Said Donald Trump, a while back, before he was President. You might think that as President, he never goes to Camp David, but he's there this weekend (strategizing with congressional Republicans). And he's been there "a half-dozen times."
Maybe he goes there because it's unlikeable. It lights a rustic fire under those he's compelled to meet with him there, so the hate-it-after-30-minutes quality suits his low-attention-span psyche.
[T]he president is expected to push GOP leaders to focus on an economic agenda, including a long-awaited proposal to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure.... Trump campaigned on investing $1 trillion in U.S. infrastructure, and there were early signs of bipartisan support for the idea. But momentum for the plan slowed this year, and the White House has sent conflicting signals on what shape it might take.All right, we'll make America great again. Just let us out of this rustic hellhole.
“We have a lot of things to work on, a lot of things to accomplish,” Trump said as he left the White House on Friday for Frederick County. “We're going to Camp David with a lot of the great Republican senators, and we're making America great again.”
Another reason to go to Camp David this weekend is to generate evidence that undermines the picture of Trump created by the book everyone's talking about this week, "Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House":
Kellyanne Conway... was surprised that New York and Trump Tower were suddenly stricken from his schedule. Conway thought that the president, in addition to being aware of the hostility in New York, was making a conscious effort to be “part of this great house.” (But, acknowledging the difficulties inherent in his change of circumstances and of adapting to presidential lifestyle, she added, “How often will he go to Camp David?”—the Spartan, woodsy presidential retreat in Catoctin Mountain Park in Maryland—“How ’bout never.”)In case you're wondering how my reading of "Fire and Fury" is coming along, let me tell you it's not. This is a 300-page book that goes over the story of Trump, which I've been following and writing about each day. If I wanted to read a summary of all the complicated events — the Russians, repealing Obamacare, North Korea, etc. — I wouldn't pick this author. He's marshaling the evidence that Trump is a disaster. I could see doing a word search for "Bannon" and read whatever quotes turn up but Kindle seems to max out at about 100 hits, so this strategy for getting to the juicy bits fails at page 180.
I downloaded "Fire and Fury" yesterday morning, and you wouldn't believe — talk about low attention span — all the things I was reading while my inner critic nagged me to get on with the "Fire and Fury" project. I read half of a novel that was the basis of a movie I'd watched on TV the night before. I read the first page of another novel that Amazon thought I'd be interested in based on the fact that the word that was the title of the novel I was reading was in the title of this other book, from the 1940s, and when that old book quoted some lines from an epic poem the 19th century, I was locking into sentences like...
Fair was she and young; but, alas! before her extended,
Dreary and vast and silent, the desert of life, with its pathway
Marked by the graves of those who had sorrowed and suffered before her,
Passions long extinguished, and hopes long dead and abandoned,
As the emigrant’s way o’er the Western desert is marked by
Camp-fires long consumed, and bones that bleach in the sunshine.
Posts
90 comments:
Thanks for reading the book for us, as difficult as it is. I've decided against trying to read it, based upon reports and the Katy Tur tweet you already referenced. Wolff has such little credibility that I would be rating every single sentence on a believability scale, such as the green highlighted passage in the tweet.
Would I enjoy a salacious book on Hillary Clinton? Yes, I would. But it can't be the Edward Klein book. He, too, has lost enough credibility to undermine any belief in any particular passage.
I'm sure those that believe the gorilla channel tweet will not have a problem believing every passage in the Wolff book.
As for Camp David, Trump probably dislikes it still, but it much more convenient for meetings with members of Congress than say, Trump towers. Getting a group anywhere further away would require a lot more logistics and time. Obama was also not fond of Camp David. Maybe it's like all those camps that kids use to go to as kids that have since closed.
We’re relying on you Althouse to read F&F. Otherwise the likes of Katy Tur control the narrative.
... This is a 300-page book that goes over the story of Trump, which I've been following and writing about each day. If I wanted to read a summary of all the complicated events — the Russians, repealing Obamacare, North Korea, etc. — I wouldn't pick this author. He's marshaling the evidence that Trump is a disaster...
Is it that you are not interested in the evidence that Trump is a disaster? Or that you have examined the evidence, and found it unconvincing?
As I read your blog daily, it seems to me very much the former, since you do almost never take on any stories that are harshly critical of Trump.
