At the end of the article there's some material connected to the presidential election:
Donald J. Trump, in Colorado Springs, rushed to describe the explosion as a bomb well before the authorities had made any determinations about what had happened and while the situation was still in flux.
“I must tell you that just before I got off the plane, a bomb went off in New York and nobody knows exactly what’s going on,” he said. “But boy, we are living in a time — we better get very tough, folks.”What "conclusions" did Trump rush to? There was a big explosion and he called it "a bomb." He didn't say it was "terrorism" or what terrorist group he thought it was. He only said "bomb," and, we're told, the authorities hadn't yet "made any determinations" and things were "still in flux." Was that a "conclusion"? He said "nobody knows exactly what’s going on," so where's the conclusion?
The Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton, was informed of the episode after she gave a speech at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation’s annual awards dinner, her campaign said. She seemed to scold Mr. Trump for his quick assessment. “I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions,” Mrs. Clinton said.
It seems as though the NYT and Hillary Clinton are just trying to find something to smack him around about. Who's really stooping here — Trump or the NYT and Hillary Clinton? Trump's remark didn't attack Clinton. It just addressed the immediate event and may have said "bomb" before other things that could cause an explosion were ruled out. Hillary Clinton and the NYT were the ones who rushed to find something to use in a direct attack on their opponent.
Notice how closely Trump's response relates to the way the NYT readers reacted, up-voting the comment I put in the post heading. And here's the second-most-up-voted comment:
NYC must follow what Boston did to capture the criminals and take the pubic into confidence, instead of being more concerned about shaping public opinion before the election like they did with Benghazi.Meanwhile: "ISIS Supporters Rush To Celebrate NYC Explosion."
“The lions of the Caliphate roar in New York, we cause you pain inside your house, the carrier of the Cross,” wrote one Twitter user who went by the name “I am ISIS, come and block me.” The account was soon suspended. Another, called “The Lone Wolves,” tweeted with the Arabic hashtag #ExplosionManhattanNewYork “Oh God burn America, take revenge in the name of your oppressed slaves and believers’ blood.”AND: Look at this! Hillary Clinton's remark — the one quoted in the NYT — came along with HER saying it was a bomb!
"I've been briefed about the bombings in New York and New Jersey," she told reporters.
"Do you have any reaction to Donald Trump immediately ... referring to the explosion as a bomb?" a reporter asked.Shame on the NYT!
"Well I think it's important to know the facts before responding to an incident like this," Clinton said.
पोस्ट्स
२६६ टिप्पण्या:
266 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»Literally a gut reaction against a single syllable word ("bomb") instead of the five syllable "explosive device."
An then there's Minnesota mall attacker referenced Allah before stabbing rampage, police chief says
Let's see if I have this right. There was a big explosion in a trash can but "authorities have not made a determination" that it was a bomb? are these authorities stupid or is it the case that trash can explode all the time in "Joisy"?
And yet..the Democrats want you to stick your head in the sand...mustn't hurt Hillarys chances by having a terror attack on their watch...Almost like how they blamed Benghazi on a video tape to help re-elect Obama.
The Clinton's first instinct is to hide us from and keep secret any reality that has a political angle. STAND DOWN is Hillary's response to Islamic attackers. She needs time to put US actions up for sale to the highest bidder...I have 10 million, do I hear 15 million?
But that crazy man Trump is a quick Bombophobic.
Fear of the voters' reaction is the dominant Democrat emotion this morning. If there is a rash of bombings, Hillary loses. They know this so deflection will be the order of the day.
Thanks to DuhBlahseo and the head-in-the-sand NYT New York may be in play for the first time in 56 years.
"Literally a gut reaction against a single syllable word ("bomb") instead of the five syllable "explosive device.""
No, I think it's that a bomb/device is something a human being makes intentionally, but if all you know is that there was an explosion, you don't yet know if it was an intentional act. Could be a gas leak maybe. But once De Blasio was saying "an intentional act," then it's the same thing as saying "bomb." I think the criticism of Trump is premised on Trump's speaking before the authorities called it an intentional act. But the NYT is vague, saying "well before" and so on, and I am skeptical. When did Trump say "bomb" and when did the authorities say "intentional act"? I wouldn't be surprised if Trump's statement wasn't "well before."
And it's just plain sickening how everything turns into a basis for taking a shot at Trump.
Imagine if Trump had immediately attacked Clinton over the explosion. He'd be savaged for that.
From the cruelly neutral Althouse: "It seems as though the NYT and Hillary Clinton are just trying to find something to smack him around about."
Ann, thank you for noticing the fine distinctions the progressives are able to conjure up to attack the deplorable Mr. Trump.
Of course, the average American looks at this and says "good for Mr. Trump being able to recognize what happened so quickly".
So, besides Muslims, who hates Marines and Chelsea (i.e. gays)? The Westboro Baptist Church?
"It seems as though the NYT and Hillary Clinton are just trying to find something to smack him around about. Who's really stooping here — Trump or the NYT and Hillary Clinton?" Well, yeah, it sure "seems" they are "just" trying to do that. Just as it seems like they've been trying to do that with any and all opponents to their right for, what, two generations now? Though I got out of the regular NYT-reading habit a long time ago, I'll take your implication that they seem to be stooping just a bit lower in response to Trump.
Check the update on this post.
The only "conclusions" that can be assigned to Trump that I can see is the use of the word "bomb," but the quote from Clinton came after she herself had just said "bombings." The NYT suppressed that part of the story in its effort to help Clinton. So embarrassing!
take the pubic into confidence
This is no time for jokes about that Boston Bomber's hair.
She had just finished saying she had been "briefed about the bombings" before the reporter asked if she had any reaction to Trump calling the explosion a bomb. Could she not remember what she had called it only moments earlier?
Shame on the NYT!
The NYT has no shame.
Also, Hillary referred to it as a bomb just seconds before: https://goo.gl/5wmTc8 Later I see CNN's Jake Tapper pretending she hadn't as he tries to draw a contrast between Trump and Hillary. Personally I experience a kind of schadenfreud watching Tapper (and Chuck Todd over at MSNBC) slowly destroying their reputations for fairness and objectivity. I once viewed them favorably, but now their credibility has been "irredeemably" destroyed, at least in my eyes. If Trump wins, will be interesting to see their future career trajectories. Or are they just following orders from above?
"And it's just plain sickening how everything turns into a basis for taking a shot at Trump."
This timeline thing related to bomb statements is something that contributes to some sort of, self assessed, psychological and/or physical impact on Althouse.
That can't be a good sign.
Whoops, I see the same info I had in my comment was added to the main post while I was commenting.
I'm not saying it's not terrorism, but to those who say it is, then what are the political aims?
Scopes (or Snopes) had a pretty good rebuttal of that conspiracy theorist doctor who says Hillary has Parkinsons, however, the writer did not address last Sunday's immobility. A fairly big omission.
If we had sentient journalists one would ask, after the usual robotic "We have no evidence ..." malarkey, this:
Do you have any evidence that it was not terrorism?
(The Dems are in a panicky "Protect Hillary" mode, hoping against hope that the bomb was placed by a deranged Irish Catholic nun.)
