I'm talking about this part of
Andrew Sullivan's most recent New York Magazine column:
Sixty-two percent of Republican supporters have said that there is nothing Trump could do, no crime or war crime, no high crime or misdemeanor, that would lead them to vote against him in 2020. There is only one way to describe this, and that is a cult, completely resistant to reason or debate.
Well... first, let's be accurate and fair or you sound like the one who is in a cult and resistant to reason. The question
in the poll, asked of those who said they approved of Trump, was "Can you think of anything that Trump could do, or fail to do, in his term as president that would make you disapprove of the job he is doing, or not?" You have to interpret the question to answer it, and a calm look at it makes me think that supporters were just deflecting the question and saying that, no,
they couldn't think of anything. That could mean, no, I support him and I'm in no mood to imagine wild things that I don't think will happen. They weren't prodded with things like,
oh, yeah, well, what if he shot a man on 5th Avenue just to watch him die?!!!
The tribalism is so deep that Trump seems incapable of dropping below 40 percent in the national polls, and is competitive in many swing states.
The anti-Trumpism is so deep that Sullivan can't imagine anyone supporting him without being in a "tribe."
The cult is so strong that Trump feels invulnerable.
He's just making that up. How could he know that Trump feels invulnerable? How could he know that Trump feels invulnerable because his supporters are a
cult? This is the inside of Sullivan's head, if I can judge by what he's writing. I don't really know. Maybe he's bullshitting, going for clicks, and I'm clicking.
If Trump survives impeachment, and loses the 2020 election, he may declare it another coup, rigged, and illegitimate. He may refuse to concede.
Again with the furious, paranoid ideation about how all those other people are furiously paranoid.
And it is possible the GOP will follow his lead. That this is even thinkable reveals the full extent of our constitutional rot.
Soooo... Andrew Sullivan gets ideas going in his own head, then declares that he has revealed what's out there in the world — all that rot! — because it was possible to
think it. That this was even thinkable — that
the thinkability itself was revealing of the full extent of rot in the real world — reveals the full extent of the rot inside his head.
पोस्ट्स
१९६ टिप्पण्या:
Perhaps the attitude is based of three years of outrage reporting that subsequently turned out to be wrong, so the press moved on to the next outrage. In other words, a lot of people don’t believe any reporting on Trump because the press has destroyed their credibility.
...makes me think that supporters were just deflecting the question and saying that, no, they couldn't think of anything.
Or they are saying there's nothing that Trump's opponents won't accuse him of.
Spot on.
For me and I’m sure millions of others, Trump has demonstrated that he is our last best hope before this country gets destroyed by the Progressive forces in politics today.
The “cult” thing is insulting and invented by insular provincial types without enough daring or imagination to probe the reasons that are unflattering to their safe spaces where they are.the Good and Decent People. Still not getting it, Day 1795.
The most egregious form of cultural rot is the replacement of reason with feelings. Sullivan is the instant example.
There's lots of rot and dirt but nothing about weeds.
"If Trump survives impeachment, and loses the 2020 election, he may declare it another coup, rigged, and illegitimate. He may refuse to concede."
Those are the new rules. They're not Trump's rules, he'd just be playing by them. Establishment Repubs would not follow those rules, even though their opponents would. Trump, I suspect, would embrace the rules and force those who instituted them to resent it.
It's like Sullivan read Loserthink and decided to do all that is warned against.
For a man who feels himself invulnerable, Trump certainly expends a lot of energy defending himself.
Our Beloved Professor Althouse (who i don't Really think is addicted to tiktok) said..
They weren't prodded with things like, oh, yeah, well, what if he shot a man on 5th Avenue just to watch him die?!!!
THIS raises THE ISSUE that our country NEEDS to address!
IF Johnny Cash "shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die"
What The HELL is he doing in California's Folsom State Pen??
Is he confessing to a DIFFERENT murder? Then Why is in in Folsom?
And WHY does that train keeps a rollin' on down to San Antone??
San Antone TEXAS? What the???
There IS a San Antone California; but it's just a valley sort near San Jose
WHEN is someone going to address this issue?
Spell it out, Andrew. What did Trump do?
At least he got the question right.
Many people including kamala harris twist the quote to say that he said he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and face no consequences.
As in no arrest.
He never said that.
John Henry
Some things are unthinkable, some unspeakable. But is anything unwriteable?
"another coup" ?
Well, in point of fact, Ted Kennedy did walk away from a drowning woman. That's the kind of thing that narrow minded people would hold against most politicians. But people whose soul is as broad beamed and expansive as Ted's ass, realize that a man should not be judged by his worst moments in life but rather by the totality of his deeds and character and that the best way to do this is to look to his views on abortion......The love feminists directed at Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton was in no way cultish It was an honest appreciation of how they had struggled and triumphed over their base sexual impulses and finally reached the right opinion on the most important issue that confronts humanity.
I think Andrew was better back in his early blog days. I think his views are more mainstream, leftist journalist than they were back then. This piece is reflective of that.
If you're going to shoot somebody just to watch him die it would be in Reno.
I noticed that people don't look into oncoming traffic when they're Crossing at crosswalks anymore. They just assume the cars are going to stop. They are incapable of thinking that one of the cars might know them down through inattention or malevolent
With simple pronouncements by the Supreme Court, citing to some envisioned “full extent of personal liberty in all it’s possibilities”, our society has been compelled to accept all kinds of things that were once universally unthinkable.
Maybe now Republicans are just envisioning another, fuller extent of personal liberty. I mean, why does the left think that only they should have the right to tear down the pillars of just society?
The left (10% of it? 20%?) is the only significant cult - the rest of the left doesn't pay close enough attention, and is following their leadership.
How many lefty pols have lost but declared victory even after (ahem) three years? And with willing support by media.
We may be watching two movies, but only the left is in charge of projection.
I can't think of any Democrat who might run against Trump who would not be completely antithetical to core values that I hold dear, like the sanctity of life and the ability to practice my faith unencumbered.
I'm sorry. I can't follow Andrew Sullivan's thinking. This is some bare-naked paranoia. He has exposed himself as someone who is wildly flailing at imaginary threats. It's as if he had been unknowingly infected with some awful disease because of his own careless behavior and is projecting his fear and regret onto others. He is deeply disturbed. His talk of mental rot is a Freudian projection for the ages.
Will not someone come to his aid?
Epstein did not kill himself.
I would have supported his impeachment if it turned out that he had faked up that transcript. Beyond maybe taking out some classified stuff that was classified for good reason.
This particular rot that lies in the heads of the entirety of the left regarding Trump, is as thick a political rot as I've ever seen in my life. It is a peculiar mix of ignorance, hubris, and groupthink that makes previously intelligent people sound like crazy, not so stable people. Or maybe they've been crazy, not so stable people all along.
From where I sit, Trump is an unorthodox person. That is, he's unorthodox in so many ways, it's not just that he's an unorthodox businessman, or politician, or tv show host, or husband, or human being. He's all of those packaged into one being. But he was elected to shake things up. Change the status quo. He was not elected to appear to be noble, with particularly nicely creased slacks.
Trump is unorthodox. Definitely abnormal in behavior. But he's not crazy. The Left has become crazy, and I think they speak to voices in their heads dailly now. And the end product is that they cannot discern what's real and what is coming from those voices in their heads. Andew Sullivan is an intelligent man. He should understand this better than he does. But...alas...Andrew Sullivan, like so many others, has been Trumped.
“our mental rot”
That’s Sullivan’s nurse talking to him.
Has Sullivan ever corrected his baseless accusation that Trig Palin is not Sarah Palin's son?