And here is where I place my obligatory disclaimer that the editing of Althouse blog posts is a matter to be left entirely to Althouse and I am not telling her what to write. I am making an observation.
"Thanks for reading the book for us, as difficult as it is."
Yeah. Reading is hard.
"We’re relying on you Althouse to read F&F."
You really don't want to rely on me.
Other than to put up another post (and to be unreliable).
"Is it that you are not interested in the evidence that Trump is a disaster? Or that you have examined the evidence, and found it unconvincing?"
I am not interested in going back over the past, except reading a book by a very reliable author. I go forward into new stuff every day. I have covered the past, every single day of the Trump story. That is my method, reading news articles. Books don't fit the blogging method very well, but occasionally I blog a book that I am reading, e.g., Dylan's "Chronicles." It is a big exception to the normal approach, and there is no way Michael Wolff has shifted me into the alternate mode.
What may seem "pro-Trump" here is simply my resistance to hysteria and predisposition to see other people as human.
This is why you need a podcast. You just need to read a random paragraph (or play one from the audio book) and then riff for a couple minutes, then another paragrapgh, riff, interupt yourself to tell us about Blue Apron, another paragraph and sign off at the 30 minute mark.
Is Camp David really that rustic? Maybe they need some activities like horseback riding, badminton or canoeing. Or I would enjoy seeing the video of them all coming together and putting on a play in the cafeteria
Economic indicators are up; the stock market is up; Isis is being defeated; north and south korea are talking to each other. If this is what a Trump disaster looks like imagine what things will be like when he gets the hang of this presidency gig.
It's shocking to see Bannon flame out like he did, riding a turd. Like Slim Pickens riding that bomb.
Reading Trump's comment regarding Camp David reminded me of our stay at Old faithful Inn. Mrs Dink and were doing our wild west driving tour - best vacation ever. No schedule, no firm plans - just go. We decided to visit Yellowstone. Due to a last minute cancellation, we were able to book a room at Old Faithful Inn. Place was gorgeous. The lobby was rustic beyond description. The rooms were a dump (I exaggerate). Not updated and cramped. But, but, but ..... the history (cough).
"The book" seems by all accounts to be nothing but pandering to an audience. A piece of fiction. The author has little credibility. Offers up early, that he knows wide swaths of his writtings are not supported by facts, but included them because, shutup.
We are now one year and counting into President Trump. It is impossible to cite any group of indicators and not conclude, that President Trump is very successful. I am reminded of the early primaries, when some wag made an observation the the future President didn't seem to understand tha voting delegates were what the pimaries were keeping score of. So he said 'oh, delegates? yea I can get delegates, and proceeded to run the table. President Trump doesn't know everything (who does) but fact show him to be a fast learner. This much success in 12 months, just imagine what the next 84 months will bring.
Inquisitive Chuck asked: "Is it that you are not interested in the evidence that Trump is a disaster? Or that you have examined the evidence, and found it unconvincing?"
Have you?
George Will and Bill Kristol have both stated, on the policy front, Trump is right on. However, they both would prefer Hillary as el presidente. in the vernacular, style over substance. Is that you position Chuck? Or do you disagree with Trump's policy positions, in addition to his style?
Is Camp David really that rustic?
The cabins and outbuildings do look like where kids go for summer camp. Carter liked it there. Reagan liked it. Why would Trump like it? It is perhaps deliberately informal but not a place to project power. I suppose making the folks on the other side of the negotiating table uncomfortable is a viable strategy.
Now the girls camping with Meredith in The Parent Trap (1988), there's an effective use of rustic.
"Resisting hysteria" and "seeing other people as human" could become the core tenets of a great spiritual revival in this frantic century.
Chuck said...
... This is a 300-page book that goes over the story of Trump, which I've been following and writing about each day. If I wanted to read a summary of all the complicated events — the Russians, repealing Obamacare, North Korea, etc. — I wouldn't pick this author. He's marshaling the evidence that Trump is a disaster...
Is it that you are not interested in the evidence that Trump is a disaster? ...
After one year, President Trump is the most successful conservative President of our lifetimes (Tank is 65). Your mental derangement seems to prevent you from observing reality. It is you who are not interested in the evidence that so far our President is doing a great conservative job. LLR my ass.
What may seem "pro-Trump" here is simply my resistance to hysteria and predisposition to see other people as human.