After all these years of slanting, spiking, or otherwise trying to determine the public's talking points, why would anyone read the NY Times anymore? Seriously. It ceased to be the 'paper of record' once the internet took full hold. Per my comment yesterday, journalists are not our best thinkers- more honest and objective than the random person, nor do they have better info than anyone else anymore. Hell- they're not even better writers than many waiters in any NY restaurant. And even with their staff of fact checkers, they have to devote space to 'clarifications and corrections' daily (sometimes multiple corrections on single articles, such as when they tried to correct Gary Johnson on Aleppo). The days of looking to the NY Times for accurate information passed long ago. Those days are done. And just because your paycheck comes from the NY Times and not the Des Moines Register does not mean that your reporting is to be judged as anymore accurate or truthful. In reality, it's probably more controlled and contrived if you DO work at the NY Times.
Seriously, unless you're looking for a review on a recent wedding in the Hamptons, I'm not sure why you'd use that time of life to scour the NY Times for info, when you're just going to have to double up on that time to find the truth to it.
Anyway...what was the question?
In the news:
"CNN covered for Hillary Clinton when it severely edited a statement made by the former secretary of state in response to an explosion that rocked a Manhattan Chelsea neighborhood Saturday night.
In her actual statement, the Democratic presidential nominee called the explosion a “bombing,” while at the same time chastising Donald Trump for calling it the same. Oops."
"Seriously, unless you're looking for a review on a recent wedding in the Hamptons, I'm not sure why you'd use that time of life to scour the NY Times for info,"
People love to be and demonstrate outrage, that's why.
"The NYT suppressed that part of the story in its effort to help Clinton. So embarrassing!"
The reporter was following the script in asking the question about Trump using the term "bomb."
Hillary looked dull and medicated and her hair looked like she had been awakened and not tended it.
Her appearance is going to be an issue the next few weeks.
The point of the bombs is to make the news. It's militarily insignificant even at much higher levels.
Trump's right that if you let Muslims in then you get this shit. Muslims don't run by American rules.
It's handy emotional support for Trump's argument and against Hillary's.
[Trump] rushed to describe the explosion as a bomb well before the authorities had made any determinations about what had happened...
Authorities? Who the hell is the Times talking about? The mayor? The Chief of Police or some other political flunky, some De Blasio appointee? Surely not the cop on the street who saw the blasted dumpster and the resultant chaos, it's not possible. No mere police officer without scrambled eggs on his hat is intellectually equipped to distinguish a terrorist's bomb from a malfunctioning waste disposal canister. The pig-ignorant Trump is probably unaware of the wide-spread problem of spontaneous dumpster explosions, known to the cognoscenti as SDE's. This is why we groundlings need authorities to discern the difference for us between a terrorist's bomb, an intentional explosion, and an SDE event triggered by the dumpster's outrage at the lowly nature of its existence.
> Shame on the NYT!
But they have no shame. They don't care about reputation, integrity, honesty, fact, or truth. They have an agenda and they are going to carry it out.
"Her appearance is going to be an issue the next few weeks."
Don't forget her voice.
Althouse couldn't name a single lie on that Bloggingheads thing. But, she did say that HRC's face and voice were specific reasons HRC was unacceptable.
Pipe bombs had already been found in New Jersey earlier in the day at a planned 5K charity race, so I think that would prime people to think "bomb" if an explosion happens in NYC the same day.
Since Clinton clearly was thinking on the bomb track too, and since it actually did turn out to be a bomb, this is a line of attack the press should be dropping like a hot potato, especially since Trump's directness is likely to stand in favorable contrast to the dissembling attempts of de Blasio to avoid the obvious.
Quaestor said...
Thanks to DuhBlahseo and the head-in-the-sand NYT New York may be in play for the first time in 56 years.
NY state went GOP a little more recently than that - they were part of the Reagan landslide in 1984.
"Trump's right that if you let Muslims in then you get this shit. Muslims don't run by American rules."
Althouse is fine w/ this. Some how this doesn't count as making kids (not to mention adults) fearful.
I wouldn't be surprised if Trump's statement wasn't "well before."
Which means either Trump is prescient or lucky. Prescience and lucky are presidential qualities in my book. There's a story about a French officer being put up for an open generalship to Napoleon. The Emperor listened to the blandishments about the prospective appointee for a few minutes and then interrupted, "Yes, yes, I know he's brilliant, But is he lucky?"
Ummm, if Hillary was speaking at a fundraiser, and Trump was on his plane when it occurred, whom do you think received immediate Intel from the Secret Service?
My guess is Trump knew it was a bomb from much higher "authorities" than Comrade De Blasio.
Well, ISIS claimed it today so the whole speculation is moot. Trump was right on all counts. Hillary and De Louse -eo were lyin' wimps.
"Hillary looked dull and medicated and her hair looked like she had been awakened and not tended it"
I'm sure she was trying to look serious and somber, but all I could think when I watched her was "low energy."
Noted fool Gerardo Rivera was stating that last night's explosion was not a terrorist attack, but "terror vandalism." That idiot's daughter was witness to the Paris nightclub slaughter and could have been murdered herself, and Rivera is calling this "vandalism?" Sure Jerry, let's put on the same level as punks spraypainting subway cars.
I guess 9/11 was a really, really big act of "terror vandalism."
NY state went GOP a little more recently than that - they were part of the Reagan landslide in 1984.
That one doesn't count. Everybody, including the pet goldfish, knew Mondull was a pathetic placeholder candidate nominated because every Democrat with prospects was terrified of Reagan and gladly let Walter Mitty — oops, I mean Mondale smoke the exploding cigar.
No bomb here. It was only Alice Kramden who had some potatoes in the pressure cooker she was using in the dumpster. They clogged the relief valve on the pressure cooker and well, you know, "Boom Happens". Nothing to see here. Move on. And Alice--as old Ralph used to say, "To the moon!"
Sorry is you young uns don't get the Honeymooners reference.
Hillary bombed with her duplicitous remarks.
The point of the bombs is to create uncertainty and fear. Note the use of bombs in Saigon by the VC. Their on the ground impact was minimal, but their psychological impact was huge. How can you be winning a war when you can not protect your own capital city?
Beautiful piece of sarcasm by Questor at 0944. The MSM is daily making themselves look worse. The clear assumption by all these people based in NYC is that the rest of the country is populated by idiots. I hope they keep it up. It's a sure road to victory for Trump.
The syllable thing again: Hillary said "bombings" which is OK, but Trump said "bomb" which is jumping to a conclusion.
If one accepts that Trump is Evil, then whatever he says, whenever he says it, can be ascribed to the worst possible motives.
"HT said...
Scopes (or Snopes) had a pretty good rebuttal of that conspiracy theorist doctor who says Hillary has Parkinsons, however, the writer did not address last Sunday's immobility. A fairly big omission."
They also omitted this instance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azUpfzDNxpw
It's pretty clear she has some sort of neurological issue. The black guy is not a SS agent. He know immediately there is an issue. He calms and instructs her twice. He is always with her.
It's frightening.
Althouse couldn't name a single lie on that Bloggingheads thing. But, she did say that HRC's face and voice were specific reasons HRC was unacceptable.
9/18/16, 9:46 AM
Ann, please follow through. PBJ seems to think that you owe a dissertation on Hillary's top 10 lies. Happy to see you oblige him.
I'm surprised the NYT published there was a pressure cooker involved. A person with even a room temperature IQ is immediately going to say "Boston Marathon" and it isn't far from there to "Islamic Terrorism" no matter what the NYT says.
Why are you frightened, Curious?
FYI, Chelsea is a hip, expensive neighborhood in Manhattan, and if I said that it was favored by homosexuals I don't think I would get a lot of disagreement. Even gays are capable of remembering that after 9/11, we didn't get hit again. I have long thought that the state of New York should be in play. If she can't hold New York, this is going to be a tidal wave.