That this is even [askable] reveals [some of the] extent of [his] constitutional rot.
A rational Democratic Party could tempt me to vote for them in 2020. As it is, Sullivan is right, I cannot think of anything Trump is likely to do that I would not put up with rather than see a Democrat administration come into power.
Althouse, you are a island of sanity in this madness. Whether you vote for Trump in 2020 is immaterial. I looked up reasoned discourse in the dictionary and there was a picture of you. I'm impressed with this post.
The only explanation for the aesthetic horror that is Trump is to attribute his political success to a "cult". "Fresh" thoughts from the mind of Sully. Trumps supporters are as foreign to the beaches of P-town as Rajaneeshis are to the Alabama-LSU game.
"paranoid ideation"
This assumes that progs believe what they profess to believe.
Another option: a mix of clueless projection (by Dems who actually did support the hero of Chappaquiddick) and narrative pushing (look at those stupid deplorables! you wouldn't want to be one of them, would you?).
Anyway, to the extent that we can take Sullivan et al. at face value, the old deplorable rule applies: their ignorance is our strength.
It’s especially rich to hear Obama cultists accuse Trump supporters of being cultists.
Sounds like projection to me. But hey, it worked so well for you in 2016, keep it up!
The left is all about making shit up and passing it off as revealed wisdom. Mainly because they know that the left side of the bell curve, where most of their voters reside, will treat it as gospel.
Trump has proved to be more moral than his detractors.
Sulllivan's sick obsession with Sarah Palin's gynecology sort of eliminates him from this discussion.
Have worked with a lot of gay rights political operatives at the Georgia legislature, to be quite specific enough, I feel entitled to say this: Dear Other Gays, your activist leadership is making you look like a bunch of psychotically misogynistic, pedophilic assholes. Including the female ones. Which I know you're not.
The race is turning into It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World versus Red Dawn. Just about right, under the circumstances.
I used to read Andrew Sullivan regularly about 18 years ago. I remember him writing that one of his advantages was that he was privy to what the important people were saying amongst themselves. That is, the people with power and influence. When he spent Trig Palin crazy I realized our elites are just as crazy and unworthy of their positions. This is more of the same. He’s reflecting the thinking of our governing class. It’s why we are in such dire straights. They all need to go to hell.
How about I can't see a single President Trump action that even raises an eyebrow. Nothing.
The absolute worst thing I've seen lately, is the NC, thing when he said there were good people on both sides. That's it. The most current event brought up lately. The haters are so desperate, that's how far back in history they must go. To a situation that the haters are forced to lie about.
So somebody list the worst. I'll go from there. But be aware, you have to agree past President's have done worse, the world never looked up from the lives to give a shit.
In a March Politico poll, 82% of Democrats said they'd vote for anyone on the ballot against Trump, regardless of who it was or what they'd done. In the same poll 86% of people who had voted for Clinton in 2016 said they'd vote for the next Democratic nominee over Trump, even if that person has a known history of manslaughter, accepting bribes, money laundering, sexual assault, leaking classified information, or offering the KGB help countering the US government.
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/03/07/trump-polls-2020-democrats-443083
(Unlike Sullivan's column, the examples I gave in the last sentence are things that Democratic politicians who continued getting elected to office were known to have done.)
MAGAphobia
Althouse, this is one of your best articles.
Some deep thoughts from Donald Trump Jr following his visit to Arlington National Cemetery.
"I rarely get emotional, if ever. I guess you’d call me hyper-rational, stoic. Yet, as we drove past the rows of white grave markers, in the gravity of the moment, I had a deep sense of the importance of the presidency and a love of our country.
In that moment, I also thought of all the attacks we’d already suffered as a family, and about all the sacrifices we’d have to make to help my father succeed — voluntarily giving up a huge chunk of our business and all international deals to avoid the appearance that we were ‘profiting off the office’…Frankly, it was a big sacrifice, costing us millions and millions of dollars annually…of course we didn’t get any credit from the mainstream media, which now does not surprise me at all."
Insanely self-centered, whiny, delusional, dishonest and greedy.
Not that I don't enjoy Althouse's commentary, but do people reply to this stuff for the merry hell of it, or do they really think the writer is a Serious Person worthy of a Serious Critique? Please let it be the former. Because it's crazy-talk, and has been for a long time.
If this sort of stuff showed up on a mimeographed sheet stuck under their windshield wiper, people would immediately recognize it for what it was. But sometimes I worry that there are a lot of otherwise sensible people out there who lose the ability to perceive flat-out crazy-talk for what it is, if it shows up in the Respectable Press.
"He's just making that up.”
Doesn’t mean it’s not impeachable!
The 2016 election indicates that the number of people in the cult is about 63 million.
The choice isn't Trump or nothing. It's Trump or the Democrat alternative.
62% of wine drinkers have said that they would never give up wine to start shooting smack.
No explanation of the health risks involved with excessive drinking, no statistics about drinking and driving related fatalities would lead them to switch to heroin, and that is alcoholism pure and simple.
After 8 years of a swooning, cultlike Media and little kids singing songs to their idol of worship...this is rich. If only they could take a look back, and see what we were puking on for those years...they would understand WHY we don't care about the lies the media is now pushing on us to make the one guy who won't take the hate and viciousness that is thrown on him daily by the same Obama worshipping press......
Sullivan is right, I cannot think of anything Trump is likely to do that I would not put up with rather than see a Democrat administration come into power.
Seconded.
Recently a guy got banned from a technical conference because he was photographed in front of Trump Tower wearing a MAGA hat. Banks are refusing service to people because of their (right leaning) political views. People in HR departments are openly discriminating against people because they do not hold "approved" values. Antifa is beating people in the streets with impunity. We are rabidly approaching a Red Guard era and that's with Trump in office. What other choice do I have?
63 millions people isn't a cult, it's a movement.
The most egregious form of cultural rot is the replacement of reason with feelings. Sullivan is the instant example.
Trump has unleashed the neurotic, delusional stream-of-consciousness that characterizes what passes for thinking in today's Left.
ARM: Insanely self-centered, whiny, delusional, dishonest and greedy.
Need I say more?
IF Johnny Cash "shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die"
What The HELL is he doing in California's Folsom State Pen??
The victim was in Reno. Cash was in California. It was a helluva shot.
As I recall, the choice was between Trump and Hillary Fucking Clinton.
The lawyer says that anything can mean nothing. Very Bubbaesque
More TDS puke
The delusions of the left are fascinating and endless. Sullivan extrapolates all sorts of scenarios from a simple question. He divines the inner thinking of millions of people. He is a psychic!!
Leftist people seem to think in "black and white", either/or when to me everything is in shades of grey with multiple nuances.
"Can you think of anything that Trump could do, or fail to do, in his term as president that would make you disapprove of the job he is doing, or not?"
The question is disapprove of THE JOB....not the man. Trump does all sorts of things that I disapprove of, are questionable, irritating, which I wish he didn't do.
However, the JOB he is doing. Wow! Great. Keep it up. Think what he could have done already; without all the opposition and treasonous actions of the deep state!!
Actually, what he could do that would make me disapprove of his JOB is to start acting like a Democrat or a Mitt Romney type of politician. He would lose my approve instantly if he did.
"We've gone to great lengths to manufacture fantastic lies about Donald Trump. Why do you refuse to believe them? Are you a member of a cult?"
I second pacwest @ 7:20. Well said.