1/6/18, 6:14 AM
Without cultural ideas containing some degree of sexism about hysterical women I doubt you would have refined your exquisite resistance to hysteria many of us admire so much to the expert extent you have. Ought we then be grateful for sexism? The results are real and spectacular.
What Tank said.
The worst businessman, nay, the worst human being on Earth is doing a very good job at exposing professional politicians for the dolts they are.
[Camp David] lights a rustic fire under those he's compelled to meet with him there, so the hate-it-after-30-minutes quality suits his low-attention-span psyche.
Not to mention Camp David also has notoriously poor TV reception of the Gorilla Channel.
"while my inner critic nagged me to get on with the "Fire and Fury" project"
Give her a break, Meade!
Chuck,
In what parallel universe is Trump a disaster? What disastrous events have occurred so far that are due to his actions?
Every quote attributed to Trump should be greeted with skepticism. A lot of skepticism. The media abandoned journalistic ethics in pursuit of a metanarrative, i.e. Trump is bad. Doesn't mean it is all BS, but a lot of it is.
The Evangeline poems by Longfellow are his best IMHO
I call the genre "I Hate the President." The books are always boring.
"Humperdink said...
What Tank said."
Yeah, what Tank said. Plus an insufferable tool.
He’s marshaling the evidence that Trump is a disaster.
I think that in this one case “muster” works better than “marshal” because while he gets all of the “evidence” in one place, he never really seems to get it marching. “Muster” sort of conveys the limp dickedness of the whole thing.
George Will and Bill Kristol have both stated, on the policy front, Trump is right on. However, they both would prefer Hillary as el presidente. in the vernacular, style over substance. Is that you position Chuck? Or do you disagree with Trump's policy positions, in addition to his style?
You can’t find much writing from me, disagreeing with any Republican policy and Trump has indeed done some Republican policy. And nowhere in this blog’s commenting pages will you read me complaining about good Republican policy. I did vote for Trump, after all. But I think that any of the other primary candidates — especially a Kasich or a Rubio — would have gotten much more good policy done by now. (With more, and even better, federal judicial nominations.)
I don’t typically write stuff supporting Obamacare, for instance. What I write is that in the campaign, Trump promised that he’d get everybody in a room, and he’d make deals, and come up with something really great, that covered everybody, with lower premiums and lower deductibles, with better care, and that everybody would be covered. Then he discovered, as if nobody knew, that healthcare reform was, like, really hard.
Is it that you are not interested in the evidence that Trump is a disaster?
Other than your political prognostications for the fate of the Republican Party, which history has shown to be flawed, Chuck, what is it that Trump has done that can be said to be a “disaster” from the point of view of conservatives, ahem, like yourself.
As the emigrant’s way o’er the Western desert is marked by
Camp-fires long consumed, and bones that bleach in the sunshine.
This reminds me of something...
http://www.bfplumbingbayarea.com/images/Oregon-Trail.png
If not Ann, who? If not now, when?
I guess it might be fair to conclude that removing the individual mandate is probably a death sentence for health plans that are forced to take on subscribers at any time, since people being what they are, people can just sign up for health insurance from the waiting room of the hospital, and cancel it the day they leave.
My personal opinion though is that single-payer is inevitable ever since Obama began what he after all said, was a twenty year process, of destroying our current health care payment system by knocking out one of its foundational pillars, personal responsibility. That’s an action that can’t be taken back. Or at least that’s the conventional wisdom. So I am with Neitzche on this one, “When something is leaning, it should be pushed!” You seem to think that saving the old system was somehow possible. I would like to hear how.
The hero who gets single-payer done will be the one who recognizes that it will take the kind of massive and steady revenue that only a regressive tax like a VAT will produce. Just my two cents, but the only way even that works out long terms is if there were some kind of Constitutional amendment that eliminated government employee unions, since, if you think that private insurance is expensive, wait until all of the non-union employees there are replaced by government workers with their high salaries and lottery winner style pensions.
Some books are just meant to be sold, not meant to be read.
Whoa, a Camp David thread to single payer thread in 36 posts? Chuck is really on his game when he gets up early...
Obama began what he after all said, was a twenty year process, of destroying our current health care payment system by knocking out one of its foundational pillars, personal responsibility.
Obama destroyed the existing system, which Teddy Kennedy also hated and called "A cottage industry."