The NYT is part of the machine, a component of the ministry of propaganda. It has been so for decades. This understanding requires a considerable switch in world view for many Americans, in that it forces the conclusion that the country, your community, is not what you thought it was.
But it is natural for one brought up in dictatorships.
It is a given in a dictatorship to that the mass media is centrally controlled and does things according to instructions, only rarely, usually inadvertently, opening an unfiltered window. Everything out of such a system is something they want you to know, for political reasons, there is no motive of innocent curiosity or even commercial purpose.
""These pressure cooker bombs are terrorism, and it does not matter whether it's home-grown terrorism or foreign terrorism. It's terrorism, Mr. De Blasio.""
De Blasio, as much as I ordinarily think he is an idiot, is absolutely correct. Terrorism is the act of making people terrified to go about their daily business. Terrified people will change their actions. If there are enough terrified people who stop shopping, traveling, going to certain places or areas, the harm to the community, the economy is going to be extensive.
Terrorism isn't JUST Islamic terrorism. Black knock out game...terrorism. The KKK were terrorists. The gangs in the barrios of E LA are conducting terrorism. The fact that the bomb or terrorist act isn't associated with a formal group like ISIS or an ideology like Islam, doesn't make it any less terroristic or terrifying.
The question then arises.....what are we going to do about it. Become terrified sheep or protect ourselves and retaliate against the terrorism whenever we can.
An evergreen sentiment: shame on the NYT!
Althouse, I really appreciate your reading the NYT so I don't have to. As the the old joke says:
The New York Times: Don't read it and be uninformed. Read it and be misinformed.
Here's info wars take on the timing. Hard to get away with MSM BS these days. But we all know that Hillary is despicable liar. I am waiting for her withdrawal from the debates. I don't think she can make it through them.
The clear assumption by all these people based in NYC is that the rest of the country is populated by idiots. I hope they keep it up. It's a sure road to victory for Trump.
Khesanh0802, New Yorkers will put up with a lot, but they will not tolerate being treated like idiots.
"HT said...
Why are you frightened, Curious?"
Seriously? You think that someone who has a neurological disorder, who freezes when stressed from something as simple as a loud noise, who needs soothing to get back to reality, as POTUS isn't scary?
Seriously?
Shame on ladyfingers for turning the talk of the explosion into his perceived lead in the polls. His complete lack of empathy, attention span of a flea, referral of the National Enquirer as "the Paper", branding of those who served their country as "losers", and, while not racist, willingness to bed with them and anything vile to win is antithetical to me. Will someone please explain how he is the least bit presidential?
If this is the best that ISIS can do here in the US, then I am slightly heartened. Not that this isn't serious - it is - but it's also weak-sauce compared to the attacks in Europe recently.
Actually, I think the attack up in MN is more significant. If that sort of thing becomes more common, expect to see applications for concealed carry to spike even further, and a serious backlash against gun-free zones (which most malls are).
The NY explosion is getting most of the media attention, but let us not forget that yesterday a black cop-hater opened fire on a cop in Philadelphia and went on to wound 3 other people and murder a 25 year old woman before getting killed himself.
And the goddamn Eagles are going to "take a knee" at tomorrow night's game.
As the the old joke says...
Old indeed. In a world where the Democratic nominee's only claim to political fame is having a vagina the joke goes like this: The New Times, don't read it and be uninformed. Read it and be disinformed.
EsoxLucius said...
Shame on ladyfingers"
You're talking about Obama, right?
I think FDR was an excellent president, but that may just be me. Trump's lack of knowledge about how government works frightens me more. I'm no fan of Hillary, either.
I love her. I want to marry her and leave her all my money.
You cannot be serious, Professor Althouse. Trump's biggest problem is that his statements -- the ones that matter -- are so unclear … blah … blah … more blah … stupid … butchered it … Trump is THE WORST -- certainly the most unclear -- public speaker in modern presidential campaign history.
Translation: Trump made a “good conservative argument,” indeed it would be difficult to claim the contrary seeing as how the same argument has been used by just about every pro-2nd Amendment debater out there, but Chuck doesn’t like the way Trump did it. There’s always something, right?
What Chuck wants is for Trump to use a patchwork of politically correct lawyer terms and phrases, pseudo-legalese, simplified of course for an ignorant public. That’s what Ted Cruz, a fellow lawyer and Chuck’s favorite losing candidate, would do – right? Notice, readers, that Chuck offers no script of his own to illustrate to us how that should be done; I’m curious, aren’t you? Show us, Chuck.
Personally I experience a kind of schadenfreud watching Tapper (and Chuck Todd over at MSNBC) slowly destroying their reputations for fairness and objectivity.
As much as I wish it were not so, Tapper and Todd have nothing to worry about. They’ve been doing this their entire career. The audience they cater to doesn’t use accuracy or objectivity as a measurement of “journalistic” value. As long as they spew the latest PC claptrap about events and individuals they’ll be fine.
EsoxLucius:
None of the bull shit you threw against the wall stuck. And now you need to wash your hands.
Yes, but the crusade to stop Trump (now that polls are showing a shift in black support away from Clinton and toward Trump) has become a holy crusade. This is not a political campaign for some - it's a "just war".
HT:
Other than extending and worsening the Great Depression, why do you think FDR was a great president?
Was it for consolidating federal power? Threatening to pack the Supreme Court? Price controls?
Watching Hillary's whole statement is disquieting: she speaks in a heavily medicated monotone, and her demeanor makes Jeb Bush look high energy by compare.
@Bad Lieutenant Couldn't agree more about New Yorkers. The elitist idiots in the MSM don't represent real New Yorkers. I hope they rise up and crucify some of these jerks that ruin New York's image in the rest of the country. However, I'll never say a nice thing about the Yankees. Go Red Sox!
holdfast said...
If this is the best that ISIS can do here in the US, then I am slightly heartened. Not that this isn't serious - it is - but it's also weak-sauce compared to the attacks in Europe recently."
What bothers me is that this might be a trial run by some inexperienced young "lone wolf" who will devote himself (or herself, we can't be sexist here) to making bigger and better homemade bombs.
I think you are right about the Minnesota attack, though.
Hey, Garrison Keillor, here's an idea for your cornball show: Somalians move to Lake Woebegon and blow up Ralph's Pretty Good Grocery.
"HT said...
I think FDR was an excellent president, but that may just be me. Trump's lack of knowledge about how government works frightens me more. I'm no fan of Hillary, either."
Weak. FDR had polio, or maybe Guillain-Barre Syndrome. But it any event he did not suffer neurologically. He didn't have someone bu him constantly reassuring him, telling him what to do.
Try again.
"He didn't have someone bu him constantly reassuring him, telling him what to do."
Neither does Hillary. Look, I'm concerned, I'm just not "frightened" by her. But Trump, yes, a little bit. Also, I think he's a bad businessman and has awful taste. Yech.
The headline at Daily Mail reads "New York mayor de Blasio under fire for saying there's 'no evidence of a terror connection' in Manhattan blast - even though he admits it's 'an intentional act".
1) Why not simply say "The investigation is ongoing, and it would be premature for me to announce any conclusions". That would be more neutral, and it would avoid introducing the "T" word, and then appearing to deny it.
2) Of course there is "evidence" of terror in a FUCKING BOMBING. It's not conclusive. It's not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There may be evidence of other motives or actors. But TWO GODDAMN BOMBS are certainly evidence of terrorist activity.
Curious George:
Don't let HT off the hook. FDR was a terrible president. Worse than Nixon for price controls. And cozying up to Uncle Joe Stalin, too.
