June 2, 2019

At the Sunday Night Café...

... here's a table for you. Scribble away.

ADDED: Possible topic: Trump's hat hair.

91 comments:

Kathryn51 said...

My favorite "follow" on Twitter is now KerriKupecDOJ. She's SPOX (that's spokesperson for those like me who are still trying to learn the lingo) for Bill Barr.

Every post makes me think "Bad Ass Bill Barr".

My favorite is (hope I do this correctly): Bad Ass AG Barr

And this is another favorite. First AG to visit roadless Alaska villages "I believe, as Attorney General, my job, my responsibility, is to make sure the justice system works for all Americans, regardless of where they live.”

He's my hero.

Birkel said...

I will imagine those links were awesome.

Chuck said...

Trump says he didn’t call the Duchess of Sussex “nasty,” and claims it was a fake news story for which he is owed an apology.

While audio of the interview proves he said it.

Liar? That’s the easiest categorization.

Crazy? Sociopathic? Delusional? You could take your pick of any number of pathologies. There are many things that could be said about Trump’s interview with The Sun. “Fake” is one thing that cannot be said about it.

mandrewa said...

This is a great video:

Top 20 Country GDP (PPP) History & Projection (1800-2040)

And I think it raises some issues that I think people haven't caught up with yet. Certainly I didn't realize this.

First of all, China is now ahead of the United States in GDP (PPP).

What does that mean? It means that China now has more material wealth than the United States. The video is a comparison of the total material wealth of different countries through time. It doesn't not include money. We are talking about things, and the capacity to make things, not money.

I will follow up with more explanation in the next comment.

Ingachuck'stoothlessARM said...

Hill's IT guy who deleted her emails--
https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-09-19/paul-combetta-computer-specialist-who-deleted-hillary-clinton-emails-may-have-asked-reddit-for-tips

... did his house get raided last nite in Denver?

narciso said...

No he moved to Rhode island and his house I'd s a two story one. You don't get arrested much less perpwalked If you're a Clinton minion, you get immunized

narciso said...

So some blue collar worker who creates a meme, gets burnt by a criminal hacker and David french insists there might be something amiss here, maybe.

Lewis Wetzel said...

According to the world bank, US GDP is @19 trillion, Chinese GDP @ 12 trillion.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ny.gdp.mktp.cd?view=map

Bay Area Guy said...

I don't like the new hairdo, Mr. President!

Change it back, now!

FullMoon said...

What a great day. Both Chuck and Inga have broken their silence after the heartbreak of the Mueller report. Welcome back ! And, for the occassional reader or newby, here is Chuck's TLDR.

Chuck said...

"I am afraid you are mistaking me for someone who has an interest in fair treatment of Donald Trump. I'm not your guy. I am interested in smearing him, hurting him and prejudicing people against him."

3/4/16, 4:46 PM

walter said...

Blogger Kathryn51,
Thank you for posting active links

Narayanan said...

Saw Long Shot today.

Didn't realize movie title double entendre.

mandrewa said...

PPP or "purchasing power parity" is a metric to separate the exchange rate of currencies from what a given amount of money will buy in different countries.

Thus a thousand US dollars will buy a lot less in the United States than it will in China.

So if you're comparing PPP for different countries, you would take the average salary in a country and ask much material wealth this average salary buys in that country. So what we are comparing is not the salaries (via exchange rate) but the material wealth the salaries buy. So this is a metric that tries to compare real income.

Now GDP (PPP) is where once you've calculated the PPP for a country, then you take that number and multiply it by the number of people in the country. So GDP (PPP) is a measure of the total wealth of a country.

So in real terms China now has more wealth than the United States. This is a dramatic change. For most of us when we were young, the United States had far more wealth than China. It is still true that the average person in the United States is wealthier than the average person in China. But China has now caught up enough that it's total wealth is now greater.

This has far reaching implications. For instance in a war, China would be able to manufacture more war machines than the United States in a given unit of time.

Lewis Wetzel said...

God only knows where they came up with the data that Youtube video, Mandrews, but it's crap. Your first clue should have been that the growth rates for all appear linear over time for the last 160 years.

StephenFearby said...

'Told of her comments during his interview with the Sun, President Trump said it was the first time he had heard them.

LA-born Meghan, 37, accused him of being “misogynistic” and “divisive” during his 2016 presidential campaign. The ex-"Suits" actress also pledged to vote for his rival Hillary Clinton.