The pool is absolutely spot-on and so is Sullivan's analysis. This is exactly what I've been telling my TDS friends and family for the last 2 years they think that 40% of the country is absolutely batshit crazy insane Trump apologist and I keep telling them no that's not the case the number of crazy people is only 15%. So if you look at the pole 38% of 42% is about 15% which makes up nearly 100% of the Althouse Trump apologist contributors to her retirement party fun
At this point it is reasonable to interpret this question as "tell me something to claim that Trump has done that would make you vote against him."
Rather than debating, candidates could better display their dignity and intelligence by competing in a gravy toss.
What percentage of democrats are OK with Hillary's corruption ? Biden's?
Certainly all of the Alphabet channel "news" stations from NBC to CNn all agree - THE BIDENS DID NOTHING WRONG.
I think Andrew was better back in his early blog days. I think his views are more mainstream, leftist journalist than they were back then. This piece is reflective of that.
I read his blog and even exchanged emails. Then he got AIDS dementia and never quite recovered. Those were his "bareback" days. The Sarah Palin GYN phase has never quite ended.
ARM weighs in with another delusion fantasy.
IF Johnny Cash "shot a man in Reno, just to watch him die"
What The HELL is he doing in California's Folsom State Pen??
Easy, that was just something that he did once. That’s always how I heard the lyric even when I didn’t think about Reno not being in California.
I guess if he didn't publish your monthly quota of prefrontal diarrhea he'd be fired or back benched. We missed the "Donald, Donald, M-M-M" kiddies. Zero introspection/self examination. Obama was 12 years of epic fail, all he will be noted for is normalizing chicks with dicks and other atrocities. TDS... the Mad Cow disease of "journalists".
I always wonder why Howard comes here when he can’t even follow the conversation.
If I come upon an article while on the web, and the author is Andrew Sullivan, I never open it.
Bob Boyd said...
The victim was in Reno. Cash was in California. It was a helluva shot.
I've actually Thought about that; Truckee, CA and Reno just about abut onto each other
BUT..
IF you're in one state, and fire across a state line; a kill someone in the other state
WHERE is your crime? The state you're in? Or the state your victim is in?
Law people! Help me out!
A dishonest question deserves a dishonest answer.
Meade,
Sullivan is a Brit. They have no constitution. Sullivan is incapable of constitutional rot.
Yes pendants. I know the Brits claim to have a constitution. Yes, I've read bagehot.
But I stand by my claim that they have no constitution in any meaningful sense of the word.
PS-Is Sullivan a US citizen?
John Henry
Deploring the Deplorables. When you're on a deadline, and the well is dry after 24 hours of debauchery, the paranoia phase of amphetamines won't let you down. The pieces almost literally write themselves. And the New York editors and readers absolutely love it.
Thank you for this.
Did anyone ask anti Trumpers is there anything he could do, or anything they could learn, that would lead them to support Trump? I can andrewsullivan a no answer into “so even if you learned every bad story about Trump was a lie and the Democrats had signed a secret Nazi oath you wouldn’t vote for him”
Sullivan was clear-sighted last month about none of the Democrat candidates being very appealing. Commentators and commenters can see the faults in those on the other side very clearly, while those on their own side are usually wrapped in a gauzy haze of approval and they see little wrong with them.
But there's usually somebody on the scene that they hate so much that distinctions and discriminations and nuances go out the window. With more partisan polarization and more opportunities to comment on everything the blind speculation and fantasy building gets wilder and wilder. It would be nice if we could see the phenomenon as a whole, in all those it infects, rather than seeing it in some people and not in others.
Does Andrew Sullivan really represent what governing circles are thinking? He does seem to have a hotline to media people; what he says reflects and influences what other journos are saying, but I doubt he's really in on any serious secrets or that he's thinking the way those with real power are thinking.
Sullivan was on the track to power when he was Marty Peretz's protegé, but then he took some time off to decompress, and now he's writing whatever comes into his head, and coming at things from his own personal angle. Not so different from Pete Buttigieg. The more you get into a subculture, in this case gayness, the more you can lose touch with the mainstream.
It's the #MeToo ploy- saturation bomb the populous in the hopes we condition them to accepting the illogic we need them to accept to get the political outcome we want. With #MeToo that thing was convicting a man without a trial on an anonymous claim alone, without evidence or rule of law. With impeachment that thing is accepting mind reading and inference as factual evidence of high crimes and misdemeanors.
Meade
No Sullivan never retracted. In fact when the doctors made statements he doubled down, suggesting they were part of a cover up.
Lefties excel at projection.
They've just spent the last couple of years doing the very thing they accuse others of.
But they're like vampires; you hold a mirror up to them and they don't see a thing.
Expose their plans to light and watch them fade away.
Russian collusion? Is anybody even talking about that anymore?
Andrew, like so many others of his tribe, is certifiably insane.
Sarah Palin's womb says hi.
I corresponded reasonably often with Sullivan in his early blog days, before he was taking all the meds. I don’t know why he snapped, it might have been the hormones. But even in his supposed good old days he was belligerent and histrionic. A good hater someone called him, perceptively.
The real cult is the "Trump broke the law by beating poor Hillary and it's all the Russian's fault" cult.
They keep digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole with this kind of invective.
Republican supporters have said that there is nothing Trump could do, no crime or war crime, no high crime or misdemeanor
They didn't actually say that, of course, since those words were not in the question.
But I wonder what the percentages are or were for other Presidents and candidates ... what's that you say? Nobody asked? That's shocking.
Let's get this straight -- it is not so much that folks would vote for Trump no matter what.
It is that there is nothing Trump could do that would not lead these people, by action or omission, to allow the far, far worse Democrat autocrats to come to power. Trump largely is and has been a blocking, preventative action whose purpose is to defeat and clean out the regime (of whichever party) that is bent on destroying ("fundamentally transform" to use Obama's words) this country, western civilization, and humanity itself.
Lefties do this all the time, Ann.
"Bush will cancel elections in 2008 and send all his enemies to Haliburton work camps!!!!!"
"The fact that I even imagined that is still Bushs fault!!"
I’m still waiting for Trump to shoot some on Fifth Avenue. A promise is sacred.
Well, finding a dead girl or a live boy in his bed might cause my support to waver, but I'd have to study on it even then.
All of the problems in the Democratic Party and the political Left stem from their absolute inability to engage in introspection. I suspect it stems from an innate knowledge of how unpleasant the results would be.
Sullivan is on the whole an unreliable narrator.
In any case the rot you have is not constitutional, because that is simply a totemic piece of paper, but cultural, as it is your elite culture that interprets your constitution to suit its current interests. Law is whatever serves its interpreters best, and always just that.
The only thing that keeps up the fiction that the law is something independently real is its existence as an element of terrain in the social battlefield between the inevitable warring elite factions. When one faction decisively defeats the other there no longer any way to maintain the illusion.
Your weird faith in "law" has always been a puzzlement. I can see that humbug Oz through the curtain, why can't you?
Sullivan and Kaus were the first blogs I read. I still love Kaus.
I don't think he knows what happened in Russiagate, how it was set up by Fusion GPS, and how much Trump cooperated in discovery, and wisely sidestepped the perjury traps carefully laid for him.
And he seems to take all the obstruction traps very seriously.
He's clueless. The perfect know-nothing non-lawyer tool for the deep state.
Ol' "Milky Glutes" is projecting. But then it's just more of the same old same old.
The poll of asked 401 Trump supporters
Can you think of anything that Trump could do, or fail to do, in his term as president that would make you disapprove of the job he is doing, or not?
and asked 467 Trump opponents
Can you think of anything Trump could do, other than resign, in his term as president that would make you approve of the job he is doing, or not?
Note the small poll sizes. Note that those polled weren't asked whether there was "anything at all" that would make them not support (or support Trump), but whether the respondents could think of anything Trump could do or not do that would change their minds.