Then you must LOATHE Trump, bkl
And the goddamn Eagles are going to "take a knee" at tomorrow night's game.
Want to fix this? It's easy. Boycott the NFL. Turn off the TV for once in your dreary life Hide the goddamned remote. Those ingrates are zillionaires because their pointless exercises are the real opium of the masses. The most valuable advertising airtime by far is associated with NFL crap — either the games themselves or the pre-game show or the post-game show or the highlights show or the fucking "Let's Talk About Pets with Michael Vic Show." If you football addicts could devote a single week to a book or two you'd see some mighty repentant running backs on ESPN telling us all how sorry they are for insulting this great country that's made them all rich as Croesus.
EsoxLucius said...
Shame on ladyfingers for turning the talk of the explosion into his perceived lead in the polls. His complete lack of empathy, attention span of a flea, referral of the National Enquirer as "the Paper", branding of those who served their country as "losers", and, while not racist, willingness to bed with them and anything vile to win is antithetical to me. Will someone please explain how he is the least bit presidential?
9/18/16, 10:23 AM"
It's not so much what he is and more of what he isn't. He isn't a grifter, criminal, traitor, perjurer and all around incompetent who needs the gig in order to avoid going to prison. In comparison that makes him presidential.
"And the goddamn Eagles are going to "take a knee" at tomorrow night's game."
Or this
De Blasio is allowing the inmates to run the asylum.
I transited NY Penn yesterday making my way home.
I've never seen so many homeless people in one place. Could've been Manila. Glad to have escaped.
Much of the media are Democrats with bylines. Their goals are political, not journalistic.
"NYC must follow what Boston did to capture the criminals and take the public into confidence, instead of being more concerned about shaping public opinion before the election like they did with Benghazi."
If this is the second most upvoted comment in the NYT article, an encouraging sign of sanity is appearing among the readers of the NYT. While I doubt Trump will win NYC it does start to look like Red Bill is going to get kicked to the curb in the next mayoral election.
http://nypost.com/2016/01/27/how-new-york-solved-new-jerseys-homeless-crisis/
Ann is assuming The New York Slimes is CAPABLE of feeling shame.
Good one.
"All the News That's Fit to Twist to Push Our Liberal Bias©"
If Hillary! as president does not scare you, the present leadership of the Democratic Party should, not to mention the political inclinations of our supposedly "non-partisan" civil service.
At least a pause from the headlong rush of the last 8 years is called for.
HT:
Did you approve the FDR price controls?
Elites,including the main stream media, loathe Trump and are doing their best to defeat him.
Quaestor, I have no problem with a NFL boycott. I'm done with those bastards.
No question that the Republican party is the only party undergoing implosion, it is happening to the Democrats too. It's all around - the lack of leadership. But then, so is civic engagement. Maybe one thing has something to do with the other.
320Busdriver: After the Glorious People's Revolution, the new leader will enact a 10 yr End Homelessness plan, and vigorously enforce his rules upon the fat cats and 1%.
Utopia awaits. Get on board!
Really. Get on board. Now.
Trump's lack of knowledge about how government works frightens me more.
Considering the trajectory of government over the last decade or so I'd say that's a BIG plus in Donald J. Trump's favor.
de Blasio is done probably. First thing I thought after his conference, was, "if it was intentional, how is it not terrorism?".
Clinton supporters believe she is completely correct in her assertion that Trumps supporters are evil. The media are Clinton supporters.
Also, I think he's a bad businessman and has awful taste. Yech.
Unless HT is provably richer than Trump, the above reflects much more on HT than Trump.
HT thinks FDR was swell, what with prolonging and worsening the Great Depression.
And that makes Donald Trump a bad businessman, because we can trust HT and his enormous business acumen.
I have no problem with a NFL boycott. I'm done with those bastards.
That's two of us. 149,999,998 to go.
I can recommend a reading list, BTW.
his?
Because pronouns are the most important part of your belief that FDR was great because of FDR's policies that drove centralization of government power and a Great Depression getting worse, while cozying up to Uncle Joe Stalin.
Yes, turn off the NFL.
When I came here I had to learn the games. Baseball was easy enough, we have it back home, to a very limited degree - I grew up a couple of blocks from Manilas ballpark, and yes there is one, and yes Babe Ruth did play there once, and yes the Japs turned the dugouts into bunkers in 1945.
American football though seemed very contrived, artificial even as games go, to this old soccer player. It seems to require odd physical types vs the generally lithe, athletic baseball, soccer, rugby, basketball players. All these others are good for general fitness, but American football seems to ruin its players.
I had to get a computer game to understand football.
Maybe it was the Ruskis who caused this sudden dissipation of energy in the garbage dumpster........ PUTIN!
HT: Oliver Wendell Holmes, a Republican Supreme Court justice who fought against the New Deal, famously said Roosevelt had a second-class intellect but a first-class temperament. I agree with you about Hillary, but she has none of the pampered crassness of Trump, the starting at third and thinking you hit a home run. If the bone spurs had been real, maybe he would have gained the humility that Roosevelt carried daily with his polio. I just don't think anyone could represent me who would turn air force one around in China if he didn't get the right set of stairs or mention the bombing in Chelsea without expressing thoughts for the victims but bragging how it helped him in the polls. I still am waiting for someone to tell me how he is the least bit presidential on this board.
Its not that many journalists are Democratic party activists, they are of course, but its not simply that.
It is a centrally directed machine. These journalists and other media creators are not coming up with their comments or news filters independently. This is a closely coordinated messaging system. There really is no difference between CNN and the NYT and WaPo and NBC. They are just different endpoints, merely loudspeakers in different parts of town blaring the same music from the same sound system.
his?
Unlike idiots who use the plural pronoun indiscriminately Quaestor uses the time honor indeterminate third person pronoun. Look it up, HT, and be educated.
As Glenn Reynolds says, "just think of them as democratic operatives with a by-line"
The machine in the south works a bit differently than other places, usually favoring the more conservative candidates - at least in my state. Also, southerners signed up for wars and fought more than those from any other region, at least that's what we tell ourselves, and in my family FDR was revered like almost nothing else, and there is just about every single book ever written about him on our shelves. He had an extremely debilitating condition and he persevered in spite of it, and with a lot of help (Hopkins).
Hesh up quaestor.
What is wrong with Hellary? She looks stoned. Is this what she's going to look like at the debates?
He or she and him/her are less stupid than using they as a singular, but only slightly so.
I continue to be stunned, even though I am as big a cynic as there is, in how willingly the people in the media are to make themselves seem like complete morons. I think if Trump came out today and said, "The Sun rises in the East," media people would immediately begin mocking Trump for believing that the Sun is moving rather than the Earth, and people would be asking Clinton for comments about it. I think the Democrats in the media are in the process of literally going batshit crazy.
EsoxLucius said...
"...the starting at third and thinking you hit a home run....
Mock-worthy.
As to quality of his business acumen, I agree he has not performed especially well over his lifetime, (a positive,but low return on equity), but compared to the Clinton Foundation, a charity that spends 6% of it's budget on actual charity, I'd say he's far superior in performance as well as ethics and morality. As to taste, Trump would have to come out in a tie dyed mumu to match the frump of Hillary's wardrobe.
http://www.wnd.com/files/2016/08/Hillary-Cape-Cod-fundraiser2.jpg
Here is a huffpo article with Jane Goodall explaining how Trump is acting like a chimpanzee. I'm getting embarrassed for the media. Maybe that's their tactic now??