Told of Meghan’s barbs by The Sun, Trump insisted it was the first time he’d heard them. He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.”

When told Meghan had threatened to leave for Canada if he won in 2016, he countered: “A lot of people are moving here (to the US).”'

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/president-trump-shocked-meghan-markle-nasty-comments-uk-visit

'Told of her comments during his interview with the Sun, President Trump said it was the first time he had heard them.

"I didn't know that. What can I say? I didn't know that she was nasty," he said.

He went on to say that he was glad she had joined the royal family and he believed she would make a "very good" princess.

"It is nice, and I am sure she will do excellently," he said.'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48491602

One can easily infer from this that Trump meant Meghan Markle's 2016 COMMENTS about him were nasty, instead of her being a nasty PERSON now. Particularly because he believes she would make a "very good" princess.

A very good princess is not a nasty princess.

mandrewa said...

Lewis Wetzel, GDP and GDP (PPP) are two different things.

Narayanan said...

Trump should Grow out the back to make ponytail >>> Steven Seagal to consult and advise

Lewis Wetzel said...

Mandrewa, if China was in a war with the US, it's PPP would change dramatically, since they could no longer export consumer goods to the US. That's just one of the problems with using PPP as the measure of the strength of an economy. As you express it, it is a proxy for industrial output.

Narayanan said...

Mandrewa:
explain with example please.
I don't get your point.

mandrewa said...

Lewis, one way to approach this would be to explore where these numbers come from.

And it's possible I would find myself aghast, as it might turn out to be made up stuff. There is a lot of that kind of stuff going around these days.

But once I got over my initial disbelief and thought about it more I'm not so sure this is necessarily wrong. I have no way of checking the data absent a very prolonged effort on my part. But I can conceive that this might be true.

PPP is in and of itself, partly subjective. It has to be because one is comparing different things and assigning relative values. For instance, I would imagine that the PPP used in the video is not putting a lot of weight on the values of a houses as this would be difficult to compare across countries but instead it's probably comparing baskets of ordinary goods.

Narayanan said...

if China was in a war with the US, it's PPP would change dramatically, since they could no longer export consumer goods to the US.

Did you mean to say GDP (PPP)?

What happens to USA GDP (PPP)?

Lewis Wetzel said...

PPP only works within a nation, not in nation vs nation comparisons.
Chinese GDP (per the IMF) is more than 25% behind the US. Per person GDP in China is about 1/6 the US. They are very inefficient at producing wealth, e.g. it takes many more chinese man hours (I almost wrote chinaman/hours!) to produce a dollar of value than it takes American man hours to produce a dollar of value.

eddie willers said...

I like his hair that way.

Makes him look younger to me.

traditionalguy said...

Golf on a hot southern June day makes one sweat profusely. The last 4 holes are a stress test of your body. Without beer, power-aide is a necessity. But the hat holds heat in, and is only worn for the visor. So taking it off, Trump looked like a drowned rat in need of prayer and potassium. Christians are praying for our President fervently every dam day.



mandrewa said...

China has about 4 times the population of the United States. Thus if we take the total material wealth of China (the material wealth of the government plus the collective material wealth of all the corporations plus the collective material wealth of all the individuals in China) and divide that by the number of people, then if that assigned material wealth per person is more than one-fourth of the comparable number for a US citizen, then China has more stuff.

Now GDP (PPP) is trying to measure the total collective material wealth. That is things. But obviously we can guess there is some kind of correlation between the total wealth and the capacity to make things.

narciso said...

Then we have this:

https://www.scribd.com/document/412221410/Bank-of-Jinzho-Auditor-Change

narciso said...

Wait that wasnt supposed to happen:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-signals-it-is-willing-to-return-to-trade-talks-with-u-s-11559467875?fbclid=IwAR0F9SnfzktlEUspawGqghUxHF0B0Khg6sdQxAfo_-HsTI0m_BfZVKZQD8U

Lewis Wetzel said...

Did you mean to say GDP (PPP)?
What happens to USA GDP (PPP)?

I don't know but it is not appropriate to compare nations on the basis of GDP (PPP) unless you are looking for a place to retire. GDP PPP is not a useful measure between nations, unless you are doing marketing.

narciso said...

They've turned 419s into a art:
https://apelbaum.wordpress.com/2019/06/02/military-romantic-scams-the-theory-and-practice/

narciso said...