That was largely true of primary care. In the 1960s, when Kennedy said that, most GPs and general internists were in solo practice or small groups of similar specialties. Obamacare empowered the hospitals to buy up the "undercapitalized small businesses," in Hillary's words and assemble an "industrial type medicine" which is impersonal, expensive and has a heart of stone.
Removing the mandate may allow of flowering of small practices again that do cash practice and have low overhead.
In Tucson, I see an "Urgent Cars" on practically every corner. My son's family use an "Urgent Care" as their family physician .
Most of us know that leftists are masters of projection.
After Bill Clinton was found to have lied to a Federal Court judge, under oath, all we heard was what a liar George W. Bush was. W was an honorable man, mediocre-to-poor POTUS, and certainly not a liar.
Chuck's life is likely a disaster, so he projects that onto Trump who is demonstrably very successful.
Humperdink said: "George Will and Bill Kristol have both stated, on the policy front, Trump is right on. However, they both would prefer Hillary as el presidente. in the vernacular, style over substance. Is that you position Chuck? Or do you disagree with Trump's policy positions, in addition to his style?"
Chuck responded: "I don’t typically write stuff supporting Obamacare, for instance. What I write is that in the campaign, Trump promised that he’d get everybody in a room, and he’d make deals, and come up with something really great, that covered everybody, with lower premiums and lower deductibles, with better care, and that everybody would be covered."
I comment regarding Trump's policies and his policy achievements. LLR responds with what Trump hasn't accomplished. That's our guy!!!!!!
You could sum up all of LLR's responses in two words: "Yeah, but...."
If he doesn't like it despite all that rusticity then that's because he's a pansy boy who never roughed it and can't stand being anywhere that isn't all paved clean with butlers everywhere to wait on him 24/7 instead of having to catch his own food.
And yet, this is the mama's boy who appeals precisely to the backwoods Republicrazy crowd that's stockpiling canned goods and training outdoors for the apocalypse. Weird. But who said the right wing ever made sense, then.
Why did you download that book? You’ll only encourage him.
They had better talk about burying/hardening our infrastructure.
Obamacare empowered the hospitals to buy up the "undercapitalized small businesses," in Hillary's words and assemble an "industrial type medicine" which is impersonal, expensive and has a heart of stone.
Jesus Christ. The HMOs had already started that trend decades before. Get your history straight. Physician-historian, heal thy historical ignorance of medicine's development.
Removing the mandate may allow of flowering of small practices again that do cash practice and have low overhead.
Another nonsense hope of the same sort that every wacky Republican scheme is predicated on. Tax cuts lower debt, too!
In Tucson, I see an "Urgent Cars" on practically every corner. My son's family use an "Urgent Care" as their family physician.
We'll continue to see that so long as the debt-spending Republicans continue to keep EMTALA intact while slashing every funding device that makes a lick of sense. Emergency rooms are appropriate primary care, so far as the idiotic Republicans are concerned, and the health industry will obviously have to continue coping by marketing the same urgent care that the Republicrazies have siphoned off every walk-in to towards clinics that don't eat up the expense operating budgets taken up by the proper emergency rooms that your lot have directed them to.
Were you ever responsible for a budget in your life? I can see why you fear socialized medicine. I doubt you've ever worked anywhere where someone else wasn't responsible for accounting for every single purchase made - right down to the very last scalpel.
If he doesn't like it despite all that rusticity then that's because he's a pansy boy who never roughed it and can't stand being anywhere that isn't all paved clean with butlers everywhere to wait on him 24/7 instead of having to catch his own food.
Outside of that whole military school thing.
Removing the mandate may allow of flowering of small practices again that do cash practice and have low overhead.
Translation: Great for the doctors and horrible for the patients.
Low overhead in today's era of fleets of mid-level physician extenders and expensive tests for anyone with the tiniest prospect of suing you for not catching their rare illness is a non-starter. Have you even practiced medicine since 1960? Did all these basic observations just pass you by? Exactly how many decisions were being left to others? It's like you think money grows on trees - you must have stopped practicing during an era when it may as well have.
Average per capita healthcare expenses in America are somewhere north of 50% or more at least of what they are in every other industrialized nation - without a lick of superiority to show for it. Start there, genius. It's called over-utilized non-essential charges and practices. Apparently things you'd prefer not to do without. Stop screwing over the patients and think about them for a change.