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-chimpanzee-behavior_us_57ddb84fe4b04a1497b4e512
The media people are professionals. They are paid to put out a message, not to invent one. Its not personal, its a job.
They sound like morons because they have been given a propaganda message to push that conflicts with common sense. This is pretty common in propaganda systems.
Is this what she's going to look like at the debates?
Unlikely. They'll use what ever amount of makeup required to produce the pretense of a living human being, even it if takes a trowel.
And yet..the Democrats want you to stick your head in the sand...mustn't hurt Hillarys chances by having a terror attack on their watch...Almost like how they blamed Benghazi on a video tape to help re-elect Obama.
Me, when it comes to this stuff, I always flash back to July 17, 1996, smack-dab in the middle of the run up to Bill Clinton's reelection, and TWA Flight 800, and how it would've mattered had the truth had been known.
Looking at the video, I wonder if Crooked Hilary was drunk?
Also, I ran across this video if her Greensboro rally on Thursday. It claims that Crooked Hilary's speech was shot against a greenscreen. In the video a lot of people in the audience are holding up phones taking video. There is a huge American flag backdrop in the video that does not show up on the phones.
Also, when Hilary makes her entrance at 1:22, she walks directly in front of several phones but is not shown on the phone screens.
Someone made a speech in Greensboro on Thursday. Was it Crooked Hilary or a body double?
Video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yCCTR35JRI
John Henry
The NYTimes is a democrat media outlet. It just is, I'm frankly shocked that you are shocked about it.
But I do appreciate you calling them on it. It very much makes your site enjoyable.
I think this article gets to the real strength of Trump's rising appeal. It's not him, it's the dishonesty of our system and people finally refusing to fall for it. It's pushback against being told what to think by obvious liars.
"...everyone knows that the press is trying to elect Hillary, and most Americans resent it. Every day, editors and reporters try to inflict an anti-Trump theme on the rest of us. "
Jane Goodall [explains] how Trump is acting like a chimpanzee.
At least his actions resemble those of a primate. Can Hillary honestly make that claim?
"in my family FDR was revered like almost nothing else, and there is just about every single book ever written about him on our shelves"
My family bought the myth too, just like millions bought the silly Camelot myth.
You might try reading a book about FDR that isn't a hagiography. Paul Johnson's "Modern Times" is a good place to start. Johnson was also not too impressed with that other vastly overrated 20th century phony, Gandhi.
"Althouse couldn't name a single lie on that Bloggingheads thing. But, she did say that HRC's face and voice were specific reasons HRC was unacceptable.
9/18/16, 9:46 AM "Ann, please follow through. PBJ seems to think that you owe a dissertation on Hillary's top 10 lies. Happy to see you oblige him."
I immediately named 2 lies relating to the email, so pbj is himself lying, about me.
I hem about "favorite" lie and say I would have to methodically collect all the lies and rank them.
I would also have to figure out what favorite means in that context.
Maybe the final answer would be: sniper fire
You'd think that all those Hollywood types would have given Hill some coaching on how to appear human.
She just can't ever seem to strike the right note. When she tries to come across as somber and stately, she seems drugged and weirdly detached. It's either that or Screech Mode, which must remind millions of men across the country of their first wives or their mean 3rd grade teacher.
exiledonmainstreet:
Or just try finding an example of price controls that benefited a country. They didn't work for communist sympathizer FDR or communist hater Richard Nixon.
In re Trumps return on equity -
Note that the purported calculations make a lot of errors.
The fundamental one is that he didnt inherit his fathers wealth until 1999-2000, when Donald was already claiming to be a multi-billionaire. And Fred Trumps estate was split among the other Trump siblings, even in 2000 Donald got only a fraction of it. Calculations based on Fred Trumps final estate value are wrong.
Fred staked Donald a few million I think when he started out, and possibly added some more capital at some point, or perhaps bailed him out at other times. But there is no way to know what Donald Trumps starting capital actually was without a deep dive into his books. Without that, any ROI/ROE calculation is useless.
Gas explosion? Natural gas explosions raise complete buildings and homes, these were IEDs designed to maim.
MichaelK,
I noticed that, too. She looked like she was drunk to me, though heavily medicated with something other than alcohol is also possible. It would also explain why she didn't seem to remember what she had said about "bombings" when asked about Trump. If you remember that you said "bombings", you would be very careful about supporting critique of what Trump said about "bomb".
"and has awful taste"
Oh, dear.
Liberal seriousness in a nutshell.
As to taste, Trump would have to come out in a tie dyed mumu to match the frump of Hillary's wardrobe.
@ bagoh....LOL. The frump.
the real strength of Trump's rising appeal. It's not him, it's the dishonesty of our system and people finally refusing to fall for it.
Exactly. Trump is a result of the system, the elites, the media and the disdain that they, in their oh so smart wisdom, have heaped upon the American people. I don't think that the people have reached a snapping point yet, but if Hillary is elected, the snapping point of enough is enough will come sooner. The Never Trump people should pray that Trump gets elected.
The link showing Hillary speaking shows her looking very tired. Trump always seems energetic, while Clinton is almost reminiscent of druggies high one day, coming down the next . The MSM does her no favor by broadcasting those lethargic vids.
Simple concept..... setting off bombs is an act of terrorism.
Now one could say there is no evidence the bomb was inspired by ISIL or other Muslim agents.
But the good mayor said no evidence of terrorism even 5though he knew it to be a bomb.
He was trying to cut off the connection to Islam.
Shame on the left for assuming a terrorist act must be Islamic in provocation....
Hilary looked out of it.
Don't worry, sportsfans, Hillary will power through this crisis with flying colors!
I watched Fox news commentary. The anchor and local expert both described the scene as not serious, so no terrorism. They did that by judging the body language of the firemen and police in the perimeter. Obviously they never watched a single episode of "24".
"The black guy is not a SS agent. He know immediately there is an issue. He calms and instructs her twice. He is always with her. "
No, he is the head of her detail. His name is Todd Madison. They have been protecting her since 1992 and I'm sure they know exactly what to do when she freezes. Apomorphine works sublingually so they don't even have to use the syringe Madison says is a flashlight.
Also, I don't know what the big deal is about last night. Pressure cookers explode all the time. One went off in Boston only a couple of years ago.
pbj is himself lying, about me
Thank you Ann, asked and answered. (Note that PBJ regularly slags you and you owe him nothing.) I myself always get hung up on "favorite" questions e.g. "what is your favorite book?" I have so many, myself, that 'twere invidious to particularize.
So PBJ, known liar that you are, will you be:
Defending yourself somehow;
Apologizing;
Or changing your name and leaving town?
If you need help deciding, Ann could make a poll.
Stronger Together is racking up a huge volume of reviews considering the total sales so far are in the four figures (low four figures). Here's one of my favs by emilywooster1, "Finally a new workout book for senior citizens. I can finally get rid of my old copy of "Bun's of Steel". It looks like Hillary's breaking a sweat from doing 3 sets of 10 "Heil Hitler's" with Timmy." Emily ranked the book as a five-star read, BTW, so take those few positives with a pinch of salt.
The cover art truly is the worst I've ever seen on such a campaign piece. It makes weep for the wasted trees.
luke lea @9:30 makes an excellent point. Jake Tapper/CNN edited out Hilllarys comment about a "bomb" to make Trump look rash by comparison.
You want my opinion, if you are violently mentally ill, a violent pervert, or a violent drug addict, society should provide a way to cremate all these people and generate electricity.