It's about time:

https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/02/daily-beast-backlash-doxxing-black-forklift-operator/?fbclid=IwAR3EuYoede1n980i7Ak_suoeUzlPdZV9MrupfWguo6RHFU2VSTLk_b-wEXg

Bay Area Guy said...

Foxnews is showing a very good piece on D-Day 1944. Great footage, great interviewers with some of the old Rangers and paratroopers.

Bona Fide heroes.

Lewis Wetzel said...

"Now GDP (PPP) is trying to measure the total collective material wealth."
Only within a nation. This should be elementary. To do otherwise would be similar to claiming that average Alabamian is wealthier than the average resident of MYC because he has a bigger house and pays less for groceries.

mandrewa said...

Narayanan, I'm not talking about GDP, I'm talking about GDP (PPP).

But that raises a question. Why is the GDP different from the GDP (PPP)?

Part of the reason is that the dollar is a store of value across the world, while the yuan is not.

Wealthy people, and governments, and corporations, need a place to store their wealth. The dollar is readily convertible, and in particular it can be converted into assets in the United States. This isn't true for China. If you are Chinese you can use yuan to buy assets in China, but if you are not Chinese then there are only a few things that a foreigner can buy with yuan.

The second reason, perhaps more important, is that since the United States has such an open economy, other governments, like especially China, can deliberately and intentionally depress the value of their currency with respect to the dollar. This is not an easy thing to do. It comes at a major cost. Basically the government cuts the income of the average Chinese citizen in half, or something like that -- it's a big percentage -- to depress their currency with respect to the dollar.

walter said...

I don't know how US relations with GB will survive Chuck's hot take of the minute.

narciso said...

They rattle off non existent white papers:

https://www.businessinsider.com/china-says-us-cant-use-pressure-to-force-trade-deal-2019-6

mandrewa said...

Lewis, the whole purpose of PPP is to compare between different regions. There is no other purpose for this metric than that.

And of course we can use it to compare the real incomes of people in Alabama to people in New York. Since some goods are cheaper in Alabama than New York, then the people in Alabama are a wealthier in real terms than the salaries would indicate.

The biggest difference is of course with houses. A million dollars buy you nothing in New York and a very good house in Alabama.

And of course we can use PPP (which as I've already said, is somewhat subjective) to compare wealth across countries. Say between Mexico and the United States, or China and the United States.

narciso said...

Well that's awkward:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/446537-assange-wont-be-charged-in-cia-leak-report%3famp

Francisco D said...

Crazy? Sociopathic? Delusional? You could take your pick of any number of pathologies.

Chuckles,

Which of the above does your rehab counselor diagnose you with?

My bet is on sociopathic AKA Antisocial Personality Disorder.

It's good that you are getting help.

walter said...

Who's your favorite Dem candidate Chuck?

mockturtle said...

I like his hair that way.

Makes him look younger to me.


Makes him look like Gordon Gecko.

narciso said...

Heck he was probably a fan of suits, Harvey spector is a little like trump, in the way he skates on the edge

Lewis Wetzel said...

Blogger mandrewa said...
Lewis, the whole purpose of PPP is to compare between different regions. There is no other purpose for this metric than that.

Not regions, countries. Nations. GDP (PPP) is not dollars, if it was the Chinese would exchange it for dollars. GDP (PPP) is not a measure of wealth. Dollars are.

narciso said...

An interesting theory:

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/06/01/sidney-powell-discusses-doj-in-the-lawfare-era-guilty-until-proven-innocent/?fbclid=IwAR2sxfK4vxKZ69uk9T_9Mqq2pF1WJUYZSSykweCR28xT74mxVY0bTNkpW1w#more-164473

Michael K said...

Crazy? Sociopathic? Delusional? You could take your pick of any number of pathologies.

How about you, Chuck., What are you this week?

narciso said...

Sidney Powell is the one who took weissman to court on the nuking of Arthur Anderson and the course reversed 9-0, didnt save Anderson's employees they got neutron bombed

StephenFearby said...

