"Ivanka Trump glided onstage to the Beatles’ 'Here Comes the Sun.' It was apt. She was sun-kissed, her blond hair perfectly sleek, blowing photogenically, no doubt from a fan in the podium. The fashion entrepreneur’s blush-pink sheath and stilettos looked Fifth Avenue chic." So begins Maureen Dowd's column, "Ivanka the Fabulous Fabulist."
My post title is Meade's bon mot from last night.
Dowd uses the same word to describe Ivanka that seemed like the right word to me — glossy. But Dowd extends the word into an insult: "She was glossy... She glossed over all of her father’s ugly rhetoric and incitements..."
२२ जुलै, २०१६
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८८ टिप्पण्या:
At least the Trump women aren't dowdy.
I can't wait to read Dowd's attack on Chelsea next week.
Just watched some early morning CBS. The theme is that Trump was "Dark" and is a "Billionaire". So I guess Hillary will be the dirt poor sweetness and light candidate. And of course we have to vote for her because she is a she.
Dowd is projecting her prejudice onto Donald Trump, while simultaneously reducing Ivanka Trump to a glossy centerfold. The liberals did something similar to Palin. The real war on men, women, and babies, too. It's ironic how many pornographers and female chauvinists perceive themselves as humanitarians.
Maureen Dowd is so past her "sell by" date...
Vote for Clinton because of progressive wars, opportunistic regime changes, anti-native policies, redistributive change, outsourcing and temporary labor, class diversity, abortion rites, and because she is a voice for the 1% globally.
The end of the day, Maureen is a good foot solider for the left. She punches the left from time to time, but she, like a dutiful Stepford wife, will end up in bed with the Clinton slime machine.
Sharp weapons the left uses to strike fatal blows are blunted by Trump's ugly rhetoric and incitements.
The entire press is in bed with Hillary. That's what we are up against.
Our press is as corrupt as Hillary herself.
Every younger woman looks glossy when you're as Dowdy as Maureen.
Trump has healthy, accomplished children. On the most basic level, he's a successful patriarch........It's pretty scummy to imply that Trump's affection for his daughter is incestuous, especially when you're remarking on how ugly his rhetoric is.
It's ok to reference women's appearance when making a political point/attack if the attack is from the Left. In all other cases it's a sure sign of sexism and is absolutely forbidden.
Remember the rules, everyone.
"It's pretty scummy to imply that Trump's affection for his daughter is incestuous,..."
If I had a daughter as amazing as Ivanka I still wouldn't dream of actually touching her 'that way'.
But I would probably masturbate furiously.
I am Laslo.
@Sebastian - true. And there's this: "Ivanka Trump wears $138 dress from her own label"
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2016/07/22/ivanka-trump-wears-138-dress-from-her-own-label.html
Ivanka did a good job of painting her father in a more positive light, as a good daughter would do. She has many great qualities of her own and obviously leans more left than right. Her attention to women's issues last evening was heartening and I hope this young woman pursues a political career if she feels called to do so. She also,did some fundraising for Cory Booker and has a book coming out called "Women Who Work". IF Trump should win the Presidency at least he has Ivanka to advise him, that's certainly a plus.
Ivanka is the key to the Trump Campaign. She projects Trump's claim to competence in a female form. Her existence tells us that the Harsh Attacking Man is really a good hearted person who favors and protects women.
She is the key. If she can be effectively trashed for something, anything, then Trump goes down.
And who does HillaryBeast trash the best...any woman who stands in her way.
Corey Booker is a fashionable fraud.
Millions of women across America are now thinking, "I wish I was/want to be when I grow up like Hillary (Rawwwk!) Clinton, never, ever like those glossy Melania and Ivanka Trumps."
Meanwhile, sales of pantsuits and riding lawn mower covers are skyrocketing.
"Ivanka is the key to the Trump Campaign. She projects Trump's claim to competence in a female form. Her existence tells us that the Harsh Attacking Man is really a good hearted person who favors and protects women."
Good grief, that is a long strech. coming to the conclusion that Trump is a good choice because his daughter is a good young woman? Really? LOL. Trump's "claim" to competence is only a claim.
"Corey Booker is a fashionable fraud."
I agree, the personification of the corrupt Democratic party.
Corey Booker may be a fashionable fraud, but the record shows Ivanka supported him and did fund raising for him.
Womens weakness is fashion.