Consider that asking whether there was anything or nothing that Trump could do to change people's opinions is pointless. There are things that any president could do that would make people change their minds about him or her. The question has to be limited to more realistic circumstances.
Now consider that the Trump opponents were more fixed in their opinions than the Trump supporters. 62% of supporters could not think of anything the president could do or not do that would change their minds. 70% of opponents couldn't think of anything Trump could do or not do that would change their minds.
Are those numbers really so different from what Obama or Clinton would have had?
***
As it was explained to me, Britain has no written constitution. The majority in Parliament (technically the Queen in Parliament) can do what it likes. But "constitution" originally meant the way the government was "constituted." We got the word from them and turned it into a written document.
Swede said...
Lefties excel at projection.
Everybody political excels at projection. Or it's not so much projection as selected blindness. They see the faults on the other side, but not the same faults on their own side.
WAITAMINUTE! There's a 5th Avenue in RENO?????????
Dear Excitable Andy,
Thank you for your continued concern for my mental health because yes, I can’t imagine Trump doing anything that will void my support for him. Mind you, I believe the real CULT is the unelected group of people working within his admin to void my vote. Who the hell appointed them Guardians of the Swamp? i know you ALWAYS feel there’s some conservative cabal working to keep you down, but they’d your own mental problem. In the real world there just aren’t any good choices on the Left and Trump is heading for a landslide win. Voting is not cult behavior, obsession is. When the vast majority of us reelect Trump what will you do? Claim we are all hypnotized?
Sincerely,
The Last Republican who reads your stupid column
Janet Reno had people shot just to watch them die and she was lauded. Whose cult was she part of?
Something is rotten in the Althouse blog!
Yesterday it was "authoritarian rot."
Today it's "mental rot" and "cultural rot".
Alas, are we forgetting the good, old fashioned "crotch rot"?
"And it is possible the GOP will follow his lead. That this is even thinkable reveals the full extent of our constitutional rot."
What's up with the use of 'rot?' Latest talking points memo?
If Trump survives impeachment, and loses the 2020 election, he may declare it another coup, rigged, and illegitimate. He may refuse to concede."
This is suppose to pass as intelligent commentary? Why waste time reading this lunatic drivel?
All the smart people couldn't think of how trump could possibly become President, but doesn't being smart mean having the ability to think of things, especially things that are true or possible and not commonly known?
I'm suffering from chronic long-term physical rot.
"It’s especially rich to hear Obama cultists accuse Trump supporters of being cultists."
It is entirely ordinary and expected that rival cults will despise each other as heretics or blasphemers, (each seeing themselves as followers of the "true" faith or cause).
How would Sullivan describe Greta? Then compare/contrast to his Trump write up. That should tell us if he's completely gonzo.
They keep digging themselves deeper and deeper into a hole with this kind of invective.
I am increasingly under the impression that the "intellectuals" on the Left are mentally and emotionally stuck in 7th Grade. They try to bully people to their point of view rather than engage in thoughtful discourse.
“Sixty-two percent of Republican supporters have said that there is nothing Trump could do, no crime or war crime, no high crime or misdemeanor, that would lead them to vote against him in 2020.”
Sullivan’s exaggerations are indicative of the mental and moral rot of the scribblers who are trying to tell us what to think. Interesting that (at least in the portion Althouse quotes) Sullivan ascribes no mental rot to the larger percentage (See link) who will disapprove of him no matter what his accomplishments. Which side is more mired in the muck?
A direct answer for Sullivan:
Of course I would turn on Trump if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, so stop asking the same question over and over.* But all he's done so far is to try and drain the swamp filled with your ilky loads of DC friends which I quite enjoy seeing done, thank you.
____________________
*An old fashioned duel held on 5th Ave. with any of the Trump antagonists -- Schiff, Nadler, Avenatti -- might be interesting.
chickelit said...
Janet Reno had people shot just to watch them die
Touche!
"If Trump survives impeachment, and loses the 2020 election, he may declare it another coup, rigged, and illegitimate. He may refuse to concede."
Hillary lost the 2016 election, declared it rigged and illegitimate, and barely conceded. That must be what Sullivan is thinking of.
Have you been to 5th Avenue lately?
Some of those douchebags need killin'.
If Trump survives impeachment, and loses the 2020 election, he may declare it another coup, rigged, and illegitimate. He may refuse to concede.
It's Hillary and her henchmen who refuse to concede the 2016 election.
They weren't prodded with things like, oh, yeah, well, what if he shot a man on 5th Avenue just to watch him die?!!!
The over-educated shitheads like Sullivan who always bring that up never factor in that much is dependent on who he shot and why.
Little old lady on her way to church or Jeffery Epstein molesting a 14 year old? One of these things is not like the other.....
Why would I tell a pollster what would get me to turn on Trump? It would just tell the media what to fabricate next.
Does Andrew buy Adam Schitt's schitt?
"The Age of Narcissism," as Christopher Lasch so clearly saw long ago. We are in it deep.
Sullivan wrote: Let us count the ways in which Trump has attacked and undermined the core legitimacy of our democracy. He is the only candidate in American history who refused to say that he would abide by the results of the vote. Even after winning the 2016 election, he still claimed that “millions” of voters — undocumented aliens — perpetrated massive electoral fraud in the last election, and voted for his opponent.
I recently went to the local DMV in Costa Mesa to change address. Part of the process is to answer a few questions regarding voter ID and registration on a computer screen. For purposes of determining citizenship and voter eligibility, the question and allowable answers were: "Are you a US citizen?: (1) Yes; (2) No; and (3) Decline to answer. So I can easily see how voter fraud is perpetrated in California. You don't even have to lie under oath to vote. I shit you not.
Poor Cook still using language he doesn’t understand, although to what end is not clear. Simple insult probably. Cults with few exceptions exist because people are seeking spiritual fulfillment. Spiritual issues are not addressed by politics unless one is a member of the two largest cults in the planet, Islam and Communism, which both subjugate the spiritual element by putting politics first. That’s why everyone assumes Cookie is a commie, because collectivism is his god. Nobody to the right of jihadis and marxists would confuse politics and spiritual enlightenment this way. That’s why we were so shocked at the hymns to Obama, the worshipping, the halos photographers created with clever posing, the fainting spells at his “revivals”/campaign events in 2008, and the way his hype-man/wife claimed we would have to sacrifice and work to make ourselves worthy of Obama. People were openly seeking and finding explicitly spiritual fulfillment through Obama.
None of this exists on the right. Cook imagines these things because in his fucked up view politics and faith are the same thing. He’s incapable of understanding how we can separate politics from seeking salvation. But we do, easily. “Render unto Caesar” on one hand and give God His due on the other. And if one’s faith rests in God, then we just don’t worry too much about which Men run this world, because no one has authority over a nation unless God ordains it. Unless He allowed it, Obama or Bush or Trump could not have attained office. And when one believes God’s words like this, then one cannot be drawn into a cult, because that spiritual fulfillment is coming from the King not a man (or woman). So the analogy of a Trump cult is a lame and played out meme, revealing the limits of the Cook intellect.
Those of us with a healthy mind body and spirit are immune to the siren song of cultists.
Ninety-nine percent of Republican supporters have said that there is nothing the Left and Democrats could make up against Trump that would lead them to vote against him in 2020. We check.
It is entirely ordinary and expected that rival cults will despise each other as heretics or blasphemers, (each seeing themselves as followers of the "true" faith or cause).
I agree, Cookie. However ...
IMHO, the Obama cult was based on hero worship of an image, not any objective reality. The so-called Trump cult is based on his actions as POTUS and not his less than desirable image.
Trump, for all his faults, has done all of us, even ARM and Howard, a public service- Trump has revealed just how stupidly mendacious our pundit and journalist classes truly are. For that act alone, Trump deserves to be put on Mount Rushmore.
I am increasingly under the impression that the "intellectuals" on the Left are mentally and emotionally stuck in 7th Grade. They try to bully people to their point of view rather than engage in thoughtful discourse.
@Francisco D, they can't engage in thoughtful discourse because they have no basis for any sort of thoughtful discussion. The facts, the reality, the elementary common sense, are all aligned against them. And it has driven them insane.
As shown in the past, if you want calm, reasoned analysis Sully is your go-to guy. Whether its discussing "Trig's baby", Torture, Going to war with Iraq, or Donald Trump, he's a fount of wisdom. /sarcasm off/
Here are some other Sully gems:
-Trump is "The most lawless President in our History"
-"Removing this petty,shabby, tyrant from office goes a long way toward restoring the Constitution"
-"Trump lies and misleads the Country constantly...so they reject the concept to Truth altogether."
Amazingly, Sully lies constantly about Trump and projects his own dishonesty and contempt for the Constitution on him. But that's S.O.P for Sullivan.
Scar amici is the most prominent proponent of the “cult leader” hypothesis of Trump. In a particularly funny exchange on Brian Stelter’s show today, Scaramucci managed to make an utter fool of himself and a hash of his Trump criticism in the first ten seconds of his appearance. Introducing him, Stelter references the Mooch’s short tenure in the Trump admin, and Scaramucci pointedly corrects him: it wasn’t that short, as he spent over 9 months with the campaign before his brief stint in the press office. Mooch then goes on the decry the Trump cult and besmirch everyone supportive of or associated with Trump, laughably predicting an imminent Trump resignation, shuffling of the pundits and entire biz model of Fox News away from Trump, including suggesting it will be sold, and the sure thing betrayal of Trump by GOP bigwigs. All without evidence, I should add. I’ve never seen a man so lucky in his enemies as Trump. Scaramucci seems intent on destroying what’s left of his dignity in these vain attempts to damage Trump and the more time passes, the more dire his predictions, the more imminent Trump’s resignation, and the more foolish The Mooch, and those who have him on, look. It’s almost like Mooch is still working for Trump by caricaturing his most ridiculous sounding opponents as Sullivan seems to be doing here.
Howard fantasizes: “So if you look at the pole [sic] 38% of 42% is about 15% which makes up nearly 100% of the Althouse Trump apologist contributors to her retirement party fun.”
“Apologists?” Who here apologizes for Trump’s persona and the accompanying intemperate remarks - except to the extent that they trigger troglogressives like Howie and his “TDS friends and family?” You know, those folks for whom TDS is considered normal while support for sane immigration, full employment, economic prosperity, capitalism, constitutionalism, etc., is considered “batshit crazy.”
Howie personifies lefty chimera.
I would've answered "no" to the Poll question. First, its a stupid question. Of course, Trump could do SOMETHING that would end my support. What if Trump machine gunned half the Senate? Second, I'll say No, because I'd expect a follow-up question if I said "Yes". And then I have to think of hypotheticals. Too much work. Third, the question sounds like its trying to put Trump bad light. If enough people answered "Yes" the Headline about be "Trump losing hard-core support"
Char Char Binks: "I’m still waiting for Trump to shoot some on Fifth Avenue. A promise is sacred."
Well, remember, after Net Neutrality and deregulation and about 17 other things enacted by Trump which all together killed every American 5 times over, there isn't anyone left in the US to shoot on 5th Avenue, or anywhere else for that matter.
This presents a narrative problem for the left which is only compounded by their serial new and improved lies vomited up every other day.
If I might paraphrase Hitchens writing of the Clintons, there is no one left for the dems/left/MSM/LLR-left to lie to in an effective way.
The left are anti-war, anti-intervention - went ape shit for the duration of the GWB years.
Trump promises to end endless wars -> pulls 50 troops out one zone, and the collective left go ape shit.
If that doesn't point to the cult of left-wing hypocrisy, I don't know what could.
As far as accusations against Trump, I use the model the Clintons and their toadies use: unless it's proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law, not only does it prove complete exoneration it is also a damning indictment of the accusers.
"(each seeing themselves as followers of the "true" faith or cause).”
But not you. tell us again why the socialism has never been tried.
OK, I read the lyrics again, and it seems like he needed two syllables and “Lodi” isn’t going to work because of the rhyme, but it would have worked otherwise.
“I shot a man in Lodi, just to watch him die...” Nah! “Frisco”? Not blue collar enough. Same with LA. Big Sur? LOL, Compton and Oakland are out for obvious reasons. Not a good look to shoot somebody in one of those places to watch him die.
Here’s the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_and_towns_in_California
I don’t think he had any choice.
Prefer Ed to Andrew Sullivan.....
Can you imagine media asking this question during Obama's tenure? No? Neither can I.
If I was asked this question, I would be among that 60%. Fuck the media and the donkeys they rode in on.
"If you're going to shoot somebody just to watch him die it would be in Reno."
No, I disagree. Imlay (population 171) would be a better choice, as you could stand around, savor the moment for as long as you desire and then get away, Scot clean.
"I am increasingly under the impression that the 'intellectuals' on the Left are mentally and emotionally stuck in 7th Grade. They try to bully people to their point of view rather than engage in thoughtful discourse."
They (to whom you refer) are operating on the same level as Trump. You are apparently not reading widely enough. (If those you refer to hold up Obama as an exemplary superior counterpart to Trump, they can be dismissed immediately as not ever to be taken seriously on any topic.)
What they dont address
https://spectator.org/the-radicalizing-of-eric-ciaramella/
Its like addressing the cambridge 5 without the apostles
"IMHO, the Obama cult was based on hero worship of an image, not any objective reality. The so-called Trump cult is based on his actions as POTUS and not his less than desirable image."
I disagree. Trump's loyalists respond to his pugnacity and braggadocio, imagining he speaks for them, or is somehow one of them, which is true only in their imagining. He is a practiced con man. (Witness his recent hire of a "prosperity Christianity" (sic) preacher to work for him. A sham hire, as he displays zero evidence of having any religious belief or moral code. He does display skill at pandering to his base, as does Obama, who, as with Trump's base, are eager to believe.)
"I said, 'You're not getting the billion.' I'm going to be leaving here in, I think it was about six hours. I looked at them and said: 'I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you're not getting the money.'"
Number of Democrats calling on Joe Biden to drop out of the race due to his un-coerced and freely-given video-recorded confession: ZERO.
Why? Besides being flaming hypocrites, they don't really care about corruption, quid-pro-quos, colluding with Russians, nor obstruction of justice; They just want go be rid of Trump by any means necessary.
And if enough of us were foolish enough to tell the pollsters that yes, there is something that Trump could do that would cause us to drop our support for him, say caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl, you can bet that next week Schiff would be trotting out a string of witnesses all claiming to have found Trump in bed with a live boy or a dead girl, and Nancy Pelosi would be deeply solemn about how we need to fully investigate these heinous acts.
They (to whom you refer) are operating on the same level as Trump.
Cookie,
I do not recall Trump ever portraying himself as an "intellectual." Not even close.
His main pretense is in being a bullshitter, but he knows that we appreciate when he is bullshitting. It seems to be a NYC thing and it has served him well in life. It's not the way I would do things, but then I would never get involved with retail politics.
Your weird faith in "law" has always been a puzzlement. I can see that humbug Oz through the curtain, why can't you?