Two useful RCP/RCI Picks:

Attorney General Barr’s Remarkable CBS News Interview
It would be impossible to improve on the excellence of his remarks.
by GEORGE PARRY

"...So, after trying to decode and make sense of Mueller’s tank car of quasi-legal bilge, it came as an intense pleasure and relief to watch Attorney General William Barr’s interview with Jan Crawford on CBS This Morning. Barr’s answers to all questions were crisp, crystal clear, logical, thoughtful, and well-founded in the principles of American law. His sober demeanor, obvious intelligence, and utter lack of conceit or pretense gave weight to his remarks and made manifest that he is the right person to meet the crisis of police-state lawlessness that has pervaded and corrupted the federal law enforcement and intelligence communities."

https://spectator.org/attorney-general-barrs-remarkable-cbs-news-interview/


Mueller must testify publicly to answer three critical questions
BY JONATHAN TURLEY

"...Mueller, however, is an experienced litigator who knows not to ask a question when you do not know the answer or when you know the answer and do not want to hear it. His position is even more curious, given his lack of action after Barr and Rosenstein did precisely what he said could not be done under Justice Department policies. If Mueller believed such conclusions are impermissible, why did he not submit the matter to the Justice Department inspector general?

His press conference captured his report perfectly. It was an effort to allude to possible crimes without, in fairness to the accused, clearly and specifically stating those crimes. Mueller knew that was incrimination by omission. By emphasizing he could not clear Trump of criminality, Mueller knew the press would interpret that as a virtual indictment.

What is concerning is not that each of his three decisions clearly would undermine Trump or Barr but that his decisions ran against the grain for a special counsel. The law favored the other path in each instance. Thus, to use Mueller’s own construction, if we could rule out a political motive, we would have done so. This is why Mueller must testify and must do so publicly."

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/446457-mueller-must-testify-publicly-to-answer-three-critical-questions

readering said...

I think this new hair style is an improvement but it reminds me of LBJ's hair style in retirement after '68.

gadfly said...

narciso said...
"An interesting theory"

I don't know who Sidney Powell is but he is chock full of bullshit in justifying the "deep state" conspiracy linking every DOJ employee that Trump had fired because they were getting too close to his criminal behavior. Trump imagination and the Last Refuge for Trump blog - now there is the source of a real conspiracy.

I am thinking that Don Henley has this thing figured out:

Then the chilly winds blew down across the desert,
Through the canyons of the coast to the Malibu
Where the pretty people play hungry for power
To light their neon way and give them things to do


Some rich man came and raped the land, nobody caught 'em,
Put up a bunch of ugly boxes and, Jesus, people bought 'em

And they called it paradise, the place to be,
They watched the hazy sun sinking in the sea

You can leave it all behind and sail to Lahaina
Just like the missionaries did so many years ago
They even brought a neon sign 'Jesus is Coming',
Brought the white man's burden down, brought the white man's reign


Who will provide the grand design, what is yours and what is mine?
'Cause there is no more new frontier, we have got to make it here
We satisfy our endless needs and justify our bloody deeds
In the name of destiny and in the name of God


And you can see them there on Sunday morning
Stand up and sing about what it's like up there
They called it paradise, I don't know why
You call some place paradise, kiss it goodbye

Fen said...

Chuck: While audio of the interview proves he said it.

When making such a claim, it's customary to post a link to the audio which supports your claim, even better to give a courteous "it begins at 3:32" or somesuch so someone doesn't have to scan an hour long audio.

I can't help but notice you didn't do any of that. Just another unsupported assertion from someone who admitted they have no intention of representing Trump fairly.


Is it because you are lying? Or because you are taking a reporter's word that the audio exists?

Post the audio.

(although it's amusing that THIS is the Trump-Hitler Hill you've chosen to die on tonight)

Fen said...

One can easily infer from this that Trump meant Meghan Markle's 2016 COMMENTS about him were nasty, instead of her being a nasty PERSON now. Particularly because he believes she would make a "very good" princess.

Ah, so Chuck lying about Trump yet again. Gosh golly.

No wonder he refused to link to a source to support his latest smear.

readering said...

Folks here don't know about google?

Clyde said...

Good morning! It’s the 3rd of June. Most songs don’t have a date in them, but there are two different hit songs that take place on the 3rd of June. Can you name them? One was from 1967 and one was from 1977.

Nobody said...

I don't know who Sidney Powell is but he is chock full of bullshit ...

That’s a spit take comment coming from you gadfly. For a few days I checked out your links just in case you had something, and every one I checked, every one, was bullshit on stilts.

Nobody said...

She sounds nasty to me. I don’t know how much shit Trump is supposed to take lying down.

Nobody said...