News is something I don’t already know. I was told the contents of the Wolff book a thousand times before he even wrote it.
Ritmo is lecturing us about the history of medical economics.
Pardon me. I have something more important to do. Is McDonald's closed today ?
” You seem to think that saving the old system was somehow possible. I would like to hear how.
Basic cable with add ons.
Change Medicaid rules.
Revise Medicare.
I'll even individual mandate that between the ages of 19- p?? Must carry catastrophic insurance.
Get rid of some of the "free" stuff. Lower age of on parents insurance to 23.
Then there's the college scam that must be stopped.
That's for starters.
Outside of that whole military school thing.
Another shallow Republican who's easily impressed by his stereotype of how things work. Check this out:
"I do whine because I want to win and I'm not happy about not winning and I am a whiner and I keep whining and whining until I win,"
“When I look at myself in the first grade and I look at myself now, I’m basically the same,” the 70-year-old presumptive Republican nominee once told a biographer. “The temperament is not that different.”
There's your "leader." The one who stood out for what a failure he was at NYMA with his low achievement and character until daddy Fred Trump made another huge donation to it. And how many deferments did he get for going to actual war for a foot boo boo? A bone spur, was it?
Yet he hates POWs. People who got captured during the course of going to the actual war that he chickened out of. What a fucking loser you have for a leader.
"Is it that you are not interested in the evidence that Trump is a disaster?"
That is some funny shit, right there!
Pardon me. I have something more important to do.
Like getting someone else to run your business for you?
Is McDonald's closed today ?
I don't know. How many of the other physicians in your practice are there to help run it for you today?
Ritmo is lecturing us about the history of medical economics.
Why shouldn't I? There are some facts in there, after all. Better than your worthless half-baked opinions - based as they always are on half-truths and other bullshit. So of course you have no choice but to go ad hominem and just shoot the messenger instead. It's what you're used to. It's why they kept you far away from your operating expenses and budgets - just kept you as the manual laborer and gave you some new kids to apprentice to on that. You probably got through life by whining and condescending. In fact, I'm sure of it.
Not much different from your quadruple-bankrupt idol Don Trump. I'm sure after not long they kept him far away from the budget, also. Just gave him some fancy toys and helicopters to fly around in - to flatter his ego. As they gave you a shiny new bedpan or two.
It's how you'll spend your senility, too.
"But I think that any of the other primary candidates — especially a Kasich or a Rubio — would have gotten much more good policy done by now. (With more, and even better, federal judicial nominations.)"
This is some even funnier shit, right there!
Neither Kasich nor Rubio -- nor any of their cuck buddies -- will ever be president.
"Then he (Trump) discovered, as if nobody knew, that healthcare reform was, like, really hard."
No, Trump discovered that the cock sucking Congressional Republicans had been lying for years that they had "Repeal and Replace" bill ready to go. GOPe had lied to him along with the rest of America.
How Trump fared at school.
Kicked and punched til he made his bed. What a fucking pansy. What a mama's boy.
No, Trump discovered that the cock sucking Congressional Republicans had been lying for years that they had "Repeal and Replace" bill ready to go. GOPe had lied to him along with the rest of America.
Are you saying that Trump is opposed to lying?
Why does he do it so often, then?
"So of course you have no choice but to go ad hominem "
Says the troll who has had a bunch of comments deleted by the blog owner.
If you would make intelligent comments and avoid the nasty personal attacks, more people might interact with you.
You have serious mental issues. Not as bad as trumpit but bad enough.
You remind me of the leftists at Washington Monthly who got so infuriated that I did not support single payer that they went nuts.
The criticisms of Trump are many. Some are hilarious. Some are rhetorical. Some are are hateful. However, one of our resident cranks that posted the following criticism earlier in this thread: "Trump doesn't catch his own food".
Where to put that one? It's a mystery to me.
And then I think back to Obama. Did he catch his own food? Well, he was a connoisseur of dogs. So there's that.
The Toothless Revolutionary said...
What a mama's boy.
You want mama's boy, here is some whip's picture. You don't need to read the article.
LINK TEXT
Ritmo has glimmerings of intelligence but always gets into nasty ad hominem leftist baloney,
Yesterday, Trump was low class because he didn't like to be waited on by strangers, today he can't stand Camp David and not being surrounded by servants. Pretzel logic, HT rhardin.
Says the troll who has had a bunch of comments deleted by the blog owner.