They are unfortunately likely to follow the mass of their friends into irrational fads, like Corey Booker, or Barak Obama.
I forgive my women this all the time.
Is Dowd still using her 1989 headshot to accompany her columns?
How much do you want to bet that Ivanka sells incredible numbers of her dress now?
Or that womens wardrobes at the Dem convention are being furiously reevaluated and being replaced by numbers out of department store catalogs?
Thats women for you.
The contrast between Ivanka and Donald gives me a kind of Christie-Hugh Hefner vibe. On the one hand you have the playboy in his dotage, the posturing man-child whose endless self-promotion is inevitably slipping from the eye-roll to the wince. On the other you have the self-possessed and accomplished daughter, the receptacle for all the executive functioning shed by the father.
I wonder if Hillary's outfits inspire sofa upholstery?
So it was fashion that drove Ivanka into supporting Corey Booker? What a paternal crock. Ivanka has a good brain that isn't ruled by "fashion" alone, lol. What a condescending remark toward women and Ivanka.
Please, if you can't ignore Dowd, at least refrain from trying to expose the rest of us to her efforts to remain coherent.
Cory , not "Corey".
I am a realist and experienced. After a certain age a man understands women, in particular and in general.
They have their weaknesses, you cant avoid learning them.
Cory Booker was (was) fashionable. Much less so now. Was it good judgement to find him worthy of support? Apparently not, as he is falling out of favor.
The left always quickly identifies the people they see as a threat. The negativity indicates the entire Trump family is seen as a problem for Hillary. The Trump kids glow. Chelsea Clinton doesn't have that same positive vibe.
You can have a fine brain but be swayed by irrational instinct. This sort of weakness can be predictable.
Observe talented people long enough, or rather manage people long enough, and you will learn that they make mistakes and are prone to certain mistakes.
That doesnt mean they arent useful, or essential, but that you must make allowances and predict failures.
The bottom line is that Ivanka IS NOT conservative. Which is fine with me.
Ivanka doesn't seem like the the type who falls prey to popular, fashionable people. She seems to have more substance than that. She saw traits and values in Booker that resonated with her. You are once again being condescending to her.
Unknown said...
"Good grief, that is a long strech. coming to the conclusion that Trump is a good choice because his daughter is a good young woman? Really? LOL. Trump's "claim" to competence is only a claim."
If a man raises an intelligent, successful, and competent daughter how is that not a good reason to vote for Trump?
On the other hand you have an idiot scion who has been given cushy media gigs and has failed at everything she has tried to do. She is hated by her staff just like her mother and married into another democrat family aristocracy.
The comparisons between the Trump family and the Clinton family are going to be glorious.
Maureen Dowd is so past her "sell by" date...
Nevertheless, her readership is aging along with her so it all works out.
When you consider Ivanka could have been another Paris Hilton and she is not, that says something good about Trump.
AprilApple said...
"I wonder if Hillary's outfits inspire sofa upholstery?"
It would take all of the material off of 2 couches to cover that mound of stinking ____.
Unknown said...
"The bottom line is that Ivanka IS NOT conservative. Which is fine with me."
Neither is Trump. Duh. If you haven't noticed we are not really into ideologues this election. But they are certainly not fans of government. Ivanka iterated that women in her father's companies get paid what they are worth because of her father values talent and success. That is not a liberal value because they hate the talented and successful.
Of course Hillary is not an ideologue either. It is clear she doesn't have a single core belief she would not sacrifice for her own personal gain. And ever better for liberals she hasn't succeeded at anything. She is powerful because she has a vagina and married the right man. That is a core liberal value.
Cory Booker is a good choice if the choice is between him and Sharpe James. He seems like a decent enough person, but he had less success in Newark than Rudy had in NYC........I'm sure blacks with money and choices would prefer him to Rudy, but they would, nonetheless, choose to live in NYC over Newark........It's really unusual for a tall, slender woman like Ivanka to have such an impressive rack.
"If a man raises an intelligent, successful, and competent daughter how is that not a good reason to vote for Trump?"
Are you serious? First of all they all had mothers who also raised them. Secondly they are not clones of their father, they are adults in their own right. How much do we really know about the political philosophy of the children anyway? We do know that Ivanka supported Cory Booker and supports women's issues such as equal pay for equal work and extended maternal leave, which are traditionally liberal issues.
AprilApple: You don’t know Mo.
Maureen Dowd’s takedowns of Hillary have been brutal and relentless. Here is Media Matters’ accounting: “The Numbers Behind Maureen Dowd's 21-Year Long Campaign Against Hillary Clinton”
Attacks on Hillary from the right are painless. Attacks from the left, from the Gray Lady herself, truly sting.
I remember clearly the first time I even heard of Ivanka Trump. HBO ran a documentary about rich kids in New York sometime in the early 2000s created by one of their peers. She was the only one interviewed, the only one, who seemed sensible and grounded. I remember wondering whether or not that was attributable to any degree to her father- whom even at that time I viewed as a carnival barker at best- whether it was her mother's influence, or just a happy accident. Over the course of Trump's campaign, one learned of the other children, too, and I think the happy accident theory can be fully discounted. His children give me hope.
And, yes to the commenter above- the media understand clearly who the most dangerous parts of Trump's campaign are, and immediately try to tear them down, but it isn't going to work. You can see the work of the local troll above-"Ooooh, she is leftist, so you Republicans better not vote for Trump!" Good grief!
Ivanka is attractive. Of course she's now older than Marla was when Donald dumped her for being too old in favor of younger models.
Ivanka is attractive. Of course she's now older than Marla was when Donald dumped her for being too old in favor of younger models.
Yeah, he should have stayed married to her, and just cheated on her like Bill Clinton did.
Tommy Duncan said...
The left always quickly identifies the people they see as a threat. The negativity indicates the entire Trump family is seen as a problem for Hillary. The Trump kids glow. Chelsea Clinton doesn't have that same positive vibe.
7/22/16, 10:22 AM
You have to hand it to Chelsea, she seems to be following in her mother's footsteps in that she seems to be completely unqualified for any of the positions that she has held and yet seems [unexpectedly] to be thriving economically and career wise. Most people that incompetent would be working in a fast-food place or a nail salon.
I am always amazed that the daughters of Republicans are "fair game" while the Dem daughters cannot be mentioned in polite company.
I can't wait to read Dowd's attack on Chelsea next week.
She actually MIGHT do it. She is left as the day is long, but she really dislikes the Clintons, based on her columns.
Good grief, that is a long strech. coming to the conclusion that Trump is a good choice because his daughter is a good young woman? Really?
Raising lazy and inept kids doesn't speak well of one normally, does it?
Corey Booker may be a fashionable fraud, but the record shows Ivanka supported him and did fund raising for him.
How useless he is hasn't been well-known for a long time. He had amazing press for a while until even the media realized he was a creepy dude.
So it was fashion that drove Ivanka into supporting Corey Booker? What a paternal crock.
Would you assume that if a dude was praising a woman who happened to have a nice set of tits, her tits weren't part of her appeal?
We do know that Ivanka supported Cory Booker and supports women's issues such as equal pay for equal work and extended maternal leave, which are traditionally liberal issues.
I'll go ahead and assume you don't see why extended maternal leave and "equal pay for equal work" are contradictory. Women are "paid unequally" for a wide array of reasons, including that. Taking more time off from work then men --- or working fewer hours than men --- is, by any definition, not "unequal pay". The man made more because he worked more.
If you're taking more time off for maternal leave, somebody --- usually a man --- is picking up your slack. When you return and he is higher up, you might complain that you're being mistreated, but he is simply being rewarded for doing the work.
Ivanka is attractive. Of course she's now older than Marla was when Donald dumped her for being too old in favor of younger models.
As mentioned, this would be an amazingly stupid line of attack for Clinton to pursue.
Maureen Dowd.
Seriously.
Donald Trump’s Kids Donate to Democrats
"Ivanka Trump, who is sometimes referred to as “Anka” Trump in campaign finance filings, has contributed significantly to Democrats over the last decade. (To verify the two are the same person, we confirmed that Ivanka and “Anka” are listed at the same home address in New York City on campaign finance filings.)
Ivanka contributed $16,500 to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in the 2006 midterms when then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was fighting Republicans. She contributed $7,500 to Harry Reid’s Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee that same midterm election year. Ivanka also gave $8,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2008 during a presidential election year.
She has also contributed $4,000 to California’s far-left Attorney General Kamala Harris; $17,500 New York’s Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo; the Democrats’ National Leadership PAC in 2006 and 2008 – an organization associated with the “Act Blue” 527 organization during years that Democrats were fighting against Republicans; and $7,700 to far-left Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, a pro-abortion feminist who supports protecting LGBT community members from illegal immigration deportations.