When I see all the good bodies rotting in the desert of Syria, it makes me sad we could be getting millions of kilo-watt hours of 220 volts AC.
It would be the promise of free electricity that nuclear power has failed to do.
John Henry, that was one of the most bizarre you tubes that I've ever seen. I wish you would have put into a link so it would be easier for people to view.
Doesn't Althouse jump to a conclusion when she complains about Hillary - What "conclusions" did Trump rush to?
Hillary said - “I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions,”
Doesn't reference Trump and it is a sensible thing to say. Althouse is relying on the Times interpretation of her statement to scold Hillary. How sensible is that?
I think FDR was an excellent president, but that may just be me. Trump's lack of knowledge about how government works frightens me more.
Trump will be surrounded by experts, as his counsel and advisors. The best and the brightest. On any given issue or in any situation, they will lay out his options to him and make recommendations. He will thereby make his decisions. This is exactly how Trump functions as a project manager. Being "frightened" of this is irrational.
“I must tell you that just before I got off the plane, a bomb went off in New York and nobody knows exactly what’s going on,” he said. “But boy, we are living in a time — we better get very tough, folks.”
Let's call this what it is -- a straightforward, fairly banal statement of fact. It's a bomb, we're living in tough times, we're going to have to do things differently in the future.
Getting worked up about statements like that is what happens to people who've been in power for too long. They feel defensive, they feel like they have to slot everything into a preexisting narrative, they feel like they have to defend the status quo against all comers.
One of the big questions about Hillary is whether she has enough left in the tank for a successful four year term, or if we're going to get second (fifth!?) term hangover in the first term.
I don't think this is a Trump story. It's a Hillary story.
Blogger buwaya puti said...
yes the Japs turned the dugouts into bunkers in 1945.
But is it true that General McArthur brought Goto Dengo to Christ in those dugouts during the battle of Manila?
John Henry
Althouse is relying on the Times interpretation of her statement to scold Hillary. How sensible is that?
Sensible enough to anyone able to tell shit from Shinola.
Speaking of Crooked Hilary's book, you know what else is stronger together? A bundle of sticks.
Also called a fasces.
Which gave its name to the Fascist Party and ideology in Italy.
Progressives looooovvvveeeedddd El Duce back in the 20s and early 30s. LaFollette was still publicly advocating his (and Hitler's) political ideals into the late 30s.
John Henry
Allen, I keep forgetting how to make a link in Blogger. I should know but whenever I try it, I screw it up.
John Henry
OpenID jdniner said...
Hilary looked out of it.
No shit, 70 year olds that need to sleep 16 hours a day look like that, especially the medicated ones. She looked like crap, so we know her keepers didn't have time to stoke up her plane's portable paint booth. The alternative theory is that Crooked Hillary pick up an opium habit in her travels to the middle east. ;-)
John said......when Hilary makes her entrance at 1:22, she walks directly in front of several phones but is not shown on the phone screens.
Could be the phone screens have been faked.
None of the phone screens ever look the same as they look in the same direction. I suspect this video is manipulated.
The rule in politics, is win whichever way you can. But I don't see this video as winning.
Quaestor said...
Sensible enough to anyone
But her whole argument is that the NY Times is an unreliable witness. How can you impeach someone with an unreliable witness?
John said...
Allen, I keep forgetting how to make a link in Blogger. I should know but whenever I try it, I screw it up.
John Henry
9/18/16, 12:22 PM
So do so I, so normally I just copy and paste the link. Works just as well.
This kinda reminds me of CBS Face the Nation this morning. They first did a softball interview with Kaine, then had Conway, followed by Priebus. The host kept coming back to Trump announcing this week that he believed that Obama was born in Hawaii. The host kept asking why it took so long, and they would remind him that the birther rumors came from the Crooked Hillary camp. And he reminded them that her campaign has denied that, and immediately fired the lowly state level staffer who started it. And then they would remind him of Sidney Blumenthal pushing the rumor. But, the Clinton campaign has denied any involvement, and that should settle the issue. I think that the parsing this time is that this is a different Clinton campaign than 8 years ago, since Blumenthal was, apparently, hired by THAT Clinton campaign, and maybe not by THIS Clinton campaign. It is hard to pretend that Blumenthal wasn't operating for her benefit, as a primary surrogate, when he was shopping the birther story (as well as some other anti-Obama stories). But, they seem to be trying to do so with straight faces. Sometimes I think that Botox is a requirement of that job.
Any, case, the bomb thing is a big nothing burger. Being thrown against Trump because they are desperate to break his momentum. But the point is too technical to sway any of the moderates that the MSM want to move away from voting for him. It comes down to that he shouldn't have called the bomb a bomb until it was officially declared a bomb by the powers that be. Because that might offend our Muslim brethren unneedlessly. Apparently, we are supposed to be politically correct in the midst of a terrorist attack on the off chance that it wasn't actually a terrorist attack. And, thanks to confirmation by ISIS, we know that it was a terrorist attack. Most of the country are likely going to miss those subtleties, and the MSM pushing that meme are going to, again, look silly, and in the bag for Crooked Hillary.
"Defending yourself somehow;
Apologizing;
Or changing your name and leaving town?"
In that BHTV thing I don't know what two HRC lies it is that Althouse was pointing to. She mentions one HRC statement about designated classified info not being sent by email, then Bob shoots that down. After flailing for a bit Althouse concedes that "maybe nothing she ever said is actually a lie" then she goes on to jabbering about perceptions instead of reality.
Also the whole question was about the the worst lie, not what is the favorite lie.
P.S. Of course the favorite lie has to be the sniper fire. I remember fun videos folks made back in 2008. In addition to being shameful, that lie makes for good visuals. It's hard to beat.
P.S. I do sometimes change my name here. So that's on the table.
Blogger Birkel said...
exiledonmainstreet:
Or just try finding an example of price controls that benefited a country. They didn't work for communist sympathizer FDR or communist hater Richard Nixon.
Wage and price controls always precede black markets.
What do we need? "Real Newspapers"
When do we need them? "Now"
In Hillary's defense, she didn't mention Trumps use of the word "bomb". When the reporter asked her;
"Do you have any reaction to Donald Trump immediately ... referring to the explosion as a bomb?"
Clinton knew the MSM agent was instructing her to criticize Trump, but she wasn't sure what to criticize him for. She was still woozy from all the drugs they're giving her, and hadn't read the press-campaign coordination memo.
This would all work better if the reporters would just read Clinton's script for her, instead of requiring her to remember her own talking points. Can't they see the poor woman is dying?
BTW, if HRC was briefed that this was a bombing, and then HRC refers to that briefing, why can't she still be critical of DJT for making this claim before any authorities had made this determination? Think about it.
How long until the media concludes the NYC bombing was masterminded by Putin, to help Trump win the election? 3..2..1
It looks like this except where you see a comma, you need to hold the shift button down and punch the comma key to get the < -- and where you see a period hold the shift button down and punch the period key to get the > -- put the url between the "" -- link text would be the words you want to be blue --
,a href="url".link text,/a.
I could never remember how to do it, so I copied the link info and sent myself an email, then moved the email to my draft area. That's where I go to copy it.
Good luck!
AND: Look at this! Hillary Clinton's remark — the one quoted in the NYT — came along with HER saying it was a bomb!
"I've been briefed about the bombings in New York and New Jersey," she told reporters.
"Do you have any reaction to Donald Trump immediately ... referring to the explosion as a bomb?" a reporter asked.
"Well I think it's important to know the facts before responding to an incident like this," Clinton said.
Shame on the NYT!