A bunch?
I have thousands as many bunches more that were fine... never touched. When you take a chance like that, as I do, people sometimes get offended and object. So what? That's the nature of not being a coward when it comes to figuring out where people's love of the truth ends and their sensitivities begin. Not that you would know anything about that, Mr. It Can Only Be True if It Doesn't Offend. You sound like the PC police.
If you would make intelligent comments and avoid the nasty personal attacks, more people might interact with you.
My comments tend overwhelmingly toward the factual. You say "intelligent" as if it's an opinion - not an objective standard. Who says what's "intelligent" and what's not? You? You're impressed by any quote in mainstream publication. That's not intelligent; that's being a starfucker to the literati.
I'm kind and decent to anyone who respects not only what they perceive to be majority opinion on this minority opinion blog, but to everybody - and especially when they respect the facts first and foremost.
You have serious mental issues. Not as bad as trumpit but bad enough.
There you go. Right after lecturing on "nasty personal attacks." Hypocrisy, much? Oh that's right. With you it's hypocrisy, always. And I'm sure you're just sensitive enough to call that a "nasty personal attack" as if you need a softer standard than what you subject others to.
You remind me of the leftists at Washington Monthly who got so infuriated that I did not support single payer that they went nuts.
You remind me of someone who got beat too much as a kid and who always needs to push around his sense of authority. That's bad enough, but the real kicker is that you confuse intelligent conversation with whatever gives you the trappings of glitz and glamour that you get when feeling that you're emulating the literati. Don't kid anyone, Michael. You're way too elitist to just appreciate a decent conversation. Come on. You know it.
Ritmo: "I have thousands (of comments) .....
Don't we know it. Also known as thread killers.
Ritmo is always personal and that is why you get into arguments with anyone who tries to engage with you.
This is kind of a little salon on the internet and some of us enjoy discussions.
Then you, and to some degree Inga, come in and throw poo.
Your constant allegations of "elitist" and nasty personal comments about my personal life and childhood are what suggest that you are envious.
Envy leads to lapses of judgement. Which you display every day you show up.
Ritmo has a good handle on Doc Mike. But, I’d also add some note re his windmill self-delusion. That’s what makes many of his comments so funny.
Ok, Michael K. Here's why you're wrong. (Also known as FACTS):
Ritmo is always personal and that is why you get into arguments with anyone who tries to engage with you.
I'm not "always" personal, but I don't accept bullshit. And if you want to say something untrue, of course I'll argue it. The blog's owned by a law professor. You feign some really silly delicateness there to object to "arguments." If you want groupthink or blind agreement, don't you think you could find someplace else to go? And let's pretend you're never personal. You're always personal. What proportion of your comments to me are ad hom digs at service workers, as if I even were one? (Which I'm obviously not. But you're not creative enough to come up with anything else and obviously hate the working class).
This is kind of a little salon on the internet and some of us enjoy discussions.
Those posts are set aside for that purpose, Mr Just Leave Me Alone to My Front Porch! Lol.
Then you, and to some degree Inga, come in and throw poo.
Awww... there you go with your love-hate relationship to Inga. Poor you!
Your constant allegations of "elitist" and nasty personal comments about my personal life and childhood are what suggest that you are envious.
Your constant inability to examine how easily seduced you are by appearances, niceties and luxuries are what give away your narcissism and elitism. Except in an extremely clumsy way. No narcissist or elitist is daft enough to wave away offense at the allegation, unless of course they grew up cared for by a nursemaid and are those things.
Envy leads to lapses of judgement. Which you display every day you show up.
Blah blah blah. Address the facts. It you object to personalizing then stop doing it. Those are grounds on which you'll get beat pretty badly, given how much you give away about yourself. (Now watch you go and cry in response. So predictable. Bully, then cry. It's the Michael K Pattern. Very boring).
FullMoon said...
(Something that someone else said. Nothing that he himself was able to come up with.)
I sense some parrot memes in the works.
Why is it that Trump's greatest lovers and followers keep objecting to everything on the grounds of their hurt feelings and insufficient regard for being gentle and kind? Did their leader who's setting the tone in this country ever exemplify those things? Or just decency in general? Now all of a sudden they think kindness is a virtue? Since when?
Oh, but Desperate Don does think that no one's nice enough to him personally, so I guess that's where they get it. These are the cry-bullies now in charge. You must appreciate their nastiness but when you do it to them, look out! That's when the tears never end. Cry cry cry!
It's a little sad to see Ritmo show up and destroy the thread but I do have some yard work to do.
anti-de Sitter space said...
Ritmo has a good handle on Doc Mike.
Leftists stick together in their delusions.
Where's Inga ? She should, be along soon to fling a little poo.
Also, not that it matters, but no one on Planet Earth "envies" a semi-retired cardiologist in Tucson with a porn-star mustache and sunglasses.
People envy athletes. They envy richly rewarded innovators. (Steve Jobs or even Bill Gates - an intelligent, socially interested mega-philanthropist). They envy rock stars. Hollywood actors.
These are people who through talent or honesty or sufficient skill achieve renown and an actually fun, actually different, actually rarified lifestyle.
Hell, they might even envy someone with the honesty or personal integrity to say what they mean - No. Matter. What. Anyone. Else. Thinks.
But they don't envy a 70-year old semi-retired egomaniacal cardiologist in Tucson. No way in hell.
Michael - try becoming 40 years younger, a major philanthropist, and gaining the attention of starlets. Then I might envy you. Until then however just remember that you have none of those things.
Aging narcissists are the saddest of all. Once Desperate Donny starts becoming infirm, you'll see the effect in him also. But he'll hide it very well. He's a really crusty one, that.
Leftists stick together in their delusions.
As do right-wingers. Except when reality finally sets in, their delusions are shattered, and then they turn into the circular firing squad we all know so well. Witness the latest pathetic Donny and Stevie drama episode as an example.
Ritmo, that’s #4 of the rules for reactionaries.
So is that an endorsement of that language and attitude Mr. 10:53 or a condemnation of it?
Poor little schizophrenic right-wingers. Don't even know what they're for or against any more. Be nice one minute, be an asshole the next. What dramatic little whirlwinds these children are.
I forgot. Narcissists don't need the attention of starlets. They're in love with themselves, anyway. They just pretend they're getting that attention, instead. (Cue Access Hollywood tape).
But Me First, Mike! doesn't even have that.
He's just got his porn-stache and his semi-retirement to distinguish himself. (Although a number of commenters already have the latter, anyway. Most people eventually do).
Remind me exactly what it is about you that I'm supposed to envy, Me First! Mike. How is there any hope that our interaction will become more civil unless you can do that? Oh no!
SAD!
Ritmo Brasileiro said...
It's good to know that the stupidest threads are just ripe for the threadjacking. I'll be sure to leave a trail of turds on every one of the brain droppings here that suit my fancy. Getting you shit-eaters to complain about the taste after opening your mouths wide and saying "Ahhhh..." to every bad idea under the sun is very satisfying, I must admit.
10/16/10, 10:28 AM
It's going to 11!
Lololol
Winning!
Wow there, Mr. 11:09 AM. That's what, like three comments already that you ripped off from others to re-post, as if you don't know what to make of them?
Did you have any thoughts of your own, on this matter?
Seeing Red said...
It's going to 11!
Lololol
Winning!
Don't blame me, I just ring the bell, that's all.
Is Camp David really that rustic?
I'm sure the hills outside of Thurmont, MD were a crisp & vigorous 8 degrees F this morning when Trump & the Senators arrived.
I bet they all wished Trump had picked Mar-A-Lago today.
You use Camp David for such retreats because it is easy access for Congresscritters from D.C.- much easier than any Trump resort.
Some people like woodsy getaways and some don't. I like them, but I don't judge those who don't- I do get it.
Boy, the lefties are really carrying on today !
Maybe I can find more to do in the yard.
You poor dopes.
Camp David is probably many things to many people.
I like threads, like this one, that only have 60 comments to read.
Currently there are 86 comments posted.
They tend to be short if they don't attract the attention of the angry lefties.
Maybe one of our resident leftists could remind me how many times President Boyfriend spent the weekend working on policy with members of Congress. Of either party.
He didn't. It was beneath him.
One of the greatest untold stories of the Obama years is how little interaction he had with Congress ... be it on Capital Hill, hosting them at the White House or at Camp David.
It's no secret neither party could stand him. But you sure wouldn't know that by reading WaPo or the NYT.
ttr saves a lot of time getting thru the comments. Dont have to read any of them.
Post a Comment