Sometimes we see boat fishers in the pics but no one is fishing off the dock, are there no fish that come into shore? On Lake Huron the wind brings the alewives in to shore and the walleye come in to get them.
There was a time during the COVID tyranny when one could enter a restaurant with a mask on, take the mask off when sitting at your table, and then be required to put a mask on to go to and from a restroom. If anyone ever heard a rationale for how that could reduce the spread of the virus, please share it. In the suddenly famous Last Ditch, one was required to wear a mask, but how did one drink (or eat if food was available)? If people were allowed to unmask in order to drink then it seems there was no reason other than submitting to woke ideology for obeying the mask mandate.
Several of the Fox News primetime lineup were guests at the State Dinner for Xi last night. Tonight, they recapped their experience. Interesting contrast to how the MSM pretend they didn't hang out with the Dem presidents. CC, JSM
For the first time in as long as I’ve been watching the Amazon top 100 best seller list, there are zero political books on it. Nada. Nil. Rien. With elections a month away, no one is reading political books or writing them, I suppose. Fahrenheit 451 is still on the list, now at #70. Otherwise it’s children’s books, puzzle books, coloring books, mysteries, love stories and science fiction. So then I checked Amazon Charts: The Top 20 Most Sold & Most Read Books of the Week. Zero political books. Amazing. This might bode well for Republicans, and might explain why the stock Althouse antiTrump commenters are in such a frenzy. Internal polling must be bad.
"Sometimes we see boat fishers in the pics but no one is fishing off the dock, are there no fish that come into shore? On Lake Huron the wind brings the alewives in to shore and the walleye come in to get them."
There's a restaurant on Washington Island, WI that advertises "fresh lawyers." I had to look it up: "An alewife is a small, silvery schooling herring that acts as a critical food source (forage fish). A lawyer (most commonly known as a burbot) is a large, slimy, bottom-dwelling predator that eats alewives."
Let us pause for a moment and give remembrance to the word "many" which has all but disappeared from common usage*. All hail to the new word "multiple."
*Yes, "use" as a noun, as in "common use" is no longer heard nor seen. The young replacement "usificationage" is already making an appearance.
Don't know if our hostess will ever want to look at the President's powerful address to the United Nations, but here is a piece that makes some great points. I saw it courtesy of Instapundit's link to it. The writer believes Trump's failures are failures to follow his own logic more fully and forcefully.
Saw my lawn guy at the gas station getting coffee, and he said he has started moonlighting because the price of gas is killing his business, not to mention the looming heating oil bills.
Trump claiming to be the “peace president” while setting the world aflame was a pretty good joke. But the idea that what is needed is even more forceful pursuit of his goals is Triumph of the Will territory. It’s fascism.
You know, Fiddler on the Roof was about the Ukrain, where Ukrainians gleefully participated in the holocaust, throwing in many Poles and Hungarians for good measure, and Ukraine is building a “Pantheon of Heroes,” honoring people like Bandera and Melnyk.
Hey! Years ago when I worked at a landscaping company EVERY COMPANY added a gas surcharge if the price of gas went above “X” price. Tell your bad business man to charge you a gas surcharge and help him out temporarily. Or are you too much of a skinflint to do that?
Jaq surely must know that SOME Ukrainians "gleefully participated in the holocaust", which he should have capitalized, while the vast majority, including Zelenskyy's grandfather, fought in the Red Army. This despite the fact that Stalin was at least as tyrannical and mass-murderous as Hitler, and nearly as anti-Semitic, so the lesser of two evils was not so easy to judge in those days.
Similarly, some Dutchmen (22,000-25,000, from a much smaller country) joined the SS and gleefully participated in the Holocaust, with no such compulsion to choose between two horrible sides. Was Jaq's Dutch grandfather one of them?
""Bad faith" means what it means to me. You are disrespecting my work and acting as if you would like to ruin this forum. In my opinion." It's your forum to ruin, kiddo. Adios.
“But the idea that what is needed is even more forceful pursuit of his goals is Triumph of the Will territory. It’s fascism.”
He is a wanker not a banker He is afraid to take a piss It is the thing Vermonters ask for When they convey they are possessed
Before he dies, before he dies Before he dies, he’ll get another piece of pie Some maple syrup on his pie He’ll get another piece of pie if he has to lie
It was a thing Tim had to do It was a rancid, bitter pill It took some time for him to swallow It was a Triumph of the Will
--- This might bode well for Republicans, and might explain why the stock Althouse antiTrump commenters are in such a frenzy. Internal polling must be bad. [EvaMarie]
Very interesting point about the book lists. But I think you should look more closely at the "stock Althouse [pro]Trump commenters." They are going crazy, as I read here. God forbid I or anyone else disagree with them. They just can't bear it. Off with their heads and TRY to insult them off the site.
For what? So Peachy et al can say the same few things another thousand times? They seem to need a private club where no one else will ever disturb them. How exciting that would be. The boredom factor is already driving people away, one commenter at a time.
As for the election, the Republicans will run ahead of public polls, is my guess -- they always do, nowadays. Whether that is enough to gain any ground is another matter.
--- But the idea that what is needed is even more forceful pursuit of his goals is Triumph of the Will territory. It’s fascism. [Jaq]
Maybe to an Aunty Trump, Jaq. But, to cite:
This is where Trump Derangement Syndrome becomes analytically expensive. If every Trump statement must first be processed as an outrage, very little intellectual bandwidth remains for asking what the administration is actually doing. Trump’s language makes the temptation particularly strong. He speaks in superlatives where a foreign-policy seminar would prefer subordinate clauses. Yet vocabulary should not be confused with doctrine. Behind the boasts sits a conception of international politics much older than the post-Cold War order: sovereign states remain the principal political actors; international institutions derive their usefulness from the states that sustain them; military capability underwrites diplomacy; borders define political communities; and treaties are instruments of statecraft rather than substitutes for it.