Shame on the Times, but also shame on Hillary Clinton for her lack of self-awareness. I'm sure that the there are fewer than three digits in her IQ.
BTW, if HRC was briefed that this was a bombing, and then HRC refers to that briefing, why can't she still be critical of DJT for making this claim before any authorities had made this determination? Think about it.
Are you suggesting that only Hillary Clinton gets briefed on such events? Why wouldn't all four candidates be briefed? Think about it.
@Big Mike - not sure if the third party candidates get briefed, but Trump should be getting the same briefings as Crooked Hillary. Essentially identical.
John Henry
Stuart Chase a FDR advisor coined the term "New Deal" in his book "A New Deal". Chase is famous for the quote at the end of his book A New Deal, "Why should the Soviets have all the fun remaking a world?"
ARM
But dear old Hillary, bless her heart, said it was a bomb before saying the correctthink phrase that we should wait for all the facts, a la our deal leader, the golfer.
Surely you detect the irony, having awaited all the facts available, of course.
Jim Gust,
Probably already happening. If not, it will be done this way in either NYT or WaPo- "Unidentified sources in Homeland Security say that it can't be ruled out that Russian agents were behind the attempted attacks." Then the Clinton campaign will send out the surrogates to say, "Homeland Security has indicated that there is evidence that Russian agents were behind Saturday's multiple attacks in order to improve Trump's chances of winning given that he is so far behind in the polls." Trump will, of course, respond by saying, "There Crooked Hillary goes again- the claim the Russians are behind these attacks has literally no evidence at all. Sad!" The NYT and WaPo, on the front page, above the fold, will headline "Trump Denies Knowledge of Potential Russian Linked Attacks in US."
"PBandJ_LeDouanier said...
BTW, if HRC was briefed that this was a bombing, and then HRC refers to that briefing, why can't she still be critical of DJT for making this claim before any authorities had made this determination? Think about it.
Having thought about it, I am quite glad Donald Trump is able to use common sense to know what is plain.
Having thought about it, Hillary Clinton is drug and booze addled and needs other people to tell her what to think and say.
#ZombieHillary all over Twitter based upon her statement. No eye contact. Stammering. She looked sick and tired. bin Laden's weak horse in person.
Re Goto Dengo ("Cryptonomicon" - Neal Stephenson reference) -
Thats a weird book. Go get it, should be plenty of used copies.
Its not for everyone, but if you're one of the few, its brilliant.
The interesting part is that the truth (in general) is at least as weird, in many directions. There were indeed Japs brought to Christ in 1945, or at least that probably died having done a last act of Christian charity. There are dozens of such stories, many can be found in the memoirs of the time. A great-uncle of mine, like all of our lot a survivor, published one such as a newspaper article.
Stephenson did a tremendous lot of research in the field and in the stacks for that one, it shows.
Old Mac wasnt a particularly devout fellow and quite a sinner in his day. Look up "Dimples". One of many it seems.
Having thought about it, I am quite glad Donald Trump is able to use common sense to know what is plain.
What is amazing to me is how one has to make ones self look like a total cretin in order to not understand this is common sense. Hell, even Clinton understood it was a bomb in her apparently addled state last night, but then forgot that 30 seconds later. Here is the thing that gets me about Clinton's comments- it would have done her world of good politically to have just answered the reporter's question by simply saying, "It was obviously a bomb of some kind, so that is a stupid question." Why didn't she do that? I have no clue- I simply can't think at that level.
You can't shame the shameless, Professor.
"Are you suggesting that only Hillary Clinton gets briefed on such events? Why wouldn't all four candidates be briefed? "
It' a timing thing. Briefing first, then relaying what was briefed vs speculate first then wait for briefing to back you up.
BTW, I could not care less about this thing. I don't think DJT was brilliant to immediately think this was a bombing. Odds are that most everyone thought that. But, it probably wouldn't so bad if he could wait for the very short time it took for the authorities to come out w/ an on the ground assessment.
I would also have to figure out what favorite means in that context.
Maybe the final answer would be: sniper fire.
Easily the worst lie Hillary ever told was that she was not involved with TravelGate. To refresh people's memories, she wanted the White House travel office replaced with her cronies, she had the people manning the office sacked, and had them accused of embezzlement. After there was push back because of her siccing the FBI on these people, she said, basically, "Who? Me?"
You know, thats something the Clinton camp hasnt tried yet - calling the press bloody idiots on some such commonsense matter.
If anyone is disliked more than Clinton its the press. Punching them around a bit should help. It might even help if she went off on them for being such obvious lickspittles.
And in doing so she wont antagonize them, given that they will be paid to cooperate. They could be her punching bag.
We must suspend common sense and long experience until the "authorities" tell us what to think.
No better distillation of collectivism exists.
Thank you, PBandJ.
@PB, you can be pretty mealy-mouthed when you try, can't you?
Blogger exiledonmainstreet said...John said...Allen, I keep forgetting how to make a link in Blogger. I should know but whenever I try it, I screw it up.
--
You might want to bookmark http://www.easyhyperlinks.com
My favorite Hillary lie is that she was named for Sir Edmund Hillary, who climbed Mount Everest after she was born and named.
It is my favorite because of the audacity of the lie. There is no way it could be true. It is not plausible. It is the sort of lie a drug addict tells, unable to keep the lies straight.
How can you impeach someone with an unreliable witness?
If the usual suspects — no use trying to shuffle to the back of the room, you know who you are, and I know who you are, yes, you Maddow... and stop fidgeting when I talk to you, and you O'Donnell, sidling out the door, were you? You'll have to do better than that — can do it routinely, shamelessly, then I should be allowed occasionally.
BTW, I could not care less about this thing. I don't think DJT was brilliant to immediately think this was a bombing.
Too fucking funny, Peanut Butter. No one in this comments section, and likely no one else either, thinks Trump was brilliant for thinking this. That is why it is called "common sense". So, I guess making common sense statements is now a faux pas politically. Sheesh, no wonder Clinton is in trouble.
"a bomb went off in New York and nobody knows exactly what’s going on"
That is adequately hedged..qualified. And that these times make any such event concerning..quite obviously from an ISIS/ISIL/Icicle/Mrs. Dash terrorism perspective.
Buwaya,
Bingo!
I wondered if anyone would get the reference. Cryptonomicon is one of my favorite books I had read it 15 times when I stopped counting a few years ago. I've read it at least 4-5 times since.
Just finished Reamde for about the 8th time and it was as gripping as ever.
If you are a stephenson fan, I also highly recommend the two books he wrote with his uncle: Cobweb and Interface I read both over and over and they never get old or tired.
John Henry
My idea of hell would be serving a life sentence in solitary confinement in the Florence Supermax with nothing but a copy of Cryptonomicon to pass the days.
I hate the name "Bobby."
Michael said...
Surely you detect the irony, having awaited all the facts available, of course.
But Althouse's complaint specific complaint is:
Clinton - “I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions”
Althouse - What "conclusions" did Trump rush to?
There is no reference to Trump in Clinton's statement.
If Althouse is simply providing a service where people can join together to chant 'Kill the witch', this is, I assume, considered to be a valuable service by those who participate. Otherwise, her arguments should at least match the coherency of the NYT's breaking news division, who throw their articles together under considerable time pressure, unlike Althouse.
The school found several things wrong with Frostburg’s investigation process, but one of the most notable findings was that using “common sense” and “reason” are considered violations of Title IX, the anti sex-discrimination statute that is used to force schools to adjudicate felony sexual assault.
This right here is a perfect example of a moronic argument by ARM:
Clinton - “I think it’s always wiser to wait until you have information before making conclusions”
Althouse - What "conclusions" did Trump rush to?
There is no reference to Trump in Clinton's statement.
Dumbass, she was answering a question about Donald Trump's statement. Unless you want to argue she was answering some other question she imagined the reporter asked, it is understood that she was referring to Trump's statement.
AReasonableMan:
We must forget any references to Trump preceding any Clinton statement. We must be stupid for the good of the collective.
Blogger Jim Gust said...
How long until the media concludes the NYC bombing was masterminded by Putin, to help Trump win the election? 3..2..1
Well, there goes my opportunity to comment.
Yancey Ward said...
she was answering a question about Donald Trump's statement.
She quite clearly made a general statement of principle, without any specific reference to Trump. She clearly could have done otherwise.
Roughcoat, you will probably dislike the Baroque cycle intensely. Stephenson is a particular taste and even his fans have to forgive him a lot.
John, I am behind on Stephenson, my last was Anathem, which is inventive at least. Its on par that way with Diamond Age, my favorite.
Five explosions in NJ and NYC, where was the President? Hillary handled this well, she didn't blame it on Trump, the irredeemable deplorables, David Duke, the NRA or a film maker. She's doing better. Though she can't bring herself to say Islamic terrorism that might offend her benefactors.
I post under my real name- have since I first started posting comments on-line in 2004 at Political Animal, and it exposes me more than would be usual since my name is quite unusual- people aren't going to generally ask me if I am that Yancey Ward. I only make exceptions to this rule when the moniker is explicitly part of a joke or a point I am trying to make. However, even if I were using a pseudonym, I could never bring myself to make transparently idiotic arguments that trolls like Peanut Butter and ARM make almost every single day here. Is there some psychic benefit I am unaware of in doing it? Am I missing out on something here?
Yes, ARM, I guess this is in the same league as what the definition of "is" is. Bravo. Like I wrote, if this is the level of discourse you have fallen to, I can see now why Clinton is well on her way to losing to Trump. You are symptom of her bigger problem.
Yancey Ward said...
I guess this is in the same league as what the definition of "is" is.
No. She quite clearly could have answered the question, "Unlike Mr Trump I ..."
She deliberately choose not to do this, which clearly undercuts Althouse's argument. Equally obviously, she is not responsible for what the press either asks or writes.
Clinton "deliberated" in her drug and alcohol fueled stupor.
Pull the other one, AReasonableMan.
(Because Clinton did not say "as a general principle" your own argument is negated. You are a dull boy.)
Ann Althouse said...
"Maybe the final answer would be: sniper fire"
Good choice. It has a beat, you can dance to it.
And the travel office fiasco does show the Little First Lady with Megalomania in a particularly vicious and unscrupulous light. It's helpful to remember that she has always been utterly amoral, and willing to destroy the lives of innocents on a trivial whim of venality.
But my favorite is an oldie; Hillary learning to trade cattle futures by reading the WSJ! There was something so loopily innocent about the Clintons back then, when they would sell a favor for a measly 100K, and cover the bribe with a lie so transparent you could read through it by candlelight. Nowadays she has a staff designing lie systems deployed in depth, with judicious misrepresentations covering for false imputations piled atop misleading irrelevancies and convenient failures of memory. She charges millions for even a routine bit of jobbery, and with the press and the FBI in the tank for her, sometimes she just can't be bothered to go through the motions any more. She's like, "So I lied. So sue me. Are we there yet?".
I remember the Clintons when their corruption was still fresh and new, at least outside of Arkansas. Perhaps it's just that an old man likes best the things of his youth.
Here I disagree with ARM.
She is responsible for what the press asks or writes.
They are units of the same organization operating under the same leadership for the same cause. Its like having the Stars and Stripes enlisted man journalist interviewing Eisenhower in 1944.
buwaya puti said...
She is responsible for what the press asks or writes.
You are correct, I should have written, "Equally obviously, no one whose thought processes are not riven with conspiracy theories, believes that she is responsible for what the press either asks or writes." Even using your frame of reference, she could reasonably expect them to be less ham-handed.
No. She quite clearly could have answered the question, "Unlike Mr Trump I ..."
Well, then she could have quite clearly answered the question "I am not going to criticize Mr. Trump's statement since it was quite clear to everyone it was a bomb of some sort." Then, and only then, she could have made her general statement disconnecting it, at least arguably, from being a critique. Answering the question with that general statement is the critique. Any moron but ones like you can actually understand that. It really is one of those things that is beyond reasonable doubt. That you either can't see it, or more likely, are just being deliberately obtuse about it, is just another indication of why she is having so much trouble.
The really hilarious thing to me is that most of the critics of Trump on the Right actually don't ever stoop to this level disingenuousness. They actually mount arguments I am certain they believe, and they can at least not have to resort to utterly extreme and unreasonable parsing of words Trump said or that they said and got called out on. Even Chuck, on his worst day, doesn't appear nearly as stupid as you and Peanut Butter do.
In any case, I am done responding to you- I don't often break my rule against engaging trolls- but you guys take it to a level that got the better of my normal good sense.
Nobody makes crock pot bombs.
No. She quite clearly could have answered the question, "Unlike Mr Trump I ..."
No. She quite clearly could have answered the question "As a general principle..."
That she did not puts the lie to AReasonableMan's contention that she was making a statement of general principle, by the terms of AReasonableMan's own argument.
Yancey Ward said...
"I am not going to criticize Mr. Trump's statement since it was quite clear to everyone it was a bomb of some sort."
But this was not Althouse's argument, which is what I was critiquing, by the general standards she applies to the NYT.
More generally, I can't see any obligation on the part of any politician to clarify or in any way disambiguate statements made by a political rival.
When I was young, I made fun of conspiracy theories.
Occams razor said that stupidity and confusion and complex perspectives explained things better.
With age and experience, I modified my attitude.
Occams razor cuts in all directions.
Birkel said...
She quite clearly could have answered the question "As a general principle..."
That she did not puts the lie to AReasonableMan's contention that she was making a statement of general principle, by the terms of AReasonableMan's own argument.
So every statement of general principle must be preceded by the statement "As a general principle..." otherwise it cannot possibly be a statement of general principle? How would books of philosophy ever be written if this was in fact a general principle? They would be unreadable, not a great change to their current state of unread, but still an enormous burden to place on a group already reeling from the onslaught of irrelevancy.
For those coming late to the party here is a fine piece of sarcasm from Questor posted at 0944:
"Authorities? Who the hell is the Times talking about? The mayor? The Chief of Police or some other political flunky, some De Blasio appointee? Surely not the cop on the street who saw the blasted dumpster and the resultant chaos, it's not possible. No mere police officer without scrambled eggs on his hat is intellectually equipped to distinguish a terrorist's bomb from a malfunctioning waste disposal canister. The pig-ignorant Trump is probably unaware of the wide-spread problem of spontaneous dumpster explosions, known to the cognoscenti as SDE's. This is why we groundlings need authorities to discern the difference for us between a terrorist's bomb, an intentional explosion, and an SDE event triggered by the dumpster's outrage at the lowly nature of its existence."
It is so beautiful I thought it should be repeated.
buwaya puti:
All theories begin in the philosophical domain, where they transition to another logical domain with improved knowledge and skill. However, their assembly is not two-dimensional, or even three, but a constellation with complexity proportional to the product of time and space offsets from an observation frame. That is, accuracy increases as complexity decreases, or accuracy decreases as complexity increases.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा