TRUMP MUST GO

[kallend 1,620]

He combines the integrity of Nixon, the morals of Warren Harding, the work ethic of Coolidge and the effectiveness of Buchanan in one obese package.

but George Will says it better than I possibly could:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/02/politics/george-will-donald-trump/index.html

[Phil1111 908]

Defeating cancer has proven difficult but come November it can be done.

[DJL 232]

16 minutes ago, kallend said:

but George Will says it better than I possibly could:

I'm sorry to say but a CNN recap of a Washington Post writer's article isn't going to reach the necessary audience.

But full text:

This unraveling presidency began with the Crybaby-in-Chief banging his spoon on his highchair tray to protest a photograph — a photograph — showing that his inauguration crowd the day before had been smaller than the one four years previous. Since then, this weak person’s idea of a strong person, this chest-pounding advertisement of his own gnawing insecurities, this low-rent Lear raging on his Twitter-heath has proven that the phrase malignant buffoon is not an oxymoron.

Presidents, exploiting modern communications technologies and abetted today by journalists preening as the “resistance” — like members of the French Resistance 1940-1944, minus the bravery — can set the tone of American society, which is regrettably soft wax on which presidents leave their marks. The president’s provocations — his coarsening of public discourse that lowers the threshold for acting out by people as mentally crippled as he — do not excuse the violent few. They must be punished. He must be removed.

Social causation is difficult to demonstrate, particularly between one person’s words and other persons’ deeds. However: The person voters hired in 2016 to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” stood on July 28, 2017, in front of uniformed police and urged them “please don’t be too nice” when handling suspected offenders. His hope was fulfilled for 8 minutes and 46 seconds on Minneapolis pavement.

What Daniel Patrick Moynihan termed “defining deviancy down” now defines American politics. In 2016, voters were presented an unprecedentedly unpalatable choice: Never had both major parties offered nominees with higher disapproval than approval numbers. Voters chose what they wagered would be the lesser blight. Now, however, they have watched him govern for 40 months and more than 40 percent — slightly less than the percentage that voted for him — approve of his sordid conduct.

Presidents seeking reelection bask in chants of “Four more years!” This year, however, most Americans — perhaps because they are, as the president predicted, weary from all the winning — might flinch: Four more years of this? The taste of ashes, metaphorical and now literal, dampens enthusiasm.

 

The nation’s downward spiral into acrimony and sporadic anarchy has had many causes much larger than the small man who is the great exacerbator of them. Most of the causes predate his presidency, and most will survive its January terminus. The measures necessary for restoration of national equilibrium are many and will be protracted far beyond his removal. One such measure must be the removal of those in Congress who, unlike the sycophantic mediocrities who cosset him in the White House, will not disappear “magically,” as Eric Trump said the coronavirus would. Voters must dispatch his congressional enablers, especially the senators who still gambol around his ankles with a canine hunger for petting.

In life’s unforgiving arithmetic, we are the sum of our choices. Congressional Republicans have made theirs for more than 1,200 days. We cannot know all the measures necessary to restore the nation’s domestic health and international standing, but we know the first step: Senate Republicans must be routed, as condign punishment for their Vichyite collaboration, leaving the Republican remnant to wonder: Was it sensible to sacrifice dignity, such as it ever was, and to shed principles, if convictions so easily jettisoned could be dignified as principles, for . . . what? Praying people should pray, and all others should hope: May I never crave anything as much as these people crave membership in the world’s most risible deliberative body.

A political party’s primary function is to bestow its imprimatur on candidates, thereby proclaiming: This is who we are. In 2016, the Republican Party gave its principal nomination to a vulgarian and then toiled to elect him. And to stock Congress with invertebrates whose unswerving abjectness has enabled his institutional vandalism, who have voiced no serious objections to his Niagara of lies, and whom T.S. Eliot anticipated:

 

We are the hollow men . . .

Our dried voices, when

We whisper together

Are quiet and meaningless

As wind in dry grass

or rats’ feet over broken glass . . .

Those who think our unhinged president’s recent mania about a murder two decades ago that never happened represents his moral nadir have missed the lesson of his life: There is no such thing as rock bottom. So, assume that the worst is yet to come. Which implicates national security: Abroad, anti-Americanism sleeps lightly when it sleeps at all, and it is wide-awake as decent people judge our nation’s health by the character of those to whom power is entrusted. Watching, too, are indecent people in Beijing and Moscow.

Edited June 3, 2020 by DJL

[kallend 1,620]

10 minutes ago, DJL said:

I'm sorry to say but a CNN recap of a Washington Post writer's article isn't going to reach the necessary audience.

 

WaPo is behind a paywall, I posted that article  yesterday and someone grumbled.

[airdvr 197]

Thanks for posting the article.  This is kind of like when Cronkite reported on Tet.

[DJL 232]

5 minutes ago, kallend said:

WaPo is behind a paywall, I posted that article  yesterday and someone grumbled.

Ah.  I pasted it into here, mostly so I could copy and feed it to a group of friends over the course of the day paragraph by paragraph.

[turtlespeed 212]

1 hour ago, DJL said:

Ah.  I pasted it into here, mostly so I could copy and feed it to a group of friends over the course of the day paragraph by paragraph.

When in the first few lines the words "Crybaby in Chief" are used - all credibility is lost forever.

There is no use trying to go through the rest of the article. There is no balance - it is a far left hit piece.