Trump’s rhetoric sometimes runs ahead of his willingness to act. Having described the stakes in existential terms, his administration can hesitate at precisely the moment when language demands consequence. The problem is not that Trump’s doctrine is too radical, but that its execution is occasionally insufficiently so. A theory of sovereignty ultimately depends upon credibility: once power has spoken in the language of decision, hesitation carries a price. The remedy is therefore greater correspondence between word and deed, not more modest words.
For several decades, Western political discourse often behaved as though sovereignty were an embarrassing inheritance from an uncivilised past, something advanced societies might gradually subcontract to courts, conventions, bureaucracies and transnational governance. Trump treats it instead as political capital: accumulated painfully, surrendered easily and recovered only through the exercise of power.
I believe this is an open thread here so as the Host had advised I will place my comments here on an instruction from the host on the nonsense up in here. excellent statement that IS printed in the rules, anyone who follows this blog sees the ones who ALWAYS HAVE degrading ,name calling comments, some with sometimes at least half the posts on an issue. Personal insults, constant name calling seemed to be the way here even with the rule book listed below, Thank you maybe the "perps" doing the constant daily influx will adhere to common courtesy debate rather than the immediate NAME CALLING, if your blue YOU SHOULD DIE, one guy here said while ago" JOE BIDEN got cancer, im glad I hope he dies a slow and painful death" that person supposedly a lawyer.? hmmmm its in the archives, I found that pretty amazing not for what was said but how it was just flossed over. Statements Ignorant slut, foul language on the Lords day, death wishes on others, and grade school banter, will hopefully quell but time will tell. Freshen up time nice :)
ICE killed another man. His name is Mario David Coronado Juarez.
Mario lived and worked in Michigan for 7 years as a construction worker, sending money home to his kids in Guatemala.
Response by Homeland Security:
On September 20, ICE officers attempted a stop of a vehicle registered to a known criminal illegal alien with multiple alcohol related driving offenses who is also wanted in Guatemala for a drunk and disorderly charge, during a targeted enforcement operation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
As officers attempted the stop to confirm the identity of the driver, the driver of the vehicle fled at a high rate of speed. In the interest of public safety, ICE officers immediately discontinued the enforcement action. A short time later, officers saw smoke nearly half a mile from the attempted stop and discovered the vehicle had crashed into a tree and caught fire. Officers immediately attempted to render aid and extinguish the fire until the Grand Rapids Police Department and Fire Department arrived. The driver was pronounced dead at the scene by local officials. Officials also estimated that the suspect’s vehicle was traveling well over 100 miles per hour when the crash occurred.
Upon further investigation the driver of the vehicle was Mario David Coronado-Juarez and not the vehicle’s registered owner. Coronado-Juarez was an illegal alien from Guatemala who was previously removed by Border Patrol from the United States in 2021. He re-entered the country, a felony, at an unknown date and location.
Good to see Steve and Jared getting involved again -- I'm feeling very positive about the outcome.
Trump is not going to get anything better than the MoU from here. Fuel prices rocketing, bond market turmoil and dire polling at the worst time possible relative to the mid-terms is only going to weaken his hand. It's amazing how much damage his Obama Derangement Syndrome has done to the US and the world overall.
Remember Rex Tillerson, Trump's first secretary of state in the first four-year disaster? He succinctly described Trump as a fucking moron.
Trump, and Iran, are going to get something much better than the MOU. The IRGC-mullah regime is going to collapse, all the leaders are going to head for Russia via the Caspian ports, or Afghanistan via the border, and those who don't make it are going to be hanged from lamp posts. After that, there will a caretaker regime, most likely led by Reza Pahlavi, followed by elections, most likely leading to a constitutional monarchy and peace with Israel. The inflation rate makes collapse inevitable.
That’s quite a parlay: severe inflation → regime collapse → leadership flight, executions, a Pahlavi caretaker government, elections, constitutional monarchy, and peace with Israel.
“Inflation makes collapse inevitable” is doing an astonishing amount of work here. Iran’s economic crisis is real, but you’ve turned it into a complete screenplay in which every subsequent plot point is treated as predictable. Regime collapse, leadership flight, executions, a Pahlavi-led transition, elections, a constitutional monarchy, and peace with Israel are all separate contingencies - not inevitable consequences of inflation.
That’s less a forecast than a highly speculative chain of events presented as if the ending has already been written.
Highly speculative? It's already happening. Baluchi forces in the SE are killing IRGC troops in large numbers, cheering for Reza Pahlavi, and insisting that they are not separatists, as the lying IRGC pretends. And I never claimed that inflation sufficed. The fact is that the people hated the regime even before it slaughtered 40,000-100,000 of them in January. The 'moderate' prime minister did a survey last fall, and concluded that 92% of the population opposed the regime even then. And inflation does mean that the regime cannot pay its enforcers. Again, plenty of reports from Iran that low-ranking soldiers and IRGCs are deeply depressed because they haven't been paid in months, and everyone hates them, too. Collapse is in fact inevitable, as long as the blockade continues. If you don't know that, you don't know much. Of course, the people who write your talking points don't want you to know that, so they'll never tell you.
That’s not a forecast. It’s a Wikipedia article from three years in the future.
Assad’s fall shows that authoritarian regimes can collapse quickly. It doesn’t establish that every Iranian domino will fall in your preferred order. You’ve demonstrated that collapse is possible, not that you’ve obtained the spoiler-free version of the future.
By the way, how dumb do you have to be to think that "regime collapse", "leadership flight", and "executions" are separate stages? If the regime is brutally tyrannical and hated by the vast majority of the people, its collapse will inevitably include a flight of any leaders who can afford to escape, and execution of at least some of those who fail to escape. The flight and the executions are integral parts of the collapse. Duh! How ignorant of history do you have to be not to know that? It's less than two years since Assad's regime suddenly collapsed, he and a few others escaped to Moscow, and many of his followers were killed before they could escape. The collapse and flight were also simultaneous for James II in 1688, and Yanukovych in 2014, though the aftermath was a lot less bloody in those cases, since neither had slaughtered 40,000+ citizens in a few days.
No one said regime collapse, flight, and executions have to occur in separate stages. The point is that their occurrence, timing, scale, and relationship are contingent—not historically pre-programmed.
Assad, James II, and Yanukovych demonstrate that regimes can collapse and leaders can flee. They don’t demonstrate that Iran’s collapse, if it occurs, must follow the same script—or that we can skip ahead and fill in the missing chapters.
History provides precedents, not spoilers.
“Duh” is a curious substitute for a theory of causation.
As an aside—and ironically—you’re accusing me of ignorance while making the more questionable epistemic move: turning historical examples into predictions about a specific future event.
For God's sake, the regime is not only hated, it is unable to pay its troops, or feed the citizens. How long will hired killers keep killing when they're not being paid?
And I never claimed that the events I mentioned are all inevitable and could only happen in one particular order. Just because you allow your paymasters to put words in your mouth does not give you the right to put words in my mouth. I won't let you do that even if you offer to pay me.
I do say that collapse is inevitable as long as Trump doesn't let up on the blockade and other pressure.
Ah, so we’ve gone from “collapse → flight → executions → Pahlavi → elections → constitutional monarchy → peace with Israel” to “I never said those things were inevitable.” That’s quite a useful revision of the original forecast.
No one disputes that Iran is under extraordinary economic pressure. The interesting question is whether that pressure actually breaks the regime’s coercive apparatus. That’s precisely the part that isn’t established: economic misery can weaken a regime, but it doesn’t tell us when—or whether—its security forces stop enforcing it. Current analysis specifically identifies cohesion or fragmentation of the security forces as a critical variable.
And “collapse is inevitable as long as Trump maintains the blockade” is, of course, another prediction of inevitability. You haven’t escaped the crystal ball; you’ve simply moved it one sentence to the right.
The evidence supports “under severe strain.” The leap to “therefore inevitable” is still doing all the heavy lifting.
We shall see how it turns out, and which of us is the lying weasel repeating anti-Trump talking points, and which is the one that actually understands how the world works.
By the way, my 4:55pm comment used "most likely" twice, so your claim that I said that all those likely events were "inevitable" is a damned lie. I say that collapse is inevitable, if Trump keeps the pressure on, and that is a very likely way for it to unroll.
That’s an interesting revision. You didn’t merely mention those possibilities—you predicted them, using “going to” and “most likely” throughout.
No one claimed they had to happen in separate stages. The point is that you presented a very specific sequence of contingent events with considerable confidence, and now seem surprised that someone noticed.
I'm not at all surprised that a lying weasel continues to pretend that saying two events are "most likely" means I think they're "inevitable", or that giving a list of events I think will happen means a promise that they must happen in precisely that order, one after the other. It's not a fucking numbered list, and I've already explained that the collapse, flight, and execution of stragglers are generally simultaneous. Now bugger off to BlueSky, you ignorant bastard.
You seem remarkably angry at an argument I haven’t actually made. I never said your events had to occur in numbered stages, nor that “most likely” means “inevitable.”
I said that you presented a highly specific set of future events as likely—including regime collapse, leadership flight, executions, a Pahlavi-led caretaker government, elections, constitutional monarchy, and peace with Israel—and then objected when someone treated those statements as predictions.
That remains the point.
The profanity doesn’t change the verbs you used. “Going to” is still a prediction, “most likely” is still a prediction, and “inevitable” is still a prediction.
But by all means, keep the exclamation marks. They seem to be doing more work than your argument.
Lying weasel keeps lying and weaseling. Anyone who reads what I wrote and what lying weasel wrote, will be able to see that. If lying weasel wants to pretend that he won the argument, he's welcome to. Most things he writes here have no connection with reality.
At this point, there’s nothing left to rebut. You’ve replaced the argument with “𝘭𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘭” and a declaration that you’re right.
Since there’s no new factual claim here to address, I’ll leave you to the name-calling. The forecast remains yours; the certainty remains yours; and the future remains stubbornly unconsulted.
There's a great deal left to rebut. You could offer an alternative ending to the story, explaining how the Iranian regime could possibly survive the next year or two, but you don't do that, because you are, as usual, a paid anti-Trump propagandist, who has been proven to copy talking points from others. And who violates the "No italics, even briefly" rule, to boot: arrogance or incompetence, who can tell?
Finally, someone who objects to "name-calling" probably shouldn't have ended his very first comment with "fucking moron". You put the words in someone else's mouth (though without quotation marks), but obviously endorsed them, like the foul-mouthed hypocrite you are.
That’s an impressive escape hatch: you make a prediction, demand that I disprove it by making a different prediction, and then declare victory when I decline.
By that logic, anyone can win any argument simply by demanding that their opponent predict the future more convincingly.
No one's asking you to disprove it. Just give us a plausible account of how the Iranian regime can possibly survive, when 92% of the population hated them before they murdered 40,000+ of them, when they can't pay their hired thugs, inflation is 2,300,000%, when every country's tankers are getting through Hormuz except Iran's. Has any regime ever survived hyperinflation? Maybe Mugabe's, but it didn't have the U.S. or Israeli armed forces arrayed against it.
If my prediction is so obviously wrong, you should be able to come up more than one plausible alternative account. But you can't, and you know it, because the collapse of the Iranian regime is in fact inevitable.
Of course the regime could survive. History is full of deeply unpopular governments that endured economic catastrophe and repression; Zimbabwe survived one of the worst hyperinflations ever recorded.
The real question isn’t whether Iran is in terrible shape—it plainly is—but whether its coercive apparatus, elite cohesion, and ability to fund repression have actually reached a breaking point. That requires evidence, not repeated claims that collapse is “most likely.”
And if you need me to make a competing prediction before defending yours, you’re not presenting evidence. You’re asking me to play Nostradamus.
Stop playing stupid - or being stupid, as the case may be.
Iran's "ability to fund repression" is nearing zero, and I didn't say they've "actually reached a breaking point", they haven't broken yet, but that it is inevitable that they will reach one, most likely in the next few months. Yet another of your sleazy misrepresentations.
One more time: their troops aren't being paid. And if they do get an occasional months-overdue paycheck, it's in rials, which are worthless. Do you understand what that means? And they're not going to be paid as long as Iran's exports through the Gulf are shut off.
It wouldn't take a Nostradamus to explain how they might survive, just someone with a basic understanding of economics, human nature, and geopolitics. In other words, someone other than you.
Those are some very interesting quotes! The ending paragraph at 12:53 hides a very ghastly concept -- the opponents of traditional national sovereignty apparently think, or at least wants us hoi polloi to think, that the individuals who would be implementing the "courts, conventions, bureaucracies and transnational governance' would be a better class of human than the rest of us, interested only in what's best for everyone and not a hint of self-interest. That is all complete b******* of cars
Why is anyone talking with IEE? What an immense waste of time. (And why does Althouse apparently think he / she / it is coming from here in good faith, rather than one of those who is trying to degrade or destroy this place. But that's an unanswerable question.)
I only reply to the talking-points creep to help any third parties still reading, who might be tempted to believe some of the things he cuts and pastes here, especially if they're new here. I was worried that there was no such person here, but I'm glad to see there's one. (And I always hope a few people will eventually see even a long-dead thread.)
K.P.: Arguing with some people here is good practice in some ways. Not great practice, but rather like the ancient Roman military exercise of practicing with their sword on a tree-stump. A good exercise, even if the stump is too dumb to fight back. Basically, the sword equivalent of a punching bag.
The U.S. should substantially reduce its military footprint and security commitments in the Middle East; otherwise, it will remain vulnerable to being drawn into the region’s conflicts.
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
५७ टिप्पण्या:
Nice photos. Good to see a couple peeps out there, looking at the lake.
Sometimes we see boat fishers in the pics but no one is fishing off the dock, are there no fish that come into shore? On Lake Huron the wind brings the alewives in to shore and the walleye come in to get them.
There was a time during the COVID tyranny when one could enter a restaurant with a mask on, take the mask off when sitting at your table, and then be required to put a mask on to go to and from a restroom. If anyone ever heard a rationale for how that could reduce the spread of the virus, please share it.
In the suddenly famous Last Ditch, one was required to wear a mask, but how did one drink (or eat if food was available)?
If people were allowed to unmask in order to drink then it seems there was no reason other than submitting to woke ideology for obeying the mask mandate.
Several of the Fox News primetime lineup were guests at the State Dinner for Xi last night. Tonight, they recapped their experience. Interesting contrast to how the MSM pretend they didn't hang out with the Dem presidents. CC, JSM
For the first time in as long as I’ve been watching the Amazon top 100 best seller list, there are zero political books on it. Nada. Nil. Rien. With elections a month away, no one is reading political books or writing them, I suppose. Fahrenheit 451 is still on the list, now at #70. Otherwise it’s children’s books, puzzle books, coloring books, mysteries, love stories and science fiction.
So then I checked Amazon Charts: The Top 20 Most Sold & Most Read Books of the Week. Zero political books. Amazing.
This might bode well for Republicans, and might explain why the stock Althouse antiTrump commenters are in such a frenzy. Internal polling must be bad.
Josephbleau said...
"Sometimes we see boat fishers in the pics but no one is fishing off the dock, are there no fish that come into shore? On Lake Huron the wind brings the alewives in to shore and the walleye come in to get them."
There's a restaurant on Washington Island, WI that advertises "fresh lawyers." I had to look it up:
"An alewife is a small, silvery schooling herring that acts as a critical food source (forage fish). A lawyer (most commonly known as a burbot) is a large, slimy, bottom-dwelling predator that eats alewives."
Inside scoop on the Xi visit:
https://x.com/SoveyX/status/2103601794270015996/video/1?s=46
Internet meme:
"I asked a woman to explain the Lindsay Clancy trial to me like I'm five and she started strangling me."
Always nice to see a calm lake at sunset, trees.
Let us pause for a moment and give remembrance to the word "many" which has all but disappeared from common usage*. All hail to the new word "multiple."
*Yes, "use" as a noun, as in "common use" is no longer heard nor seen. The young replacement "usificationage" is already making an appearance.
“ is this the little girl i carried,
is this the little boy at play?
(golde)
i don't remember growing older,
when did they?
(tevye)
when did she get to be a beauty,
when did he grow to be so tall?
(golde)
wasn't it yesterday when they were small?
(men)
sunrise, sunset (x2),
swiftly flow the days.
(women)
seedlings turn overnight to sunflowers,
blossoming even as we gaze.
(everyone)
sunrise, sunset (x2),
swiftly fly the years,
one season following another,
laiden with happiness and tears.
The Week in Pictures: Xi’s Gotta Have It Edition | Power Line https://share.google/jThN8JQO5DaBEjPKa
Don't know if our hostess will ever want to look at the President's powerful address to the United Nations, but here is a piece that makes some great points. I saw it courtesy of Instapundit's link to it. The writer believes Trump's failures are failures to follow his own logic more fully and forcefully.
https://righttimes.substack.com/p/recovering-sovereignty-trumps-lesson
Saw my lawn guy at the gas station getting coffee, and he said he has started moonlighting because the price of gas is killing his business, not to mention the looming heating oil bills.
Trump claiming to be the “peace president” while setting the world aflame was a pretty good joke. But the idea that what is needed is even more forceful pursuit of his goals is Triumph of the Will territory. It’s fascism.
You know, Fiddler on the Roof was about the Ukrain, where Ukrainians gleefully participated in the holocaust, throwing in many Poles and Hungarians for good measure, and Ukraine is building a “Pantheon of Heroes,” honoring people like Bandera and Melnyk.
Hey! Years ago when I worked at a landscaping company EVERY COMPANY added a gas surcharge if the price of gas went above “X” price. Tell your bad business man to charge you a gas surcharge and help him out temporarily.
Or are you too much of a skinflint to do that?
Jaq surely must know that SOME Ukrainians "gleefully participated in the holocaust", which he should have capitalized, while the vast majority, including Zelenskyy's grandfather, fought in the Red Army. This despite the fact that Stalin was at least as tyrannical and mass-murderous as Hitler, and nearly as anti-Semitic, so the lesser of two evils was not so easy to judge in those days.
Similarly, some Dutchmen (22,000-25,000, from a much smaller country) joined the SS and gleefully participated in the Holocaust, with no such compulsion to choose between two horrible sides. Was Jaq's Dutch grandfather one of them?
The Althousian community is smaller by one this morning; the man with whom I've been helping in hospice care passed away last night.
He was a very good man.
""Bad faith" means what it means to me. You are disrespecting my work and acting as if you would like to ruin this forum. In my opinion."
It's your forum to ruin, kiddo. Adios.
Sorry to hear that, Jamie. God speed, sir.
“But the idea that what is needed is even more forceful pursuit of his goals is Triumph of the Will territory. It’s fascism.”
He is a wanker not a banker
He is afraid to take a piss
It is the thing Vermonters ask for
When they convey they are possessed
Before he dies, before he dies
Before he dies, he’ll get another piece of pie
Some maple syrup on his pie
He’ll get another piece of pie if he has to lie
It was a thing Tim had to do
It was a rancid, bitter pill
It took some time for him to swallow
It was a Triumph of the Will
--- This might bode well for Republicans, and might explain why the stock Althouse antiTrump commenters are in such a frenzy. Internal polling must be bad. [EvaMarie]
Very interesting point about the book lists. But I think you should look more closely at the "stock Althouse [pro]Trump commenters." They are going crazy, as I read here. God forbid I or anyone else disagree with them. They just can't bear it. Off with their heads and TRY to insult them off the site.
For what? So Peachy et al can say the same few things another thousand times? They seem to need a private club where no one else will ever disturb them. How exciting that would be. The boredom factor is already driving people away, one commenter at a time.
As for the election, the Republicans will run ahead of public polls, is my guess -- they always do, nowadays. Whether that is enough to gain any ground is another matter.
--- But the idea that what is needed is even more forceful pursuit of his goals is Triumph of the Will territory. It’s fascism. [Jaq]
Maybe to an Aunty Trump, Jaq. But, to cite:
This is where Trump Derangement Syndrome becomes analytically expensive. If every Trump statement must first be processed as an outrage, very little intellectual bandwidth remains for asking what the administration is actually doing. Trump’s language makes the temptation particularly strong. He speaks in superlatives where a foreign-policy seminar would prefer subordinate clauses. Yet vocabulary should not be confused with doctrine. Behind the boasts sits a conception of international politics much older than the post-Cold War order: sovereign states remain the principal political actors; international institutions derive their usefulness from the states that sustain them; military capability underwrites diplomacy; borders define political communities; and treaties are instruments of statecraft rather than substitutes for it.
https://righttimes.substack.com/p/recovering-sovereignty-trumps-lesson
And therefore the conclusion:
Trump’s rhetoric sometimes runs ahead of his willingness to act. Having described the stakes in existential terms, his administration can hesitate at precisely the moment when language demands consequence. The problem is not that Trump’s doctrine is too radical, but that its execution is occasionally insufficiently so. A theory of sovereignty ultimately depends upon credibility: once power has spoken in the language of decision, hesitation carries a price. The remedy is therefore greater correspondence between word and deed, not more modest words.
For several decades, Western political discourse often behaved as though sovereignty were an embarrassing inheritance from an uncivilised past, something advanced societies might gradually subcontract to courts, conventions, bureaucracies and transnational governance. Trump treats it instead as political capital: accumulated painfully, surrendered easily and recovered only through the exercise of power.
--- Adios.
I hope you meant Au revoir.
I believe this is an open thread here so as the Host had advised I will place my comments here on an instruction from the host on the nonsense up in here. excellent statement that IS printed in the rules, anyone who follows this blog sees the ones who ALWAYS HAVE degrading ,name calling comments, some with sometimes at least half the posts on an issue. Personal insults, constant name calling seemed to be the way here even with the rule book listed below, Thank you maybe the "perps" doing the constant daily influx will adhere to common courtesy debate rather than the immediate NAME CALLING, if your blue YOU SHOULD DIE, one guy here said while ago" JOE BIDEN got cancer, im glad I hope he dies a slow and painful death" that person supposedly a lawyer.? hmmmm its in the archives, I found that pretty amazing not for what was said but how it was just flossed over. Statements Ignorant slut, foul language on the Lords day, death wishes on others, and grade school banter, will hopefully quell but time will tell. Freshen up time nice :)
Fun fact of the day
California has a population of nearly 40 million people but only added 200 nonfarm jobs in the first 6 months of 2026 according to government reports.
Post by Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib on X:
ICE killed another man. His name is Mario David Coronado Juarez.
Mario lived and worked in Michigan for 7 years as a construction worker, sending money home to his kids in Guatemala.
Response by Homeland Security:
On September 20, ICE officers attempted a stop of a vehicle registered to a known criminal illegal alien with multiple alcohol related driving offenses who is also wanted in Guatemala for a drunk and disorderly charge, during a targeted enforcement operation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
As officers attempted the stop to confirm the identity of the driver, the driver of the vehicle fled at a high rate of speed. In the interest of public safety, ICE officers immediately discontinued the enforcement action. A short time later, officers saw smoke nearly half a mile from the attempted stop and discovered the vehicle had crashed into a tree and caught fire. Officers immediately attempted to render aid and extinguish the fire until the Grand Rapids Police Department and Fire Department arrived. The driver was pronounced dead at the scene by local officials. Officials also estimated that the suspect’s vehicle was traveling well over 100 miles per hour when the crash occurred.
Upon further investigation the driver of the vehicle was Mario David Coronado-Juarez and not the vehicle’s registered owner. Coronado-Juarez was an illegal alien from Guatemala who was previously removed by Border Patrol from the United States in 2021. He re-entered the country, a felony, at an unknown date and location.
Trump Rejects Iran Ceasefire, Expects Renewed Bombing After Midterms ~ WSJ
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘢𝘺𝘴 ‘𝘐’𝘮 𝘳𝘦𝘫𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘥𝘦𝘢𝘭’ 𝘢𝘴 𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘥𝘭𝘺 𝘷𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘥𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘤, 𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘤 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘮𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘭𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘴
Good to see Steve and Jared getting involved again -- I'm feeling very positive about the outcome.
Trump is not going to get anything better than the MoU from here. Fuel prices rocketing, bond market turmoil and dire polling at the worst time possible relative to the mid-terms is only going to weaken his hand. It's amazing how much damage his Obama Derangement Syndrome has done to the US and the world overall.
Remember Rex Tillerson, Trump's first secretary of state in the first four-year disaster? He succinctly described Trump as a fucking moron.
Trump, and Iran, are going to get something much better than the MOU. The IRGC-mullah regime is going to collapse, all the leaders are going to head for Russia via the Caspian ports, or Afghanistan via the border, and those who don't make it are going to be hanged from lamp posts. After that, there will a caretaker regime, most likely led by Reza Pahlavi, followed by elections, most likely leading to a constitutional monarchy and peace with Israel. The inflation rate makes collapse inevitable.
And no, I don't remember Rex Tillerson. Why should I? What did he ever do except make excuses?
*They are going crazy, as I read here.*
We're not the ones defending a woman who strangled her three kids.
That’s quite a parlay: severe inflation → regime collapse → leadership flight, executions, a Pahlavi caretaker government, elections, constitutional monarchy, and peace with Israel.
“Inflation makes collapse inevitable” is doing an astonishing amount of work here. Iran’s economic crisis is real, but you’ve turned it into a complete screenplay in which every subsequent plot point is treated as predictable. Regime collapse, leadership flight, executions, a Pahlavi-led transition, elections, a constitutional monarchy, and peace with Israel are all separate contingencies - not inevitable consequences of inflation.
That’s less a forecast than a highly speculative chain of events presented as if the ending has already been written.
Highly speculative? It's already happening. Baluchi forces in the SE are killing IRGC troops in large numbers, cheering for Reza Pahlavi, and insisting that they are not separatists, as the lying IRGC pretends. And I never claimed that inflation sufficed. The fact is that the people hated the regime even before it slaughtered 40,000-100,000 of them in January. The 'moderate' prime minister did a survey last fall, and concluded that 92% of the population opposed the regime even then. And inflation does mean that the regime cannot pay its enforcers. Again, plenty of reports from Iran that low-ranking soldiers and IRGCs are deeply depressed because they haven't been paid in months, and everyone hates them, too. Collapse is in fact inevitable, as long as the blockade continues. If you don't know that, you don't know much. Of course, the people who write your talking points don't want you to know that, so they'll never tell you.
Iran is in serious trouble. But you’ve leapt from “the regime is in deep trouble” to “I know exactly how the next six chapters end.”
Your argument is essentially: 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘴𝘰 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘱𝘴𝘦; 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘦; 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘥; 𝘗𝘢𝘩𝘭𝘢𝘷𝘪 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯; 𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸; 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘳𝘤𝘩𝘺 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘯; 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘨𝘦𝘵 𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦.
That’s not a forecast. It’s a Wikipedia article from three years in the future.
Assad’s fall shows that authoritarian regimes can collapse quickly. It doesn’t establish that every Iranian domino will fall in your preferred order. You’ve demonstrated that collapse is possible, not that you’ve obtained the spoiler-free version of the future.
By the way, how dumb do you have to be to think that "regime collapse", "leadership flight", and "executions" are separate stages? If the regime is brutally tyrannical and hated by the vast majority of the people, its collapse will inevitably include a flight of any leaders who can afford to escape, and execution of at least some of those who fail to escape. The flight and the executions are integral parts of the collapse. Duh! How ignorant of history do you have to be not to know that? It's less than two years since Assad's regime suddenly collapsed, he and a few others escaped to Moscow, and many of his followers were killed before they could escape. The collapse and flight were also simultaneous for James II in 1688, and Yanukovych in 2014, though the aftermath was a lot less bloody in those cases, since neither had slaughtered 40,000+ citizens in a few days.
No one said regime collapse, flight, and executions have to occur in separate stages. The point is that their occurrence, timing, scale, and relationship are contingent—not historically pre-programmed.
Assad, James II, and Yanukovych demonstrate that regimes can collapse and leaders can flee. They don’t demonstrate that Iran’s collapse, if it occurs, must follow the same script—or that we can skip ahead and fill in the missing chapters.
History provides precedents, not spoilers.
“Duh” is a curious substitute for a theory of causation.
As an aside—and ironically—you’re accusing me of ignorance while making the more questionable epistemic move: turning historical examples into predictions about a specific future event.
For God's sake, the regime is not only hated, it is unable to pay its troops, or feed the citizens. How long will hired killers keep killing when they're not being paid?
And I never claimed that the events I mentioned are all inevitable and could only happen in one particular order. Just because you allow your paymasters to put words in your mouth does not give you the right to put words in my mouth. I won't let you do that even if you offer to pay me.
I do say that collapse is inevitable as long as Trump doesn't let up on the blockade and other pressure.
Ah, so we’ve gone from “collapse → flight → executions → Pahlavi → elections → constitutional monarchy → peace with Israel” to “I never said those things were inevitable.” That’s quite a useful revision of the original forecast.
No one disputes that Iran is under extraordinary economic pressure. The interesting question is whether that pressure actually breaks the regime’s coercive apparatus. That’s precisely the part that isn’t established: economic misery can weaken a regime, but it doesn’t tell us when—or whether—its security forces stop enforcing it. Current analysis specifically identifies cohesion or fragmentation of the security forces as a critical variable.
And “collapse is inevitable as long as Trump maintains the blockade” is, of course, another prediction of inevitability. You haven’t escaped the crystal ball; you’ve simply moved it one sentence to the right.
The evidence supports “under severe strain.” The leap to “therefore inevitable” is still doing all the heavy lifting.
We shall see how it turns out, and which of us is the lying weasel repeating anti-Trump talking points, and which is the one that actually understands how the world works.
By the way, my 4:55pm comment used "most likely" twice, so your claim that I said that all those likely events were "inevitable" is a damned lie. I say that collapse is inevitable, if Trump keeps the pressure on, and that is a very likely way for it to unroll.
Dr Weevil writes: 𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙄𝙍𝙂𝘾-𝙢𝙪𝙡𝙡𝙖𝙝 𝙧𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙢𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙜𝙤𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙤 𝙘𝙤𝙡𝙡𝙖𝙥𝙨𝙚, 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙜𝙤𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙤 𝙝𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙍𝙪𝙨𝙨𝙞𝙖 𝙫𝙞𝙖 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘾𝙖𝙨𝙥𝙞𝙖𝙣 𝙥𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙨, 𝙤𝙧 𝘼𝙛𝙜𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣 𝙫𝙞𝙖 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙗𝙤𝙧𝙙𝙚𝙧, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙨𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙙𝙤𝙣'𝙩 𝙢𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙞𝙩 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙜𝙤𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙤 𝙗𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙙 𝙛𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙡𝙖𝙢𝙥 𝙥𝙤𝙨𝙩𝙨. 𝘼𝙛𝙩𝙚𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩, 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙡𝙡 𝙖 𝙘𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙚𝙧 𝙧𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙢𝙚, 𝙢𝙤𝙨𝙩 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚𝙡𝙮 𝙡𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙍𝙚𝙯𝙖 𝙋𝙖𝙝𝙡𝙖𝙫𝙞, 𝙛𝙤𝙡𝙡𝙤𝙬𝙚𝙙 𝙗𝙮 𝙚𝙡𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨, 𝙢𝙤𝙨𝙩 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚𝙡𝙮 𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙤 𝙖 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙩𝙪𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙢𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙧𝙘𝙝𝙮 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙥𝙚𝙖𝙘𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙄𝙨𝙧𝙖𝙚𝙡.
Dr Weevil writes: 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙄 𝙣𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙘𝙡𝙖𝙞𝙢𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙨 𝙄 𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙙 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙫𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙤𝙣𝙡𝙮 𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙣 𝙞𝙣 𝙤𝙣𝙚 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙪𝙡𝙖𝙧 𝙤𝙧𝙙𝙚𝙧.
That’s an interesting revision. You didn’t merely mention those possibilities—you predicted them, using “going to” and “most likely” throughout.
No one claimed they had to happen in separate stages. The point is that you presented a very specific sequence of contingent events with considerable confidence, and now seem surprised that someone noticed.
I'm not at all surprised that a lying weasel continues to pretend that saying two events are "most likely" means I think they're "inevitable", or that giving a list of events I think will happen means a promise that they must happen in precisely that order, one after the other. It's not a fucking numbered list, and I've already explained that the collapse, flight, and execution of stragglers are generally simultaneous. Now bugger off to BlueSky, you ignorant bastard.
You seem remarkably angry at an argument I haven’t actually made. I never said your events had to occur in numbered stages, nor that “most likely” means “inevitable.”
I said that you presented a highly specific set of future events as likely—including regime collapse, leadership flight, executions, a Pahlavi-led caretaker government, elections, constitutional monarchy, and peace with Israel—and then objected when someone treated those statements as predictions.
That remains the point.
The profanity doesn’t change the verbs you used. “Going to” is still a prediction, “most likely” is still a prediction, and “inevitable” is still a prediction.
But by all means, keep the exclamation marks. They seem to be doing more work than your argument.
Lying weasel keeps lying and weaseling. Anyone who reads what I wrote and what lying weasel wrote, will be able to see that. If lying weasel wants to pretend that he won the argument, he's welcome to. Most things he writes here have no connection with reality.
At this point, there’s nothing left to rebut. You’ve replaced the argument with “𝘭𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘭” and a declaration that you’re right.
Since there’s no new factual claim here to address, I’ll leave you to the name-calling. The forecast remains yours; the certainty remains yours; and the future remains stubbornly unconsulted.
There's a great deal left to rebut. You could offer an alternative ending to the story, explaining how the Iranian regime could possibly survive the next year or two, but you don't do that, because you are, as usual, a paid anti-Trump propagandist, who has been proven to copy talking points from others. And who violates the "No italics, even briefly" rule, to boot: arrogance or incompetence, who can tell?
Finally, someone who objects to "name-calling" probably shouldn't have ended his very first comment with "fucking moron". You put the words in someone else's mouth (though without quotation marks), but obviously endorsed them, like the foul-mouthed hypocrite you are.
That’s an impressive escape hatch: you make a prediction, demand that I disprove it by making a different prediction, and then declare victory when I decline.
By that logic, anyone can win any argument simply by demanding that their opponent predict the future more convincingly.
No one's asking you to disprove it. Just give us a plausible account of how the Iranian regime can possibly survive, when 92% of the population hated them before they murdered 40,000+ of them, when they can't pay their hired thugs, inflation is 2,300,000%, when every country's tankers are getting through Hormuz except Iran's. Has any regime ever survived hyperinflation? Maybe Mugabe's, but it didn't have the U.S. or Israeli armed forces arrayed against it.
If my prediction is so obviously wrong, you should be able to come up more than one plausible alternative account. But you can't, and you know it, because the collapse of the Iranian regime is in fact inevitable.
Of course the regime could survive. History is full of deeply unpopular governments that endured economic catastrophe and repression; Zimbabwe survived one of the worst hyperinflations ever recorded.
The real question isn’t whether Iran is in terrible shape—it plainly is—but whether its coercive apparatus, elite cohesion, and ability to fund repression have actually reached a breaking point. That requires evidence, not repeated claims that collapse is “most likely.”
And if you need me to make a competing prediction before defending yours, you’re not presenting evidence. You’re asking me to play Nostradamus.
Stop playing stupid - or being stupid, as the case may be.
Iran's "ability to fund repression" is nearing zero, and I didn't say they've "actually reached a breaking point", they haven't broken yet, but that it is inevitable that they will reach one, most likely in the next few months. Yet another of your sleazy misrepresentations.
One more time: their troops aren't being paid. And if they do get an occasional months-overdue paycheck, it's in rials, which are worthless. Do you understand what that means? And they're not going to be paid as long as Iran's exports through the Gulf are shut off.
It wouldn't take a Nostradamus to explain how they might survive, just someone with a basic understanding of economics, human nature, and geopolitics. In other words, someone other than you.
Kai Akker,
Those are some very interesting quotes! The ending paragraph at 12:53 hides a very ghastly concept -- the opponents of traditional national sovereignty apparently think, or at least wants us hoi polloi to think, that the individuals who would be implementing the "courts, conventions, bureaucracies and transnational governance' would be a better class of human than the rest of us, interested only in what's best for everyone and not a hint of self-interest. That is all complete b******* of cars
Why is anyone talking with IEE? What an immense waste of time. (And why does Althouse apparently think he / she / it is coming from here in good faith, rather than one of those who is trying to degrade or destroy this place. But that's an unanswerable question.)
I only reply to the talking-points creep to help any third parties still reading, who might be tempted to believe some of the things he cuts and pastes here, especially if they're new here. I was worried that there was no such person here, but I'm glad to see there's one. (And I always hope a few people will eventually see even a long-dead thread.)
K.P.:
Arguing with some people here is good practice in some ways. Not great practice, but rather like the ancient Roman military exercise of practicing with their sword on a tree-stump. A good exercise, even if the stump is too dumb to fight back. Basically, the sword equivalent of a punching bag.
The U.S. should substantially reduce its military footprint and security commitments in the Middle East; otherwise, it will remain vulnerable to being drawn into the region’s conflicts.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 4 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith. Also: No italics, even briefly. Use asterisks for emphasis. And don't play with the format by changing fonts or using boldface or all caps. Never include more than one extra line break between paragraphs.