The Real timschochet

No they wouldn’t. They don’t want to be owned by us.

Also tried fried alligator. That was OK. Tasted like chicken.

I tried turtle soup with sherry! Delicious!

No need. You haven’t any answers. I knew that already.

Thank you. Gotta say that was one of the best concerts I’ve ever seen, 6 old dudes doing Dixieland, all experts, just incredible

You’re correct I have no clue, so hopefully you can explain it to me. Greenland is owned by Denmark which is part of NATO. Russia will never seize it because, since it is part of NATO, that would start WWIII. Why is it in our strategic interests to own it instead of Denmark, at the risk of alienating Western Europe? What exactly do we gain that we don’t have now? We currently have use of their waterways and without any fees or penalty, for both our military and merchant ships. So how would ownership benefit us? Please explain became I don’t get it.

I’m at Preservation Hall tonight to hear some classic jazz. Really looking forward to this.

I can’t even keep track of all rhe times you’ve responded to my posts with “no one cares”. Obviously YOU care.

It’s because we have to pay for all of the poor red states out there. If we didn’t have to support all of you dumb asses things would be a lot easier.

As it turns out I am here. First time.

Pretty good analysis of the immediate effects of the tariffs from Associated Press: https://apnews.com/article/trump-new-tariffs-liberation-day-import-taxes-118d73f50e5133ef3d9598aed6661a6c One hopeful line: “It is also possible that the tariffs are short-lived if Trump feels he can get a deal after imposing them.” Fine. Let Trump get his deal, proclaim victory. Let his fans cheer him on. So long as the tariffs are ahort-term I don’t care.

Lolololol

This is not quite right. The Democrats tried to pass it but the Republicans killed it. Then Biden took him upon himself to secure the border by executive order. By the time Trump took office the border was already secure. But again these are temporary measures. What Biden did was a bandaid. The Senate bill, had it passed would have been a larger bandaid. What Trump is currently doing is an even larger bandaid with a lot of show for the MAGA crowd put in. But none of this is anything close to a permanent solution.

My whole argument is that it will go back up over time. Obviously I can’t prove that to you. But remember this prediction: at the end of Trump’s term there will be more undocumented immigrants in this country than there are now. ETA my argument here isn’t much different from your argument about the Stock Market. Both are cyclical.

Lots of flaws in this argument, the biggest one being that all of the countries named in which walls “worked” (the old Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, Iran, China, North Korea) were or are police states. It wasn’t the wall going in or out that kept people in place as much as it was the intensive security of the entire state. Yes if you want to have that kind of police state here we could effectively prevent all undocumented immigration. I’m sure that a thug like Tom Homan wouldn’t mind; this is the sort of state he’s angling for. But it’s not consistent with the freedoms we enjoy.

They’re wrong. So are you. Sorry about that.

Yeah you’ve written this a bunch of times, and it’s bullsh!t every time. In this case the question is whether or not undocumented immigration can be curtailed in the long run strictly through security and not by addressing the greater issues which cause it. I say the answer is no and it’s an obvious no. I could offer plenty of lengthy reasoning to prove my point, statistics over years and such, but I shouldn’t have to. It should be common sense to anyone. If thousands of people are willing to leave their lives behind and risk everything to come here, they’re not going to be deterred by security alone no matter how many walls you put up, no matter how many police or military or ICE you send to the border, no matter how many people you round up to try and scare others into not coming. All of that will have an impact short term, but long term it will fail. They will find a way to come. If you want to prevent this, then you need to look at the reasons they are coming and try to fix those. But we never do.

The authoritarian playbook: 1. Attack the media. 2. Attack the courts. 3. Attack the universities. This is how you destroy democracy. Thankfully some of us see this and are fighting back even if the rest of you are gullible (or even welcome it.)

@Tebok keep up the good work. You’re facing a lot of stubborn people here who don’t want to admit that they were duped. Some never will.

I’m not sure you’re right about this. My sense is that these races are no longer about the specific candidates, but instead a referendum on Trump and Musk. I think Republicans are going to struggle in a lot of places they assumed were locks,

Don’t expect me to defend Garland. If he hadn’t hesitated to prosecute Trump (should have been done in February of 2021) we wouldn’t be in this mess. But he wasn’t partisan.

It’s not like I expected Pam Bondi to pursue a criminal investigation: yeah, right. But her explanation for not doing so is so shameless it’s laughable: https://apnews.com/article/fbi-pentagon-attack-plans-petraeus-clinton-comey-3ab3773b2642abaf024d3a5f3eb66f4b She is already, by far, the most partisan Attorney General in our history. It’s not even particularly close.

Heard this the other day, it’s an acoustic version of an old favorite: Almost has a Latin feel to it, very nice!

Have you listened to the Silver Jews, HT? 90s band, they had that Lou Reed/Dolls sound:

No. The left are just as hypocritical. They’re a little less bombastic about it, but then, who is more bombastic than Donald Trump? Personally I don’t believe in giving Presidents credit or fault for the economy as a general rule, unless you’re willing to look at it a year later. The tariffs are an exception; I fear they will bring down our economy and I think if that happens it will be fair game to hold Trump responsible.