Other Democrats that Ivanka Trump contributed to are: Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand ($2,000); Hillary Clinton for U.S. Senate and president ($3,400); the Democrats’ scandalous Eliot Spitzer for governor ($3,000); liberal Congressman Charlie Rangel; California’s liberal Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom ($500); democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer ($4,500) in 2014; and Democrat Sen. Cory Booker as recently as 2014 ($20,400)."
Group Leadership 101 says men will follow a sharp dressing and competent man or woman that enforces discipline.
But a new leader has to come on strong as a no nonsense SOB who demands performance, and then he pivots to being a nice and good man. That works everytime. But a new leader who comes on as the nice and good man, but then tries to pivots to being a no nonsense SOB who demands performance will be rejected and lose his followers forever.
Trump has played that Great leader's hand to perfection. He is now beginning the pivot, with Ivanka's help, to the nice and good man as leader of many followers.
"It appears that out of more than 30 campaign contributions, Ivanka only contributed to three Republican campaigns – John McCain, Mitt Romney/Paul Ryan for president ($75,000) and Carly Fiorina. Her contributions to Republicans represents less than 10 percent of her contributions – the rest have been to Democrats.
Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who is married to Ivanka, is also primarily (no pun intended) a Democrat giver.
In recent weeks, Trump has highlighted Kushner at campaign rallies suggesting that Kushner enjoys the campaign trail even more than his career as a businessman in New York City.
The problem for Republican primary voters is that Kushner has donated nearly 100 percent of his life’s political contributions to Democrats, to the tune of approximately $100,000. The only Republican that Kushner has ever given to is former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani for U.S. Senate run in 2000, which was 16 years ago.
Kushner is a committed Democrat who has contributed to hard-line partisan organizations including the Democratic National Committee PAC ($18,000); the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee‘s Building Fund ($26,250); and the New Jersey Democratic Party ($17,000).
Kushner has also donated to HillPac to elect Hillary Clinton for president ($5,000); Democrat Sen. Chuck Schumer ($2,000); Democrat Sen. Cory Booker ($10,400); and the Democrats’ Committee for Working Families ($10,000).
Kushner also gave to the shamed former New Jersey Gov. Jim McGreevey ($4,700); the Democrats’ New Millennium PAC ($10,000); Hillary Rodham Clinton ($4,000); democrat Jon Corzine ($4,000); and former Sen. Robert Torricelli ($12,000)."
No one's going to attack Ivanka. Don't understand why Chelsea attracts so much hostility. Their parents generate enough grounds for attack without bringing in the offspring.
They're hoping that liberals will attack Ivanka, but it won't happen for several reasons, one of which is she is one of us. Of course she is supporting her father, she may think she can influence him to make good decisions and policies, but I doubt she has that much influence.
No one's going to attack Ivanka. Don't understand why Chelsea attracts so much hostility. Their parents generate enough grounds for attack without bringing in the offspring.
Readering, I agree. In fact, Ivanka and Chelsea are apparently good friends. I feel dreadfully sorry for Chelsea, having a notoriously corrupt mother and a sexual predator for a father. If I were she, I would change my name and move to an obscure island somewhere.
It's getting hard to track the "Anonymous" v "Unknown" Hillary trolls here.
RESOLVED, Ivanka is smarter and prettier than Chelsea.
Methinks Maureen is suffering from youth envy. There was a day when she was the glossy one. Now her gloss is lost. "Gloss over." It has more than one meaning.
It's no surprise that Kushner and Ivanka Trump have donated mostly to Democrats. The ones on the list most are powerful Democrats from New York and New Jersey. That's the location of the core of the Trump business. When they say it's a rigged system, they know whereof they speak. They also know there would be retaliation if they do not pony up.
"At least the Trump women aren't dowdy."
Or Doudish.
Anyone consider that perhaps Chelsea loves her mother and father as much as Ivanka loves her parents? Trump wasn't the ideal father, cheating on his wives, nasty misogynistic comments toward women and sexualization of women. I bet she was ashamed of his comments about women over the years, yet she remains loyal to her father.
Chelsea is a very intelligent young woman also and she is lovely in her own way, a mother of two young children. The gratuitous insults toward Chelsea are unwarranted.
Anyone consider that perhaps Chelsea loves her mother and father as much as Ivanka loves her parents?
