.

Comey's performance at the FBI as well as Lynch at Justice and the further weaponization of the federal and state bureaucracies against political opponents indicates we are already probably too far gone to come back.

rcocean said...

R&B is actually correct.

Has Hell frozen over?

eric said...

If you're "switching" does that mean you decided on Trump?

eric said...

Blogger Rhythm and Balls said...
Trump.

He ain't no Lewinsky.

He can't be slut-shamed into stepping off the stage - just for talking casually about casual sex.

But Hillary has a history of going after women (and now finally, a man!) who committed this supposed ultimate evil of talking casually about sexually casual encounters.

Trump is the Lewinsky that Hillary always wanted Lewinsky to be. So much easier to direct hatred at a man for doing what her husband's mistress did than it is to direct it at her husband himself.

What a shitty woman. You guys are all pretty much doing her dirty work for her. Enjoy the selling off of state secrets and the continued sinking of the middle and working class when you're done. Hope it's worth it.

Purity is worth everything.


Alright, who hacked into R&B's account?

tim in vermont said...

Now it comes out that he was accused of doing the exact thing he described on this tape, in 1997. So it becomes pretty hard to defend him. Now it is just true that he is one of two execrable candidates for the presidency of our kakistocracy.

Hillary is worse, without a doubt. She has zero respect for the law, unless she can use it to get what she wants from others, but this is pretty bad.

Laslo Spatula said...

Hillary is upset because any of the girls Trump talked lewdly to could easily have been her aborted daughter.

If they overcame her genes and grew up good-looking.

I am Laslo.

tim in vermont said...

Still, despite all the triumphalism on display by the Democrats, they have hit an iceberg in the form of Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump, and they are leaking below the waterline, and all of those megawealthy Democrat donors better use their last little respite of a Hillary presidency to squirrel away their money, because change is going to come. Hillary will serve one term, if she's lucky. Who will replace her? Here's a clue, it won't be some Goldman Sachs milking "Free trade open borders" dreamer.

Terry said...

Anyone who believes that there is some test of character, where Clinton passes and Trump does not pass, is so crazy they probably voted for Obama because they believed that he would govern as a moderate, or believed that he would heal America's racial divide.
There was no indication that Obama would do either.
In another post, Althouse writes: "Kristof says that in the end he decided that Harth is telling the truth."
But Kristof has no demonstrated ability in determining the truth. On the contrary, Kristof routinely displays confirmation bias.

AprilApple said...

Romney and Ryan were wimpy - but at least they didn't totally dissolve like Trump did. So what's your point?

Zach said...

The Libertarians are a stoner party right now. There's no danger. It already happened. It's their only policy idea anyone cares about.

Shrinking the size and scope of the government ring any bells?


Every party has an official position on everything from the size of the mohair subsidy to the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo. But there are only a few issues that get people ringing doorbells.

Johnson's never even heard of Aleppo. Hope that wasn't a priority for you.

You know what's the most irritating thing about stoners? The fact that every single other thing in the world has to take second place to getting high right now.

So what if the major party candidates are terrible? So what if it's the Libertarians' biggest chance in a generation to make a splash on the national stage? So what if the Syrian civil war is going to be a major headache for the next president? Getting high is more fun than reading up on the issues, and you just have to live with the fact that preparing to be a good president isn't Johnson's highest priority.

AprilApple said...

Agreed. Double standards all over the place and it's totally unfair.

Greedy Clintons can rape, cheat, steal and lie...

GOP cannot have a single piece of lint on the jacket.

Terry said...

I like this bit of the Starr report on Sydney Blumenthal's grand jury testimony. This is about the guy (Bill Clinton) that the #nevertrumpers, including Jonah Goldberg (who should know better) would rather see in the White House than Trump. Talk about abusing women -- Clinton is conspiring to label Lewinsky as an aggressive stalker, and is lying about the sexual nature of his relationship with her to his friend and ally.

3. Sidney Blumenthal

Sidney Blumenthal, an Assistant to the President,(439) similarly testified that the President made statements to him denying the Lewinsky allegations shortly after the first media report.

Mr. Blumenthal stated that he spoke to Mrs. Clinton on the afternoon of January 21, 1998, and to the President early that evening. During those conversations, both the President and Mrs. Clinton offered an explanation for the President’s meetings with Ms. Lewinsky, and President Clinton offered an explanation for Ms. Lewinsky’s allegations of a sexual relationship.(440)

Testifying before the grand jury, Mr. Blumenthal related his discussion with President Clinton:

I said to the President, “What have you done wrong?” And he said, “Nothing. I haven’t done anything wrong.”

. . . And it was at that point that he gave his account of what had happened to me and he said that Monica — and it came very fast. He said, “Monica Lewinsky came at me and made a sexual demand on me.” He rebuffed her. He said, “I’ve gone down that road before, I’ve caused pain for a lot of people and I’m not going to do that again.”

She threatened him. She said that she would tell people they’d had an affair, that she was known as the stalker among her peers, and that she hated it and if she had an affair or said she had an affair then she wouldn’t be the stalker any more.(441)

Mr. Blumenthal testified that the President appeared “upset” during this conversation.(442)

Finally, Mr. Blumenthal asked the President to explain alleged answering machine messages (a detail mentioned in press reports).

He said that he remembered calling her when Betty Currie’s brother died and that he left a message on her voice machine that Betty’s brother had died and he said she was close to Betty and had been very kind to Betty. And that’s what he recalled.(443)

According to Mr. Blumenthal, the President said that the call he made to Ms. Lewinsky relating to Betty’s brother was the “only one he could remember.”(444) That was false: The President and Ms. Lewinsky talked often on the phone, and the subject matter of the calls was memorable.

A grand juror asked Mr. Blumenthal whether the President had said that his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky included any kind of sexual activity. Mr. Blumenthal testified that the President’s response was “the opposite. He told me that she came on to him and that he had told her he couldn’t have sexual relations with her and that she threatened him. That is what he told me.”(445)

Mr. Blumenthal testified that after the President relayed this information to him, he “certainly believed his story. It was a very heartfelt story, he was pouring out his heart, and I believed him.”(446) Mr. Blumenthal repeated to the grand jury the false statements that the President made to him.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/icreport/7groundsx.htm

eric said...

Blogger AprilApple said...
Romney and Ryan were wimpy - but at least they didn't totally dissolve like Trump did. So what's your point?


I've noticed something odd today.

Many media headlines are blaring, "So-in-so has withdrawn their support of Trump." Hugh Hewitt, John McCain, Governors, media personalities, etc, have run away from Trump. Thus creating the atmosphere or dissolving, as you put it.

But on my Facebook and Twitter, no one I've met or know who has been supporting Trump has changed their mind. The worse I've seen is, "What's my other options here? Still gotta vote Trump."

Maybe I'm wrong, but this seems pretty odd to me. For example, one of the headlines read something like, "1/3rd of sitting US Republican Senators have withdrawn their support of Trump."

My initial thought was, WOW! He's done. That's a cascade. The whole country is turning against him!

But hours later, still no one I've met or known who was supporting him who isn't in the media limelight has dropped their support.

So that brings me to this question April. I know you didn't support him and have never liked him. But if the election comes down to him and Hillary neck and neck, who are you going to be voting for? Because you're one of those people I know who is sort of supporting Trump, even though you've never liked him. Does this news mean he is different than you thought he was and now you're not supporting him?

Because if you are still supporting him, then why do you think it's only media and politicians who are abandoning him?

I'll save my theory until you answer the question.

tim in vermont said...

Jesus that was a depressing read. Bill was winding up on the "nuts and sluts" attack on Monica when actual evidence showed up.

tim in vermont said...

I still may pull the lever for Trump. Hillary is detestable, Trump has gone from deplorable to despicable.

The rape/sexual assault thing is a wash unless Hillary divorces Bill.

Now it comes down to Hillary's contempt for the law, her vision of "open borders and free trade" which will, of course, hit the old Democrat constituencies hardest, but Not to worry! The Democrats are busy importing new ones to replace them!

AprilApple said...

Eric -I'll vote for him. That hasn't changed.

The GOP lost Romney with "binders of women" and "dog on a car". They have been conditioned to jump ship over nothing - because the hack press make it into something.

This is actually something and when you add it together with a poor debate performance, and falling poll numbers, you get people who can no longer tolerate it.

I for one think this election is a Potemkin Village election. From the very start, I thought Trump was in this thing to hand it to his old pals, the Clintons. After all, it looks like a stroke of pure luck that Hillary, as universally hated as she is, is going to walk away with this. We've been conned.

exiledonmainstreet said...

Laslo Spatula said...
Hillary is upset because any of the girls Trump talked lewdly to could easily have been her aborted daughter.

Brilliant.

Humperdink said...

As an evangelical, he will get my vote. Lewd talk does not register very high on the baby parts meter.

Words vs. actions.

Lydia said...

Scott Adams' third point in his blog post on this today:

3. I assume that publication of this recording was okayed by the Clinton campaign. And if not, the public will assume so anyway. That opens the door for Trump to attack in a proportionate way. No more mister-nice-guy. Gloves are off. Nothing is out of bounds. It is fair to assume that Bill and Hillary are about to experience the worst weeks of their lives.

He may be right about that because Trump just retweeted these two Juanita Broaddrick tweets:

Hillary calls Trump’s remarks “horrific” while she lives with and protects a “Rapist”. Her actions are horrific.

How many times must it be said? Actions speak louder than words. DT said bad things!HRC threatened me after BC raped me.

Terry said...

I hope that Trump his best to remind people of the disgusting mess the Clintons made of the White House in the 1990s.
The Lewinsky affair became known because in 1997, in Jones V Clinton, in a unanimous decision, the supreme court decided that a sitting president could face a civil suit. Paula Jones was suing Clinton for sexual harassment dating to Clinton's days as governor of Arkansas.
The supremes apparently did not believe that a sitting president would perjure himself and face impeachment over a civil suit. The supremes had no idea that Bill Clinton was a sex addict as well as a pathological liar.
In discovery for the Jones suit, Lewinsky denied an affair with Clinton. She had previously confessed the truth to a friend, Linda Tripp, who had recorded the conversation.
Then began Clinton's scorched earth battle with the truth, including the sliming of Monica as a "stalker", his lies to a grand jury, and his lies to the American people. If Monica had not kept the stained dress, history books would repeat Clinton's "Monica was a sex-obsessed stalker who I did not have sex with" lie.
And it was purely ego driven. If Clinton had resigned, no one would have blamed him. Al Gore would have become president and would likely have prevailed over GW Bush in 2000.
Clinton didn't fight impeachment because he was innocent, but because he is a person to whom lying comes as natural as breathing. He did not believe he should be impeached for lying to a grand jury and the American people. The media backed Clinton all the way.


Lie number one, according to Starr: Oral sex is not sex.
. . .
Lawyers in the Paula Jones sexual harrassment case defined "sexual relations" as engaging in or causing "contact with the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh or buttocks of any person..."

But the president said,"If the deponent is the person who has oral sex performed on him, then the contact is with -- not with anything on that list -- but with the lips of another person."

. . .

Lie number two, according to Starr: It was a one-way relationship.
. . .
"You are free to infer that my testimony is that I did not have sexual relations, as I understood this term to be defined," Clinton answered.

"Including, touching her breast, kissing her breast, or touching her genitalia?" prosecutors asked again.

"That's correct," Clinton said.

But Lewinsky testified that the president touched her sexually nine times.
. . .

Lie number three, Starr says, is implicit, not explicit: The question of when the affair began.
. . .
"When I was alone with Ms. Lewinsky on certain occasions in early 1996 and once in early 1997, I engaged in conduct that was wrong," Clinton admitted in a prepared statement he read during his grand jury testimony.

But Lewinsky testified she first administered oral sex November 15, 1995 and again, two days later. Both encounters happened during the government shutdown, according to Lewinsky.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/09/21/lies.jackson/

gadfly said...

From the Urban Dictionary:

Stoner

Slang for somebody who smokes cannabis, often. Most people would talk them down as if they are better, though they often consume poisons such as alcohol and caffeine. Stoners are generally a friendly minority, peaceful, and harmless. The arrogant people bitching about them smoking marijuana, they are usually bigger problems then the people they denounce.

Yeppers.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Excellent, gadfly, so then we can put you down for going full Hillary? Although they say you should never go full Hillary.

Terry said...

If I say that the Libertarian Party has been bought and paid for by NORML and the porno clowns is that an insult or a compliment? Monetize everything, Libertarians! The only value anything has is what other people will pay for it!
No wonder they are selling out freedom itself. Anything for a buck.

REI said...

Trump will respond by increasing personal attacks on Clinton, but the outcome is likely to drive voters to Johnson/Weld, not the GOP.

Stories like the one below if they get the attention that a Trump barrage can give them, will seriously damage Clinton:

Is the Clinton Campaign deliberately overcharging small donors?

Observer reporter Liz Crokin spoke to a Wells Fargo employee who works in the fraud department.

"We get up to a hundred calls a day from Hillary's low-income supporters complaining about multiple unauthorized charges," the employee, who asked to remain anonymous, told Crokin. The source added that they had not received any calls about the Trump campaign and donations.

The source said this has been going on since the spring, and that the campaign stops after it has taken a little less than $100 from a one-time donor.

"We don't investigate fraudulent charges unless they are over $100," the source said. "The Clinton campaign knows this, that's why we don't see any charges over the $100 amount, they'll stop the charges just below $100. We'll see her campaign overcharge donors by $20, $40 or $60 but never more than $100."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/report-clinton-c...

Everything Obama said about Hillary in 2008 is true, and most Democrats know it. She corrupts everything she is involved in. Her clueless blind ambition will destroy the Democratic Party for a generation.

Johnson/Weld can surge past 34% in enough states to win as the two most disliked candidates in US History slime each other.

Jeff said...

The blithe dismissal of Gary Johnson as a pothead is itself stupid. This is a man who built a successful construction company from the ground up and was a successful Republican governor in a Democratic state.

What Johnson established with his Aleppo moment is that he, unlike most of the commenters here, is not a news junkie. But I would bet that if you could quiz him, Trump and Clinton on things like history, economics and foreign policy, that Johnson would score the highest on economics, with Clinton second, while their positions would be reversed on history and foreign policy. Trump would finish last in all three.

The Trump supporters might reply that a good President is one who has sound principles and the courage to stick by them. I would agree and point to non-news junkie Ronald Reagan as an example. Like Reagan, Johnson has demonstrated both good principles and courage, while Trump and Clinton have demonstrated neither.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Hey Jeff, I don't do internet bets with randos, but I'd love to take your money. You think that hippie dippie and the wicked witch understand money better than Donald Trump? Pull the other one it's got bells on it.

Jeff said...

Bad Lieutenant, I'm certain of it. You see, unlike you and Trump, I actually do know a bit about economics. In fact, I have a PhD in it. Nothing Trump says about the Fed, trade, taxes, the budget or exchange rates makes any sense. It's not that he's wrong about stuff, he's incoherent. He gets both facts and theory wrong.

Bad Lieutenant said...

In fact, I have a PhD in it.

Do ya? It's not in your profile. Oh wait...

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog.

But we can tell when you're doing the ol' Argument from Authority.

I'd ask you how much money you have, but why would you a) answer, b) honestly?

It's OK, I know the answer: c) less than Donald Trump.