[ryoder 1,380]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

WaPo is behind a paywall, I posted that article  yesterday and someone grumbled.

WaPo's paywall is the type that goes up after a certain number of articles. It tracks the number of articles via cookies. When you hit the paywall, just flush your browsers cookies, then refresh the page, and you can see the article.

[jakee 1,254]

54 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

There is no use trying to go through the rest of the article. There is no balance - it is a far left hit piece.

When you claim that George Will is of the far left you lose all credibility.

 

The uncomfortable truth for you is that Will actually represents what you merely claim to be. A conservative who actually has the integrity and the balls to call out the torrent of unnacceptable behaviour from those who currently control his party.

[okalb 78]

37 minutes ago, ryoder said:

WaPo's paywall is the type that goes up after a certain number of articles. It tracks the number of articles via cookies. When you hit the paywall, just flush your browsers cookies, then refresh the page, and you can see the article.

Most of the paywalls can also be subverted by disabling javascript on the page.

[kallend 1,620]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

When in the first few lines the words "Crybaby in Chief" are used - all credibility is lost forever.

There is no use trying to go through the rest of the article. There is no balance - it is a far left hit piece.

George Will "far left"?  Did you start on the tequila early today?

[Phil1111 908]

22 minutes ago, kallend said:

George Will "far left"?  Did you start on the tequila early today?

No, he denies and denies that he is a child of FOX news. That he never reads or studies traditional areas of conservative thinking. Most likely he has never heard of or read William Buckley Jr., or George Will.

Like almost all trump supporters he likes to be told what to think. Unfortunately there are others on SC who are like that.

Edited June 3, 2020 by Phil1111

[wmw999 2,116]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

When in the first few lines the words "Crybaby in Chief" are used - all credibility is lost forever.

There is no use trying to go through the rest of the article. There is no balance - it is a far left hit piece.

Turtle, what they say is true. George F. Will is a conservative by virtually any definition, and has been for a long time. What he has never been was a bandwagon-lover, so as the definition of "conservative" has morphed to "supports our guy no matter what" some people don't think of him as being liberal.

Equating intellectual independence with liberalism really isn't a great place to go, if you're not liberal. Eventually the old guys will die, and the ones who are still around will be tarnished by this time.

Wendy P.

[SkyDekker 1,120]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

There is no balance - it is a far left hit piece.

lol

Not sure if you have ever posted anything as clueless as this.

[yoink 321]

22 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Turtle, what they say is true. George F. Will is a conservative by virtually any definition, and has been for a long time. What he has never been was a bandwagon-lover, so as the definition of "conservative" has morphed to "supports our guy no matter what" some people don't think of him as being liberal.

Equating intellectual independence with liberalism really isn't a great place to go, if you're not liberal. Eventually the old guys will die, and the ones who are still around will be tarnished by this time.

Wendy P.

The definition of ‘conservative’ for people like Turtle.

What was conservative for people like George Will is now ‘moderate’. ‘Conservative’ now means what ‘Far Right’ used to.

It‘s how people justify beliefs that they would have been pilloried for a decade ago. 

[sfzombie13 307]

3 hours ago, kallend said:

WaPo is behind a paywall, I posted that article  yesterday and someone grumbled.

clear you browser cache of all cookies starting with wa, then do it with ny.  clears out the paywalls of both for a few articles.  it leaves the ones you want to keep.

Edited June 3, 2020 by sfzombie13
added a thought

[gowlerk 1,902]

4 minutes ago, sfzombie13 said:

clear you browser cache of all cookies starting with wa, then do it with ny.  clears out the paywalls of both for a few articles.

Then how will Walmart know me?

[DJL 232]

George Will is very much a Conservative writing for the WaPo audience.  The people who need to understand his message won't even understand the vocabulary of his articles.

[billvon 2,380]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

There is no use trying to go through the rest of the article. There is no balance - it is a far left hit piece.

Wow.  You are so far right that you think George Will is a "far left" writer.  That's pretty out there.

[gowlerk 1,902]

11 minutes ago, DJL said:

The people who need to understand his message won't even understand the vocabulary of his articles.

We love the poorly educated.

[ryoder 1,380]

2 hours ago, okalb said:

Most of the paywalls can also be subverted by disabling javascript on the page.

I do that for one of my local news sites. Damned thing won't let you see any articles w/o throwing up the paywall.

[kallend 1,620]

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

lol

Not sure if you have ever posted anything as clueless as this.

It's only 3rd of June but he's already making his play for Stupid Post of the Month.

[sfzombie13 307]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

Then how will Walmart know me?

take walmart out.  you can pick and choose.  i usually clear them all when i close mine.

[kallend 1,620]

So far none of the Trumpists have come forward to dispute that he combines the integrity of Nixon, the morals of Warren Harding, the work ethic of Coolidge and the effectiveness of Buchanan in one obese package.

[JoeWeber 2,294]

1 hour ago, kallend said:

So far none of the Trumpists have come forward to dispute that he combines the integrity of Nixon, the morals of Warren Harding, the work ethic of Coolidge and the effectiveness of Buchanan in one obese package.

That would require intellectual honesty, true integrity, a moral compass and ethical standards that informed your world view and required that you lived your life in a way that was more important to you than whatever you were getting in exchange for not having those basic ingredients of humanity. So, don't hold your breath, John.