That point wasn't under discussion or in contention. Irrelevant. The issue is which family presents better and would be an enhancement to the candidate in their run for the White House.
The Trumps who seem to be articulate, accomplished, intelligent and not to mention extremely good looking people. Or the Clintons who are aging poorly, dowdy, frumpy and with the exception of slick Willy don't seem to be especially articulate, accomplished or good very looking.
The good looking part is unfortunate for Chelsea and isn't her fault. She should not be demeaned. However, this is the way of the world and people ARE judged by their looks.
The speaking ability of the Trump children is astounding. The speaking ability of Chelsea is just cringe worthy as is that of Hillary herself. Nails on a chalkboard.
So as Adams points out. The comparison between the two families puts the Trump side well in the lead. Fairly or not. It is what it is.
Dust Bunny Queen,
The point was under discussion, pay attention.
"I feel dreadfully sorry for Chelsea, having a notoriously corrupt mother and a sexual predator for a father. If I were she, I would change my name and move to an obscure island somewhere."
The point that you, Anonymous raised at 7/22/16, 1:44 PM, was that Chelsea loves her father as Ivanka loves here.
That point of familial love was not under discussion. It is irrelevant to the subject of the Blogger's (Althouse's)post. One person making a remark does not a discussion make. A discussion is when people talk back and forth. A discussion is when people remain on topic and don't change the subject every post in order to distract.
David has it right. Mo Do was glossy once--maybe back in 1958. But then so was a '58 DeSoto. When was the last time you looked at a '58 model of anything and wanted it? That is Mo Do's problem.
"Blogger David said...
Methinks Maureen is suffering from youth envy. There was a day when she was the glossy one. Now her gloss is lost. "Gloss over." It has more than one meaning."
Yep. And I despise the fact that women (especially lefty ones) are the first to bag on other women. It's ugly and vicious. If it was solely over substance/policy that's fine. But seems they always have to bring some aspect of looks, manner, or dress into it.
Chelsea is a very intelligent young woman
What evidence do you have for that?
also and she is lovely in her own way,
Do tell..what way is that?
a mother of two young children.
As we have been repeatedly told about Trump..so what?
The gratuitous insults toward Chelsea are unwarranted.
But the gratuitous insults to the Bush girls, or the Trump kids, or Palin's kids are totally warranted...right?
Maureen likes other women frumpy, particularly now that she's not aging well.
@anonymous: Thanks, but everybody knows the Trumps contributed to Democrats and why. Saudis give piles to the Clinton foundation
Contributing to Republicans does t have the same potential for return.
I saw several links to sites reporting that Hillary and the Dems were hiring trolls to defend her in comment sections on the net.
A few seemed to have landed here. Not that it matters.
I'm old enough now that I don't envy younger women their good looks. Having had my day in the sun, I will gracefully yield to the next generation.
"I remember clearly the first time I even heard of Ivanka Trump. HBO ran a documentary about rich kids in New York sometime in the early 2000s created by one of their peers. She was the only one interviewed, the only one, who seemed sensible and grounded. I remember wondering whether or not that was attributable to any degree to her father- whom even at that time I viewed as a carnival barker at best- whether it was her mother's influence, or just a happy accident. Over the course of Trump's campaign, one learned of the other children, too, and I think the happy accident theory can be fully discounted. His children give me hope."
I remember watching that documentary too and one of the peers who created it was an heir of Johnson & Johnson.
Did the estate of George Harrison send a cease-and-desist to stop using this song?
And I despise the fact that women (especially lefty ones) are the first to bag on other women. It's ugly and vicious. If it was solely over substance/policy that's fine. But seems they always have to bring some aspect of looks, manner, or dress into it.
7/22/16, 2:38 PM
That really does seem to be much more prevalent among leftist women than it is among conservatives. Not every conservative woman I know was crazy about Palin from the get go, but I didn't hear snide remarks about her looks from them, whereas leftists women jumped gleefully on the "Caribou Barbie" meme. Conservative women tended to admire the fact that a woman with 5 kids and such a busy life had managed to keep herself in great shape.
Indeed leftist females pols sometimes seem to deliberately make themselves dowdy. I remember being shocked at Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's appearance at the 2012 DNC because for one night, she looked great, with beautifully styled hair and makeup. She immediately reverted back to homeliness and those awful greasy curls. Why? Why would any woman who is constantly in the public eye and is capable of looking quite pretty purposely choose to appear not only ugly but poorly groomed? A throw-back to 70's Birkenstock feminism which equated prettiness with an unseemly desire to please men? Or the knowledge that leftist women feel threatened by the beauty of others? It certainly underscores the fact that a major driver of leftist psychology is seething envy of others who are pretty, richer, and more accomplished than oneself. Leftist women can forgive accomplishment and wealth if the woman in question is not attractive. (It also explains the popularity of that lump of gray dough known as Lena Dunham.)
Glossy is about as much a compliment in describing another person as is plastic.
Not every conservative woman I know was crazy about Palin from the get go, but I didn't hear snide remarks about her looks from them, whereas leftists women jumped gleefully on the "Caribou Barbie" meme.
That wasn't about her looks, dummy. It was about her being a vacuous airhead.
It's possible it was about her incongruous attempt to bring glamour to her Alaskan life, though. She had a tanning bed installed in her governor's mansion. Although I'm sure you have a great explanation for that one.
Debbie Wasserman-Schultz
I think she just doesn't know how to put on makeup. Heavy eyeliner on the lower lids and too-dark foundation and way too much product in the hair is about as far as you can get from the 70s Birkenstock all-natural look.
I'd guess she had her hair and makeup done professionally for the convention appearance, and she did look very good, but she normally does her own and she just isn't good at it and presumably won't take advice from anyone who knows how.
"It's possible it was about her incongruous attempt to bring glamour to her Alaskan life, though. She had a tanning bed installed in her governor's mansion. Although I'm sure you have a great explanation for that one."
1) Alaska has long winters?
2) You think a tanning bed somehow equates to "bringing glamour"? Garage, is that you?
She had a tanning bed installed in her governor's mansion. Although I'm sure you have a great explanation for that one.
In Alaska you have almost no sun all winter. I'd want a tanning bed, too.
So they both the Trumpolines were taught by the same teacher and they talk in unison creating an echo effect? That's my guess since I have never, no will I ever, listen to a formal speech from anyone named Trump. I just get overcome by the staccato of their weirdness.
"I had an uncle went to MIT who is a top professor. Dr. John Trump. A genius," Trump said in an interview with CNN. "It’s in my blood. I’m smart. Great marks. Like really smart."
“I’m an intelligent person.” This is Professor John's role in the Trump rhetorical universe: as a sort of eugenic guarantor of intelligence and breeding.
“Good genes, very good genes. OK, very smart,” Donald Trump declared.
So its back to the first half of the 20th century, when eugenics wrought cruel experiments and torture against our sub-human population and resulted in the horrors of the Nazi death camps. Only the elites, such as the Trumps, can rule.
"So its back to the first half of the 20th century, when eugenics wrought cruel experiments and torture against our sub-human population and resulted in the horrors of the Nazi death camps. Only the elites, such as the Trumps, can rule."
It has been back to Sanger's genocidal imperatives since Roe v. Wade.
Why don't you run for POTUS or do something besides pollute the web and reinforce your malfunctions?
Trump felt like you and acted to change things, why don't you swallow your pride and learn from your betters?
"Troll" don't work on me fella. I troll trolls, not you.
<<<“Good genes, very good genes. OK, very smart,” Donald Trump declared.>>>
You may be able to get good fruit from a bad tree, but Donald doesn't see that as a wise ethos.
I wonder what The Holy Bible says...
Also, everyone, THE APPLE FALLS FAR FROM THE TREE.
Don't ya dare believe elsewise neither.
Genetics and the damn "epi" are reigning kings of some other world: In this world, Nurture Wins Every Single Last Daggone Time (at least to the extent Nurture ain't conflated with the "epi").
One upside of a Trump presidency will be a First Daughter who is everything MauDo wishes she were.
"When was the last time you looked at a '58 model of anything and wanted it? That is Mo Do's problem."
Chevy Impala convertible of that year. I owned two at different times of my youth. Now a nice example is $120-160 thousand dollars.
Unknown said...How much do we really know about the political philosophy of the children anyway?
--
Right. Ultimately teh same question hangs over Dad's err.."changing" nature.
If you look at Tiffany's chosen degrees, seems like a path toward Social Justice Warrior. Ivanka had a bit of that SJW fire when she correctly identified motherhood as an issue in the so-called wage gap...but then promised (so Dad didn't have to say it) guvment free stuffs for childcare.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा