jerryskids

As a person who speaks with a prosthetic device because of a laryngectomy, I'd like to let you know that I appreciate your honesty in equating a speaking disability with stupidity. I usually only get people speaking loudly and slowly, as if my speaking issue equates to a hearing issue. I understand though that human nature is to respond in kind, so I don't take it personally. You, however, are saying the quiet part out loud, which is that you equate such a disability with cognitive issues. I try to pretend that people like you don't exist, but back in my mind, I know you do. Thanks for your honesty, Rusty.

I added the bullet at the end as a catch-all for concerns about Trump's appointments so far. If anyone wants to add specific concerns not listed, reply with those: Reasonable concerns: - Tariffs -- If implemented as Trump has stated, would probably cause a mass disruption in our supply chain and prices. - Mass deportation -- Also a mass disruption, economic issues with losing workers, civil rights concerns. - Elon streamlining government -- Could introduce a huge number of (former) government employees into the workforce, many of which may not have (government) skills which easily translate to the civilian workplace. - RFK's influence on health agencies -- Same as above. - End of gender affirming care -- I'm not really sure how this would manifest, for adults anyway. I could see laws against medically transing kids, which I (and most rational people) would view as a good thing, but some like @squistionmight view that as a negative. - End of naturalized citizenship for Dreamers -- Highly unlikely as it is specifically enumerated in the Constitution. I might remove this one. - Environment and climate change efforts -- Trump has vowed to "drill baby drill" which, along with a general disinterest in pursuing green initiatives, makes it likely that we'll invest less in this area. - Abortion -- Long shot that Congress would propose a ban, Trump would sign it, and SCOTUS would approve it - SCOTUS -- Trump could potentially set 2 or 3 more conservative justices on the bench, securing a conservative court for decades to come. - Removal of licenses from media companies -- I don't know much about this, but OK - Some Trump appointees generate reasonable concerns. Gaetz for AG in particular is concerning given, if nothing else, his resignation prior to the release of the investigation into his potential inappropriate conduct with a 17 yr old. RFKJ, while having valid criticisms of the status quo, may go too far as head of HHS. Tom Homan is, to put it lightly, a no-nonsense border czar who has no qualms about separating families, or shipping out entire families, some of whom may be Dreamers.

Cmon Tim, there is nothing gradual about progressivism. It wants changes, and it wants them now. Frankly, it doesn't matter what the change is -- progressivism wants change for change's sake, to shake up the status quo. By this definition, perhaps we can call the vector that Trump is moving towards a similar movement. Perhaps "regressivism," although that has a negative connotation which I don't think applies here. I think "anti-progressivism" is more applicable, as it aims to undo all of the bad stuff from recent progressive advances.

I'm paraphrasing Thiel, a hyper-intelligent bazillionaire. So don't blame me, the messenger. Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Vietnam Not surprised that you think this is an awesome government. You seem to be struggling, Worms. I know you took a long hiatus last time Trump won. I admire your willingness to try to stick it out this time around. Just take it slow, mkay?

That's fascinating, thanks. Also welcome back, naomi! Hope all is well. What's up with you?

Yeah... my point though was that I didn't like the tone of that TimPool post or the comments within it. The whole "if anyone votes against you i"m going to dox (my words) you" reeks of leftoid fanatacism and i don"t want to be a part of it

How did they examine them? Were they invited to Whoopi's party? Or did Whoopi post pictures of them, which would lead discerning paparazzi to figure it out?

Yes on the BBT lead, unsure on the Ritter part. It's a good not great movie IMO.

You likened it to a public printer, whatever that is. I'm merely pointing out that the partisan hacking starting with St. Barack. I agree that I'd rather see a move back to more bipartisanship, FWIW. But clearly, several of these appointments were made to chew bubblegum and kick ass, but...

"Elections have consequences" was Obama's quote to McCain about Obamacare. Maybe you've heard of that? It's kinda big.

Since weepaws never met a fact he liked, I looked it up. It's "Dear Santa", and here is the trailer. Ima guess from this trailer that Satan doesn't get this kid's soul, and learns a lesson in kindness along the way. You know, a nice Christmas message.

Agreed! I totally zipped over it the first time, thanks for pointing it out.

Florida sues FEMA: https://www.dailywire.com/news/florida-sues-fema-for-conspiring-to-deny-disaster-relief-to-trump-supporters?utm_campaign=dwplus&utm_medium=email&utm_source=email&utm_content=newsletter

Lost in all this is the fact that Whoopi needs to pick up her own birthday cake, because she has no friends or family. Who picks up their own birthday cake?

We used to think that presidents should work with both sides of the aisle. But then Obama informed us that "elections have consequences" and, given the opportunity, politicians should just ram through every partisan thing they can. God bless St. Barack the Great Uniter!

I don't prefer fatties. I prefer woman-shaped women. Studies have shown that the ideal waist to hip ratio (WHR) is 0.7. Meaning, the waist should be 30% smaller than the hips. This makes sense, as such a look is a proxy for health (slim waste) and ability to bear children (large enough hips), both of which evolutionarily, men would want in a mate. That's cool though, you like boy-girls, you do you.

Ah, someone who knows about smoots! The Harvard Bridge was out route to Boston from Cambridge; I walked it hundreds of times. Knowing that it measured 364.4 smoots (and one ear) helped to keep track of how much longer you had to go, during a Boston winter wind storm. Whatever fraternity he was in repaints them every year. I just looked him up -- it's hilarious that 40 years after that stunt, he became the president of ANSI and then ISO. I've gotta think his name and history had something to do with that.

Just looked "her" up. She has no b00bs or hips, and looks a bit like a man. I don't want to see what's under that bikini bottom. Pass.

Doesn't strike me as an alias. When somebody new comes along, I think (1) is somebody missing (e.g., banned/suspended) and (2) does this posting style remind me of anyone? Posters like Boyo and Seafoam usually try to start being less... themselves, but eventually the style shows through. Rusty and Gutter seem more comfortable being themselves, although Rusty might hold of on "clownzo" or other dehumanizing descriptions of Trump for a while. Purdygood's style is most similar to BeenHereBefore IMO, although different politics. Plus BHB isn't the type of poster who gets suspended, and he still posts occasionally. Also Purdygood had a good (and slightly self-deprecating) career story of basically being an IT pet for some finance bros who appreciated the work he did to set up their systems. I suspect he is some poor soul who came in here looking for scintillating conversation, and instead found us. Back in the old days, people would often create aliases just for fun. Gutter had some good ones like Mrs. Voltaire, which was the persona of a sassy, controlling Chinese wife. Nowadays, it's mostly just for people who are suspended, except for the occasional @t.j. booker sighting. Now get off my lawn.

Da fuq?! Also I have no assets in this game tonight. Which is probably why my teams all suck.

Eh, maybe. I feel lucky that by and large we've had good senators here in AZ. For the longest time it was McCain and John Kyl, two fantastic ones. Kyrsten Sinema, while nominally a democrat, basically committed political suicide by being true to her values and what she thought best for the great state of AZ. She has my deep respect. Mark Kelly, a little too liberal for my taste, but also seems like a generally upstanding person. I don't feel like my Senate representation has historically voted just to maintain their deep statedness. The only bad one was Jeff Flake. He can chug a gallon of razor blades for all I care.

Well... IMO they weren't in power, so I'm not sure what people would have missed "seeing".

Thiel talks about Vance, meeting him and being impressed. He also makes a general comment about liking people that can get through Leftist echo chambers like Yale and still maintain conservative values. As for the mentoring, I think that was more leading up to Vance's Senate race in 2022. He specifically said he wasn't directly involved in the Trump campaign this year.

I often pimp The Free Press here, and I will again: Bari Weiss has a fascinating interview with Peter Thiel (conservative gay silicon valley bazillionaire, pushed Trump through in 2016, largely stayed out of it this year). https://www.thefp.com/p/peter-thiel-honestly-trump-jd-vance It's almost 2 hours long and worth the time, but I want to highlight the discussion of tariffs for @The Real timschochet and others, which starts around the 55 minute mark. He makes a few interesting points: - The theory of free trade popularized centuries ago presumed that the big-picture cost of manufacturing (including say, labor) was equal between the parties, and that the parties would reach a trade equilibrium. The fact that we have such a trade deficit with China shows that this theory is not working in this relationship. - There is a mistaken belief that trade between us and China is a two-way, net zero sum game. That is, if we raise the price of an iPhone made in China, that price gets passed directly to American consumers. But that's not how a global economy works in the long term. Instead, Apple moves its manufacturing to, say, Vietnam (his example). Yes, Vietnam is a POS country, but they pose no thread to us, whereas China has plans of global dominance and provides something of an existential threat. So, in this model, if the tariffs are imposed, China suffers greatly, Vietnam (and others) benefit greatly, and the US maybe sees a marginal negative, certainly in the short term. - Although Thiel didn't use this word, he talked about how it might be brinkmanship. Given the above, there is incentive for China to come to the table and meet somewhere in the middle.

Reading that thread, I'm getting an uneasy feeling that there are folks on the far right who are beginning to behave like the wokies on the far left, trying to strongarm minority opinions through. I would hope that the (secret) voting to elect Thune to Senate Majority Leader would send a message to these folks that the majority of people don't want to go scorched earth here. I guess we'll see.