You're limited because you can't think like an American. Our "faith" is in the Second Amendment. Get rid of that and we're no better then a third-world shit-hole. Until then our so-called elite exist at our disposal.
Trump's loyalists respond to his pugnacity and braggadocio, imagining he speaks for them ... ...he displays zero evidence of having any religious belief or moral code. He does display skill at pandering to his base
The first statement is undoubtedly true. I would add that he speaks for those who feel the Media shut down or ignore their point of view. They tell us what they think we need to know, whether it is true or not. It's all about their narrative. A lot of people have built up a lot of frustration over the years because of the behavior of the DNC/MSM complex.
The second statement seems true as well. I am shocked that politicians pander to their base, but I am mostly remembering the Clinton impeachment when the press dutifully filmed him going to church with Hillary with an outsized Bible in his hand. I do not recall anyone suggesting that it was a remarkably cynical prop.
"JaimeRoberto said...
Why would I tell a pollster what would get me to turn on Trump? It would just tell the media what to fabricate next."
I'm in the above school of how to answer pollsters. Still, if Trump chose Hillary Clinton as his VP ... and painted a picture of Greta Thunberg on the side of the White House ...
I too am amazed that of all the figures in politics today Trump assumed positions and made promises that spoke to me, and of all people who ran from any party, a freaking NY billionaire most closely spoke for me. It was even more shocking to see him follow through and have my enemies among the elite self-reveal as they fought things I voted for, in the person of Trump. This man clearly understands America and Americans better than the idiots arrayed against him and has a common man touch in personal appearances. This guy I despiser has delivered for me unlike any big R Republican has ever since Reagan. His contempt for the media mirrors my own, though I think he exaggerates his ire as his TV training has taught him to do on set. Mine is real. I hate the Media just like they hate me. The fourth Estate is now a whore. Our country’s story is being told by unreliable narrators and that is splintering our shared values.
So yeah of the public voices only Trump reliably says what I believe needs saying.
That this was even thought (and printed) speaks to the full extent of Sullivan's mental rot.
This morning, I checked a formerly conservative blog that has pretty much gone NeverTrump.
The blog founder, after posting NOTHING for the past week, put up something today about Red States possibly flipping Blue in 2020. Even granting that he might have been too busy to post anything the previous seven days, THAT is what he needs to comment on? With everything else that has been going on, impeachment-related and otherwise? THAT is what he wants to spout off about?
You can't understand nonsense like this Sullivan stuff without understanding the sort of bubble in which he and other Trump-haters reside.
Mike
OK, I read the lyrics again, and it seems like he needed two syllables and “Lodi” isn’t going to work because of the rhyme, but it would have worked otherwise.
Conversely, CCR couldn't have been 'stuck in Reno again'.
"So if you look at the pole 38%..."
blah blah blah.
Look at teh polecat.
If I were a Democrat would I support as a Democratic candidate someone who:
1. Someone who ran away and left a woman to drown?
2. Someone who put US State secrets in a private e-mail account unsecured against foreign hacking?
3. Someone who raped women and was friends with a pedophile?
4. Someone who had a Fifth Avenue pedophile killed - because he was in the pedophile's little black book?
4. Someone who supported Stalin?
5. Someone who claimed to be a moderate centrist, who loved America and intended to uphold the Constitution?
"Trump's loyalists respond to his pugnacity and braggadocio"
True. But then, the pugnacity is real, and aimed at the right targets. He fights, and he fights people that need to be fought.
"imagining he speaks for them, or is somehow one of them"
One of them? Not really. Speaks for them? To some extent--for starters, he speaks about America with pride and about malicious Dems with disdain. It's better than nothing.
"which is true only in their imagining."
No. Plenty of action to back it up--more than any of us Trump skeptics expected in 2016.
"He is a practiced con man."
That's what I thought. But it turns out, he is mostly sticking to the agenda he laid out, and the real con turns out to be the hoaxes perpetrated against him. Makes the choice for us righties pretty easy.
I can think of things Trump could do that would make me not vote for him.
I can't imagine Trump doing any of the things that would make me not vote for him.
As for not doing things, the things he's not doing are because of judicial rulings based on the constitutional principle of "Orange Man Bad!"
Trump is a businessman. He understands bargaining and negotiations. And- getting even. I'm anxiously looking forward to the getting even stage of his presidency. I imagine it will be epic. If Democrats had bargained honestly with him, honest bargaining being an unfamiliar concept with them, they could have had gun control, possibly even draconian gun control, by now. They blew their chance.
Robert Cook said...
"It’s especially rich to hear Obama cultists accuse Trump supporters of being cultists."
It is entirely ordinary and expected that rival cults will despise each other as heretics or blasphemers, (each seeing themselves as followers of the "true" faith or cause)."
Cook, you just broke the irony meter.
He is a practiced con man.
He sure has got all those newly working minorities fooled.
chickelit said...
A direct answer for Sullivan:
Of course I would turn on Trump if he shot someone on 5th Avenue, .......
*An old fashioned duel held on 5th Ave. with any of the Trump antagonists -- Schiff, Nadler, Avenatti -- might be interesting.
I've long been an advocate of bringing back formalized dueling. Matching edged weapons only, choice by the challenged. I'd choose epee and dagger. Calling someone who refused a challenge a coward would, by law, be neither libel nor slander. Agreement could be to first blood or duel to the death.
Skylark said...
OK, I read the lyrics again, and it seems like he needed two syllables and “Lodi” isn’t going to work because of the rhyme, but it would have worked otherwise.
Makes sense; but about Chico? or, WAY better yet Chino ?
And what's with this Train a rollin', on down to San Antone ? Does he want to go home?
Folsom is in Union Pacific territory. and San Antone would be Santa Fe. You'd have to switch cars
mockturtle said...
Conversely, CCR couldn't have been 'stuck in Reno again'.
I've always imagined it as
Oh Lord; i'm stuck in Ojai, again.
And for the last 10 years or so; i've imagined Emma Stone singing it
It's not so much of my support for Trump that will cause me to vote for him.
It's my hatred of his opponents.
Trump's loyalists respond to his pugnacity and braggadocio, imagining he speaks for them, or is somehow one of them, which is true only in their imagining. He is a practiced con man.
In other words, Trump supporters are stupid.
See, this is what converts an anti Hillary voter into a Trump supporter.
Assholes who suppose they are better than the average Trump voter, or the average person, in general.
Assholes who want Trump to fail so they can say"Told ya so.."
Assholes who would like to "punch Trump in the face", or "take him out behind the gym".
Assholes who want and promote a recession so Trump will fail.
Asshole who doxx Trump supporters
Assholes who attack Trump rally goers.
Not talking about you. You are different.
"Can you think of anything that Trump could do, or fail to do, in his term as president that would make you disapprove of the job he is doing, or not?"
Sure. Quit MAGA and surrender to the likes of you.
There's a very good reason why liberals, the left, and the media are staying the course with their insane accusations and projections.
They're waiting for Facebook / Google / Twitter / YouTube and the rest of the social media titans to shut down the discourse.
As they only voices surviving, they'll continue feeding us the same bullshit they did before the Internet came along and gave us a voice, or, in those immortal words: "fact-check your ass."
Once we're shut up, people will start believing their lies. Until then, they have to stay the course.
Sixty-two percent of Republican supporters have said that there is nothing Trump could do, no crime or war crime, no high crime or misdemeanor, that would lead them to vote against him in 2020. There is only one way to describe this, and that is a cult, completely resistant to reason or debate.
There is only one honest way to describe this:
The Democrats are such complete and utter trash that no sane person wants to see them get power.