I read that the Rocket Man opening was disappointing. I wonder if it is because of his comments about deplorables in the UK. I know that I suddenly lost interest in the movie, and I have an Elton John songbook on my piano and have loved listening to him since the ‘70s.

Nobody said...

Elton John is free to live as a cosmopolitan European, as Englishmen always have been. Why does he want to force other Englishmen to live the same way he does? Seems kind of bigoted.

Chuck said...

Audio, of Donald Trump saying "What can I say? I didn't know she [the Duchess of Sussex] was nasty." As recorded by the Murdoch-mainstay newspaper, The Sun, in an exclusive interview with Trump that was no doubt arranged because of the sympathetic relationship between Murdoch and Trump.

rehajm said...

Every student who has taken Ec10 or equivalent knows the fun way to explore PPP is the Big Mac Index.

Okay maybe fun is a relative term when applied to economics.

Chuck said...

Fen said...
Chuck: "While audio of the interview proves he said it."

When making such a claim, it's customary to post a link to the audio which supports your claim, even better to give a courteous "it begins at 3:32" or somesuch so someone doesn't have to scan an hour long audio.

I can't help but notice you didn't do any of that. Just another unsupported assertion from someone who admitted they have no intention of representing Trump fairly.


Is it because you are lying? Or because you are taking a reporter's word that the audio exists?

Post the audio.

(although it's amusing that THIS is the Trump-Hitler Hill you've chosen to die on tonight)


So I just posted the link to the audio. You could have easily looked it up yourself. But you didn't. And instead you alleged that I had gotten it wrong and lied about it. But I was right and the audio proves it.

So now the point I want to make is what a deplorable piece of shit you are.

Humperdink said...

gadfly said: "I don't know who Sidney Powell is but he is chock full of bullshit ..."

Well that's partly true, Sydney is a female.

Chuck said...

StephenFearby said...
'Told of her comments during his interview with the Sun, President Trump said it was the first time he had heard them.

LA-born Meghan, 37, accused him of being “misogynistic” and “divisive” during his 2016 presidential campaign. The ex-"Suits" actress also pledged to vote for his rival Hillary Clinton.

Told of Meghan’s barbs by The Sun, Trump insisted it was the first time he’d heard them. He said: “I didn’t know that. What can I say? I didn’t know that she was nasty.”

When told Meghan had threatened to leave for Canada if he won in 2016, he countered: “A lot of people are moving here (to the US).”'

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/president-trump-shocked-meghan-markle-nasty-comments-uk-visit

'Told of her comments during his interview with the Sun, President Trump said it was the first time he had heard them.

"I didn't know that. What can I say? I didn't know that she was nasty," he said.

He went on to say that he was glad she had joined the royal family and he believed she would make a "very good" princess.

"It is nice, and I am sure she will do excellently," he said.'

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48491602

One can easily infer from this that Trump meant Meghan Markle's 2016 COMMENTS about him were nasty, instead of her being a nasty PERSON now. Particularly because he believes she would make a "very good" princess.

A very good princess is not a nasty princess.


So as usual, Trump ends up blaming others, or a hostile press, for his own bumbling inarticulate verbal messes.

Yes, Trump really did call the Duchess "nasty." He did it, and it was recorded. It wasn't "fake." Maybe, in order to allow Trump to bail out of this little disaster of his own making, a much longer, grander, better-composed statement might make it a bit less bad. We see StephenFearby and other Trump apologists attempting to do just that.

But my original point stands. It was not fake news. It was never fake news. Trump really said it. And Trump's apparent denial that he said it at all is nothing less than sociopathic.

And let's recall that even Meghan Markle's original anti-Trump comments were borne out of this same sort of thing. That is, presidential candidate Donald Trump's own earlier bloviations about all manner of divisive and misogynistic things.

Rusty said...

Why is Chuck here?

Birkel said...

RE: PPP v GDP

All of the numbers out of China are nonsense.
The best way to estimate GDP is to look at satellite images of a country at night.
The most famous example is the complete blackout of North Korea except a pinpoint of light around the capital.

Compare the US to China.
It's not close.

And the evidence is there for everybody to see with their own lying eyes.

Kevin said...

So as usual, Trump ends up blaming others, or a hostile press, for his own bumbling inarticulate verbal messes.

So as usual, Chuck ends up posting here after he’s been asked to leave by Althouse.

Temujin said...

For those of you talking about Sidney Powell, he is a she. And she's quite brilliant. An Asheville-based former US Attorney. Her last book, 'Licensed to Lie' is the story of corrupt government officials and prosecutors (including one of those leading Mueller's team) created the Enron Task Force and ended up putting completely innocent people in jail, destroyed Arthur Andersen, a 100 year old Top 5 accounting firm, sending tens of thousands into unemployment in doing so. Their goal was their careers, not justice. Sidney Powell appealed these prosecutions and the Supreme Court overturned them all.

Read the book. Then comment on Sidney Powell.

mandrewa said...

Birkel, I agree that we lack reliable data. In fact I think that's one of the main problems with economics. Not just with China, but everywhere.

If I were working in economics I would be tempted to spend a lot of time on that: constructing robust metrics that are not subjective and that can resist manipulation. Without good numbers, it's not possible to falsify hypotheses. Or in other words it won't be science.

But acknowledging all of that, let me construct a scenario where the light emanating from China understates the wealth.

First off, I'm pretty sure GDP (PPP) is the sum of the wealth from households, corporations, and the government.

In the US approximately 70% of that wealth is in household hands, or maybe that percentage has fallen more recently.

In China, it's only 40% in household hands.

So if we assume that most of the light is produced by households, or it is correlated with household wealth and if we assume that the average wealth per person in China is about one quarter that of the average person in the US, then that would mean we should expect China to produce approximately one-half of the light of the US for same level of GDP (PPP) with all other things were equal. Of course all other things are not equal.

Another probable factor that may be more important is the relative wealth of the farmers. I suspect US farmers are far more wealthy than their Chinese counterparts. I suspect the disparity may be a really high multiple.

If a significant part of the light produced in the US is coming from the countryside and if the Chinese countryside is relatively impoverished, then that might explain much of the difference.

Humperdink said...

Trump, being asked a question as he boards the helicopter for England:

Question: "Would you being willing to meet with Sadiq Khan in London — the mayor?"

THE PRESIDENT: "No, I don’t think much of him. I think that he’s a — he’s the twin of de Blasio, except shorter."

I love this guy.

tcrosse said...

I've only seen Trump's new hair from the front. Does he have a DA in the back?

iowantwo said...

(although it's amusing that THIS is the Trump-Hitler Hill you've chosen to die on tonight)

This is his schtick. Take something out of the news that has less than a value of zero, as far as significance, and ride it to an early death.
President Trump is not like any other President. He is not a politician. The poster that clearly stated treating President Trump fairly is not his mission. His mission is to smear. Needs material, this is the available currency of smear at the moment. The administration of President Trump responds about the same as any other administration. The Difference, President Trump does his own wet work. Obama would have ordered a minion to contact the Queen, and either threaten or bribe the Queen to force an apology. President Trump does his own response, and is not near as controlling and demanding as other Presidents.

Humperdink said...

Just watched Trump in London, the old hairdo is back.

narciso said...

A swing and a miss chuck:

https://spectator.org/who-ran-crossfire-hurricane/?utm_source=American%20Spectator%20Emails&utm_campaign=9dcda91842-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_06_03_04_27&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_797a38d487-9dcda91842-104610393

walter said...

Regretful Trump voters hard to come by in Michigan

Chuck said...

Kevin said...
So as usual, Trump ends up blaming others, or a hostile press, for his own bumbling inarticulate verbal messes.

So as usual, Chuck ends up posting here after he’s been asked to leave by Althouse.

6/3/19, 6:19 AM


This is when I know that the punch landed. When the Althouse commentariat's attacks on me are purely personal.

Chuck said...

walter said...
Regretful Trump voters hard to come by in Michigan



RCP Average has Biden up +10.5 versus Trump head to head in Michigan.

walter said...

Among folks responding to polling.

walter said...

So is Biden your fave candidate?

walter said...

Bleach bit and Hammers most amused:

FireEye

@FireEye

We are pleased to announce that Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will be a featured keynote at our #FireEyeSummit in October! Secretary Clinton will engage in an intimate Q&A keynote discussion with Kevin Mandia.

>> Learn more at http://summit.fireeye.com
986
7:10 AM - May 30, 2019

walter said...

https://summit.fireeye.com/

Francisco D said...

So now the point I want to make is what a deplorable piece of shit you are.

Someone needs an intervention. It is way too early to be hitting the bottle.

Michael K said...

When the Althouse commentariat's attacks on me are purely personal.

Chuck should read some Robert Frost.

A small bird flew before me. He was careful
To put a tree between us when he lighted,
And say no word to tell me who he was
Who was so foolish as to think what he thought.
He thought that I was after him for a feather-
The white one in his tail; like one who takes
Everything said as personal to himself.


mockturtle said...

So as usual, Chuck ends up posting here after he’s been asked to leave by Althouse.

Uh-oh. A disgruntled commenter back to wreak vengeance.

Birkel said...

mandrewa:

You assumed so many things that you were left with GIGO.
Look at the pictures and you'll see how wrong you are.

BTW, household lights are not lighting up the night sky.
Most of us are asleep with the lights off, except those who are WORKING.

mandrewa said...

Birkel, actually on American farms, and I don't why this is, but it is common to have a bright light outside the farmhouse that is on a separate pole and is on all night long.

These lights can be bright enough that I can see my shadow from the light half a mile away. And I've seen this sort of thing many times.

Now I believe this a cultural thing. But that's just a guess. Who knows maybe it's a human norm, once incomes are above a certain level.

After all in American cities and suburbs, they have street lights, which amount to the same thing.

The point I'm trying to make is to wonder whether the amount of light at night is a reliable indicator of wealth.

Certainly the absence of light, or very little light is an indicator of poverty.

North Korea is possibly the darkest inhabited area on the planet and I'm sure that's a clue.

Africa is pretty dark for the number of people living there. I'm sure that's a clue.

China is much brighter than either of these.

The dark side of the world from space

Why is China dimmer than India? Why is it dimmer than Pakistan?

Birkel said...

mandrewa,
I really like that you pretended to look seriously at the data.
And your anecdotes are fun but pointless.

Clyde said...

The answer to the music trivia question is “Ode to Billie Joe” by Bobbie Gentry and “Desiree” by Neil Diamond, both of which begin with the line “It was the third of June...” And now you know the rest of the story. Good day!

eddie willers said...

The answer to the music trivia question is “Ode to Billie Joe”

After all these years, I remember over 95% of the lyrics. She had another big hit with Fancy, invested well and has had a fine life. No chance a song like Ode To Billie Joe would even be played today, much less become a massive hit.

FullMoon said...

haha! Crazy Chuck shows up at 5 A.M. to post an obviously doctored audio of the greatest Prewsident ever.

Some people are so easy to fool. SAD !

Fen said...

When the Althouse commentariat's attacks on me are purely personal.

"When we defeat an enemy, we tend to their wounded and treat captives humanely. But traitors? Traitors we hang."

I asked Althouse if I could hang you, she said nope, so there is this instead.

Be grateful.

Fen said...

But you've got me wondering how the concept of Shame came into being.

I think it was a way for the Village Idiot to pose: "Guys, I said and did some very stupid things, and I feel just awful about it. See how I hang my head and shuffle about? So there is no need to pick up those stones again and throw them at me. I get it."

And all the other villagers would understand that there was no need to further punish the Village Idiot, because he was now expressing Shame.

We've lost that.

After what you have said and done here over the last 3 years Chuck, you should disappear from the internet for a good 6 months, maybe come back with your hat in your hand and with some sincere mea culpas and apologies.

We'll keep throwing rocks at you till you get it.

iowantwo said...

Birkel, actually on American farms, and I don't why this is, but it is common to have a bright light outside the farmhouse that is on a separate pole and is on all night long.

Where I live, we call them security lights. The are usually placed near the livestock lots. Near the waterers, and sick lots. This was something from the late 50's early 60's. The power company put them in and maintained the Mercury Vapor lights, and billed the land owner a flat fee per month. The electricity was not metered. Almost all farm steads had one, some would pay for a second or third, but that was less common. Back then, there were, on average 4 farmsteads per square mile, (640 acres), today there are less than one occupied farmstead per section, and only a fraction of them have livestock. I think the program is still availble from the power co. but not much utilized today. Modern outside LED lights perform much better and run for pennies, and they are on switches. Mostly at machine sheds and shops, away from the house.

Chuck said...

FullMoon said...
haha! Crazy Chuck shows up at 5 A.M. to post an obviously doctored audio of the greatest Prewsident ever.

Some people are so easy to fool. SAD !


I don't think that there is any reply, nor any insult that I could use to follow up this post, that would make Full Moon look any more ridiculous, than Full Moon's own words.