No, it doesn't matter what Trump does in the next year, there's no way he could exceed the evil of the Democrats. Have the CIA, NSA, & FBI spy on the Democrat candidates, just because they're the other team? Thank you Obama, that line's been crossed
The tribalism is so deep that Trump seems incapable of dropping below 40 percent in the national polls, and is competitive in many swing states.
The NeverTrump tribalism is so deep, that conservatives seeing Trump provide massive numbers of conservative goals, are nevertheless voting Democrat. Because their social class tribe ie more important to them than any policy or ideology
If Trump survives impeachment, and loses the 2020 election, he may declare it another coup, rigged, and illegitimate. He may refuse to concede.
You mean, Like Hillary? Like Stacey Abrahms? Like the Resistance?
The projection is strong in this one. He was, briefly, being sane. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that it couldn't last
Sebastian said...
"He is a practiced con man."
That's what I thought. But it turns out, he is mostly sticking to the agenda he laid out, and the real con turns out to be the hoaxes perpetrated against him. Makes the choice for us righties pretty easy.
Bingo. I didn't vote for Tump in 2016, because I thought he was a con man. I was wrong
It turns out the Bill Kristol, George Will, Jonah Goldberg, David Frech, etc. et. al. were the actually con men. They spent decades professing to be conservatives, and believe conservative things.
Along comes a president who's not of their class, but who actually does govern conservatively. What is their response?
Their response is "I support, and will vote for, the socialist Left, for a Democrat candidate who opposes everything I've ever claimed to believe in, because [pile of bullshit follows]".
Reality, they do this because they were con men, sell conservative BS while supporting failure theater and losing to the Left.
Goodbye to all that
"For that act alone, Trump deserves to be put on Mount Rushmore."
If he manages to stem the socialist tide I would say he deserves to be there. But I gotta say it would be a strange picture with the do and all. Form that mental picture in your mind. I don't care who you are, that's funny.
Trump's loyalists respond to his pugnacity and braggadocio, imagining he speaks for them
He says what we want said. That's pretty much the Plantonic ideal of "speaking for us"
he displays zero evidence of having any religious belief or moral code.
Really? How many interns have giving him blow jobs in the Oval Office? How many times has he spent law enforcement officers out to bring in women for him to screw?
How many guns has he run to Mexican drug cartels?
How many political opponents has he unjustifiably sicked the IRS, FBI, CIA, and NSA on?
How many terrorists has he embraced?
Please, tell us which Democrat President was the last one to display a "moral code"?
Is Donald Trump a believing Christian? I doubt it.
But, Barack Obama used the power of the US Government to assault Christians for the "crime" of being believing Christians. President Trump has been fighting and rollign back those policies.
I don't care if you're a believing Christian. That's between you and God
I do care if you allow believing Christians to live their beliefs without the gov't assaulting them (see Catholic charities and adoption services). Trump does that. No Democrat President will do that. Not one elected in 2020.
He does display skill at pandering to his base
Translation: that evil bastard makes promises to the rubes, then actually keeps them, even when the elite disagrees! How dare he!
Yeah, how dare he give voice to Real Americans.
I often turn it around on my lefty colleagues and ask, for the sake of argument, imagine all of Obama's 1st term press coverage was like Faux News. The entire media landscape from the Big 3 networks, CNN, CSNBC, NYT, Washpo etc. spent 3 years routinely talking about his certain ouster over his "fake" birth certificate and nationality status only to have it proven false.
Would you bother listening to what the media had to say about Obama after that point? Would you then listen to and pay attention to their next accusation after they never apologized for blowing the birth certificate story? If so, why? Imagine being that Obama supporter and being asked "Is there anything Obama could do that would change your vote in 2012?" Now use your critical thinking skills your tribe so proudly spouts about and get back to me.
Cook opined: “I disagree. Trump's loyalists respond to his pugnacity and braggadocio, imagining he speaks for them, or is somehow one of them, which is true only in their imagining.”
Sorry, but that is just a stupid overgeneralization! Trump is a billionaire with a boorish personality. Who identifies with that? There may be a few loyalists who fit your description, but by and large delusion is the land of the lefty projectors (which may explain your post). Nevertheless, he does speak for us on many issues, but that is the nature of politics, isn’t it? The exception is folks who are so far out on the left that only the dead like Karl Marx speak for them.
ARM,
Thanks for posting junior's Words on Arlington.
Why did you stop there though? Why not include the next paragraph?
Was this because the next paragraph would change completely the point you were trying to make? That it would him look like a good guy instead of a knave?
Do you even know what the next paragraph says? Or are you just hoping nobody else does?
John Henry
didnt the Lefties just do a piece about "authoritarian rot"
...with the bonus "goggle-eyed homunculi" thrown in ?
the HildaBeast would have had millions dead in WWIII by now,
...so the one dead guy on 5th Ave is a better deal.
It turns out the Bill Kristol, George Will, Jonah Goldberg, David Frech, etc. et. al. were the actually con men. They spent decades professing to be conservatives, and believe conservative things.
Yes!
The Republican Party has long been infiltrated by phony conservatives, as much as MI6 was infiltrated by Soviet agents.
One of Trump's great qualities is that he encourages the moles to come out of their holes.
I nominate Bill Kristol for the 2019 Kim Philby award.
TBF the view out of Sarah Palin's cervix is quite limited. Go home, milkyloads, you're drunk.
That something is "thinkable" to Andrew "Trig Truther" Sullivan is a statement about his own mental health, and nothing else.
Greg the class traitor said...
It turns out the Bill Kristol, George Will, Jonah Goldberg, David French, etc. et. al. were the actually con men. They spent decades professing to be conservatives, and believe conservative things.
They were what the conservatism of the conservative movement was. It was based on the idea of the free market. The conservatism of an earlier era was based on institutional continuity. Both ideas might have been wrong in theory or in application, but they were how people understood conservative at the time.
People define themselves as conservative or liberal or progressive and assume that those words mean "good" or "right," but if one follows politics long enough one may find that the ideas that seemed correct at the time weren't. Even now, things that may be perfectly orthodox ideologically aren't necessary good or likely to be seen as good or even orthodox by the next generation.
And then to prove my point Howard shows up.
Thanks Howard.
True Conservatives don't go launching nation-building efforts in hostile countries. This was an invention of the Neo-Cons. True Conservatives don't increase the size and impact of government in our lives but work to decrease it.
IMO, only Ron Paul is a True Conservative, concerned about the national debt and strongly against foreign adventurism. His son Rand is also quite conservative in his outlook although people often refer to both as Libertarians.
John henry said...
Was this because the next paragraph would change completely the point you were trying to make?
There is no paragraph that could redeem thosse words. The words of a privileged empty-headed not so young man. But you can post them if you think they salvage this dumpster fire of oligarch entitlement.
ARM,
So you don't know what Trump Jr really said, do you? Just repeating crap that you read on other sites.
Kind of like how people partially quote the "grab them by the pussy" comment to claim that this is something that Trump does rather than something at women do.
Or the "Good people Hoax"
Or the "shoot someone on 5th avenue" comment.
Or the media "is the enemy of the people" comment (Note the position of the quotes in all the alleged quotes of PDJT supposedly saying this)
Or a hundred other examples of dishonesty in quoting.
People sometimes ask whether you are a knave or a fool. I've always "Why not both? Embrace the power of and."
John Henry
There is no paragraph that could redeem thosse words. The words of a privileged empty-headed not so young man.
ARM is just making it obvious that he does not seek to understand, only to find partisan advantage in a remarkably superficial and phony manner.
Are you friends with Adam Schiff? Maybe Eric Swallwell is more your type.
Pitiful.
"If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons."
As far as I'm concerned, we have reached that threshold.
Of course the problem is the afghan nation was destroyed by the soviet invasion and adtermath, the iraqi nation was corroding into salafism due to baathist mismanagememt
Meh:
https://mobile.twitter.com/joelpollak/status/1193704013025312768
They used to describe themselves as the "reality-based community." It's understandable that they've dropped it. Grammar Nazis and imagineers is what they've come to. And, did Andrew Sullivan notice any of Obama's war crimes, hyper-emotively?
Lurker21 said...
Greg the class traitor said...
It turns out the Bill Kristol, George Will, Jonah Goldberg, David French, etc. et. al. were the actually con men. They spent decades professing to be conservatives, and believe conservative things.
They were what the conservatism of the conservative movement was. It was based on the idea of the free market.
if your sole goal was free markets uber alles, you were a libertarian, not a conservative. Conservatives care about their fellow Americans.
Conservatives are not usually Jacksonians. But we consider them to be allies. Trump is about as pure of a Jacksonian as we've had as a President, since Old Hickory himself.
Agree with everything he does? No.
Ally with him against the Left? Hell yes, any actual conservative would do that
Anyone who, at this point, is allying with Democrats against Trump, is doing so because he or she is not in any sense an actual conservative
4B.
[If DISAPPROVE of Trump] Can you think of anything Trump could do, other than resign, in his term as president that would make you approve of the job he is doing, or not? [n=467; moe = +/- 4.5%]
Nov 2019 Yes 26% No 70% DK 3%
So it’s always on the Progressives court the game is played. It’s extremely interesting in the same poll, MORE people cannot be convinced that Trump can do anything worthwhile to change their mind. We need healing and neither side seems to be offering the other ANY goodwill. The slope is getting steeper.
I recall when everyone in Mass. revolted and did not vote for a Kennedy again after Chappaquidic. They proved there was no Kennedy cult. wait. What? you mean that DIDNT happen? Don't tell Andrew Sullivan - don't want to inject reality.
What is striking here is the complete failure to engage with what Trump Jr actually wrote. Defend his actual words or admit that they are indefensible. The entire chapter is available online.
Darkisland said...
So you don't know what Trump Jr really said, do you? Just repeating crap that you read on other sites.
No. The entire chapter is available online. The words remain the same - indefensible and whiny.
I am trying to figure out why I have to defend every word somebody ever said just because he owned a bunch of petentious liblerals on TV.
Only children and liberals believe that the world is black and white. But I will read the “entire chapter” if you read this thread that shows that Ciaramella was involved in Biden’s firing of that prosecutor and in getting dirt from Ukraine intelligence to dump on Manafort in 2016, that he met with the guy who leaked it IN THE OBAM WHITE HOUSE, and you can report back with your comments that demonstrate that you have considered the argument seriously before dismissing with a reasoned argument of your won.
https://twitter.com/ClimateAudit/status/1193513165616644097
Oh, these “challenges” don’t work that way, right? The rules are that you get to demand stuff from us and ignore everything we say. Bots don’t play that! Right ARM.
Blogger Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Darkisland said...
So you don't know what Trump Jr really said, do you? Just repeating crap that you read on other sites.
No. The entire chapter is available online. The words remain the same - indefensible and whiny.
really? Then why haven't you provided a link?
Anyone who, at this point, is allying with Democrats against Trump, is doing so because he or she is not in any sense an actual conservative
Actual conservative is the questionable self identification at this point. What exactly has been conserved? Better to acknowledge one's been played, to move along, and to set about picking up the pieces. It is no longer about conserving what is but endeavoring to radically remake. Continuing to play the old game seems foolish no? Cessation of state control of education, money and banking, debt guarantees, and scientific research are just the starters. Might be rough short term as cards rightly fall but long term better fruits will result.
Greg the class traitor said...
Then why haven't you provided a link?
Because I credited you with the ability to use Google.
More than 62% of Democrats voted for Hillary despite her being the most corrupt politician of her generation. People vote their party, which is to say their team and their perceived self interest. Surprise, surprise.
There is no paragraph that could redeem thosse words. (Completely unsupportable assertion.)
The words of a privileged empty-headed not so young man. (Snarky and needlessly insulating.)
But you can post them if you think they salvage this dumpster fire of oligarch entitlement. (Emotional, histrionic, and admission of omission.)
Never change, ARM.
BTW, why do liberals love the "lie by omission" strategy so much? Is it because reality has a conservative bias?
Kyzer SoSay said...
why do liberals love
Because they are beautiful people.
ARM finally admits he's beautiful.
I have never been a member of the beautiful people, I am not now a member, I cannot imagine becoming a member, and I do not sympathize with beautiful people principles.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Greg the class traitor said...
Then why haven't you provided a link?
Because I credited you with the ability to use Google.
Then you're an idiot, an a$$, or a liar.
You have the goods on someone? You provide a link. Is your link to the primary document? Great! I'll read it.
Is your link to someone claiming that "X said Y", with no actual link to X saying Y? Why, then, I mock you as a dishonest hack.
But no, I'm not going to do your work for you. i'm not going to let you say "oh, that link's not valid, you should have used a different one." I'm not, in short, going to spend any time or effort attempting to prove that you are correct.
That's your job, not mine.
You claimed to quote what Trump Jr. said. If your claim was not utter garbage, then at the point in time you had the link right there. Any honest person would have included the link. you didn't. Therefore, you are assumed to be dishonest, and lying about something.
So, provide us you best link to "this is what Trump Jr said". You don't have that? Then you have nothing, and your'e not worth any more time.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
Greg the class traitor said...
Then why haven't you provided a link?
Because I credited you with the ability to use Google.
tl;dr:
I will never put in any effort to try to prove your claim. If you haven't provided a link to where I can look up the speech you claim you are quoting, I will assume you are lying, and blow off anything you have to say
because there's no honest reason not to provide the link
You are one of the idiots claiming that the quote is unrepresentative. It is your claim that is in question.
Beloved Commenter AReasonableMan said...
You are one of the idiots claiming that the quote is unrepresentative. It is your claim that is in question.
Wrongo, buffalo breath
I'm claiming that, so long as you don't provide a link to the quote, nothing you claim about it has any value or worth.
As far as i'm concerned, you're making up the whole thing.
If you'd like to prove you're not making up the whole thing, you'll provide a link to the quote.
Since you're dorking around, refusing to provide the link you used to quote from, it appears obvious to me that you are lying.
So, please, don't provide any links, because then in clean conscience I get to ignore everything you're saying.
Links, or it didn't happen
6 hours later, no link
I guess he was making it all up
Once again, you are the idiot disputing the quotes. Show evidence that they are wrong.
Is there anything that Edwin Edwards could have done during the 1991 Louisiana gubernatorial campaign that would have led Andrew Sullivan to vote for David Duke rather than Edwards?
IF you're in one state, and fire across a state line; a kill someone in the other state
WHERE is your crime? The state you're in? Or the state your victim is in?
Law people! Help me out!
You can be prosecuted in both states. Just as Aaron Burr was indicted by both New York and New Jersey for his murder (excuse me: his "alleged" murder) of Alexander Hamilton.
Excitable Andy doesn't take into account who or what Trump would be running against. Never a big Trump fan myself, and certainly nowhere near a Trump cultist; but there is no way I'd vote for whatever State cultist he'll be running against.
Chance to provide link to quote is now gone
I'm not going to provide a link, and have you say "oh, no, that's not the real quote", or any other such BS.
You had a link. You won't share it. Obviously it's because it's a crap link to a crap site that no sane person would trust
Bye!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा