It’s Not Him. It’s You

>1 Earthling1: Yes, someone wrote a bunch of nonsense. It happens all the time. I see no reason to care about the confusions exhibited by the lying right-wing media elites, life is too short for that.

Now, are you capable of expressing and defending your own views in your own words? If not, what makes you think you believe them?

>1 Earthling1: I'm tempted to write a response from the other side.

"I know you. You’re somebody I know well or slightly or only as a public figure, and you hate liberals.

"No, maybe you’re not out shooting and destroying and burning, but you’re doing your part at hurting people. You ruin family events, shopping trips, TV shows, podcasts, and book or game releases which are purportedly about non-political topics and which I otherwise enjoy, by interjecting conservative rah-rah rhetoric and threats. (Example... example... example... so many f-ing examples every day....)

"Consistently, you talk about politics as if it, I don’t know, didn't impact the lives of real people. You joke as if the Trump family are charming anti-heroes in a TV show played by your favorite celebrities, who you also insist aren't responsible for the cultural, financial, and health problems of an unwillingly audience contributing to their wealth."

... but then it gets too tiring. I've had these conversations too many times before in the past four years, and in 2016, as now, the conservative side was still recycling many of the same old lines from the 1990s.

The disregard of what's horrifying, disgusting, and embarassing about Trump's record shows what a waste of time a full counterpoint response would be here.

>3 aspirit:

The disregard of what's horrifying, disgusting, and embarassing about Trump's record shows what a waste of time a full counterpoint response would be here.

Yes, this. There's hardly a semblance of a reasoned debate possible with such actors--to say nothing of hopes of reaching whatever decency they may have left.

"We" certainly needn't "hate" "liberals". They do that themselves beyond anything "we", if we were so disposed, could do.

But we're not. Why hate these self-loathing people? I don't hate them. It's perhaps worse. For in plain hatred there is something left of a sense of respect for those one otherwise despises.

I mean "liberals" and that, of course, means what passes for "liberal" in this, our stupendously fucked-up times.

Who's a "liberal", after all?

Certainly none of the prominent members of the present-day Democratic party--a party which has nothing more than name alone to do with the term "democratic."

Real liberals apparently died with the generation which served with Roosevelt (both Franklin and Theodore--yes, Theodore Roosevelt was a genuine liberal! compared to the Yahoos of today.

And, today, the country is fortunate to have Donald Trump in office for what are very strikingly similar reasons to those which made Americans fortunate to have had Teddy Roosevelt in the White House.

That's counter-intuitive but McGovern-era liberals--of whom I was one--could have understood this. McGovern didn't hate himself or his fellow liberals and he certainly didn't hate America--his county, didn't wish it had never existed, wasn't ashamed of it per se.

Basing a mass-appeal such as an election on the drive to encourage people to hate themselves, each other and their own country and heritage, ignoring any and everything decent about these--yeah, go with that. That's a "plan", a really, really stupid plan.

It suits today's Democrats perfectly.

>3 aspirit: Thank you for expressing this.

>6 proximity1: Basing a mass-appeal such as an election on the drive to encourage people to hate themselves, each other and their own country and heritage, ignoring any and everything decent about these--yeah, go with that. That's a "plan", a really, really stupid plan.

Yeah, that would be a pretty bad plan. And it's probably why Trump's never topped 50% in any poll and is heading towards defeat - and why he's gearing up for a legal battle to prevent the legitimate winner from taking office. It turns out his anti-American rhetoric isn't selling with real Americans, who still make up the majority of this country.

Fortunately, there's a candidate who's running on competence, compassion, respect for all Americans, a lifetime of service to his country, and an ability to actually compromise and make deals, and that candidate is on track to win the election.

And just as a bonus, Biden's also got all his marbles, while Trump's ability to get through a sentence in one piece has gone from bad to nonexistence as he has stumbled from one failure to the next over the last four years.

>3 aspirit:

So what is the point here? Sticks and stones may break my bones, but honesty can hurt me? You made no point aside, so I'm trying to figure out how you don't see you are living on lefty rah rah.

>1 Earthling1: well-written article. It's too bad that some people responding don't appear to have actually read it.

>7 Earthling1: "Things have changed a lot since the Democrat Party of Harry Truman."

Yup. And that was more, much more, than just a little bit my own very point. You somehow fairly well missed the import of my post--which agrees with and supports your (apparent) views in having posted Bruce Bawer's column at Front Page magazine. (By the way, you needn't post your own identity and, personally, I don't care who you are; but it is customary here in this site's commentary-threads (Esp. "Pro & Con") to post a link to the work of others whom you cite, cut-&-paste in your own posts here. Not a law, just a courtesy to your readers, not to mention the people whose work you re-post here.)

_____________________

>7 Earthling1: I didn't claim you did (hate anyone). My ">6 proximity1:" replies to ">3 aspirit:" -- a bullshit post in which the author whines, in effect,

"yeah, well, if I wanted to be bothered to, I could write a devastating rebuttal. But I don't want to."

Yeah, right.

Lots of bad luck to him (>3 aspirit:) in the coming election.

#6--I would point out that 'left' and 'liberal' aren't always the same thing. There are in any case distinctions to be made. Since you want to play the amateur psychologist today this idea of self hating liberal is pretty weak even so--a kind of extension of the so-called self hating jew to connote those of that faith who have separated from the hell bent Zionist jews supporting Israel on its path to apartheid. They would have it for instance that Bernie Sanders and Noam Chomsky were self hating jews as opposed to say the likes of Sheldon Adelson, Andrew Epstein, Alan Dershowitz, Eliot Engel, Jared Kushner, Chuck Schumer, Joe Lieberman, Henry Kissinger who love Israel no matter what evil things it does. To me to say that the reason why liberals are the way they are is they hate themselves is a stupid road to go down but you do you.

Let's also say that I don't agree with you at all that Teddy Roosevelt was very liberal. He's kind of like a precursor of what a John McCain became. Basically an early version of a neo-con warmonger with some populist ideas but also with some autocratic tendencies.

>12 proximity1: I was complaining about common conservative delusions and how BS posts like >1 Earthling1: are tiresome. But that was a good attempt at reading comprehension.

Thanks for the bad luck. I know exactly where I want to send it.

>14 aspirit:
Nope Your bad luck and your delusions are yours. You don't and you aren't "sending" them anywhere. Some might have figured that out since election-day, 2016. But not you or others like you.

Even when the returns of the coming election utterly repudiate your views of reality you won't get it.

"Fucked" is what Democrats are going to be on the settlement of the next election and fucked is just what they deserve to be.

I wonder why anyone would follow, praise, and even vote for a man who said, when asked if he would accept the results of the election, “We’ll have to see...if you could get rid of the ballots there wouldn’t be a transfer, there’d be a continuation.”

Except, you know, that’s how it works. People vote. They vote by ballot. Would you prefer that voting be discontinued? And before you reply with that twaddle about, “Hr didn’t mean that,” etc, please remember that a big reason people voted for him was that “he says what he means” in contrast to other politicians.

Indeed he does say what he means. He’s willing to violate the most basic tenets of the Constitution and throw this country into complete chaos to satisfy the whims of his ego.

For the sake of the your trust in the Constitution, vote for Me. Biden.

I have no interest in alleged citations of remarks by Donald Trump which appear here unreferenced--i.e., without links or citations of the remarks' date, source, Etc. or which contain any of these: "..."

People with demonstrated inabilities to merely parse Trump's plain-meanings don't enjoy the privilege of taking his (alleged) words, editing them, and presenting them partially and devoid of context.

Your quote would be laughed out of a court of law as hearsay.

It's junk; and, as for valid use here, its value is Nil.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/23/politics/trump-election-day-peaceful-transition/
Article with full quotes

https://www.c-span.org/video/?476162-1/president-declines-commit-peaceful-transf...

And a full video tape with transcript

>18 Matke: & >20 Matke:

Sic, from CNN,

“MISTER PRESIDENT, REAL QUICKLY, IN THIS ELECTION WILL YOU COMMIT THERE TODAY, FOR A PEACEFUL TRANSFERAL OF POWER AFTER THE ELECTION? THERE HAS BEEN RIOTING A LITTLE, WRITING IN MANY CITIES ACROSS THIS COUNTRY, YOUR SO-CALLED RED AND BLUE STATES. WILL YOU COMMIT TO MAKING SURE THERE IS A PEACEFUL TRANSFERAL OF POWER AFTER THE ELECTION?”

Yes, LOL! : this is typical of the laughably poor excuse for journalism which is CNN ("Crappified 'News' Network")

What we have here (as shown, uncorrected) is the goofy shit on which CNN relies--a machine's so-called verbal-speech-"recognition"(LOL!)-&-transcription program.

Did any thinking human-being intervene to read, check, edit and correct this Looney-Tunes stuff? Apparently, no. None bothered.

Thus, we have, supposedly out of the president's interviewer's mouth, that

"There has been rioting a little, writing in many cities across this country, your so-called red and blue states."

...

Yeah? So? As I recall, there's "writing in many cities across this country" in every election.

And you people think your judgment is superior to those you have the nerve to mock here?

This is your idea of a credible source for news and analysis?

This is what I'd describe as doddering "Biden-Quality" news-and-information. Good enough, perhaps, for you but in my opinion, it's more example of the fact that what you rely on is junk and that you people and those you support ought not be allowed anywhere near the levers of political power.

Even through the fog of confused nonsense which is CNN, Trump's meaning is clear: "WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS,"

"YOU KNOW I HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING VERY STRONGLY ABOUT THE BALLOTS. AND THE BALLOTS ARE A DISASTER."
00:09:17

"We're going to have to see what happens" is truly all in a commitment to an unknown outcome that the Democrats and their lap-dog press deserve to have.

"BUT PEOPLE ARE WRITING (SIC/(LOL!) ). DO YOU COMMIT TO MAKING SURE THAT THERE IS A PEACEFUL TRANSFERAL OF POWER?"
00:09:23

invites the president himself to join in what is his own flagrantly presupposed defeat which he quickly grasped and, on doing so, stopped himself mid-WORD to correct that outrageously presumptuous loaded question, as here:

"YOU'LL HAVE A VERY PEACEFUL TRANS -- THERE WON'T BE A TRANSFER FRANKLY. THERE WILL BE A CONTINUATION, THE BALLOTS ARE OUT OF CONTROL. YOU KNOW IT AND NO ONE KNOWS IT WHO BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE, THE DEMOCRATS." (machine-generated transcript gibberish)

Go.Die.CNN.

Callin' out around the world -
Are you ready for a brand new beat?
Summer's here and the time is right
For writin' in the streets.

They're writin' in Chicago,
Down in New Orleans,
Up in New York City.

All we need is music (sweet music),
Sweet music (sweet music).
There'll be music everywhere (everywhere);
There'll be swingin' and swayin' and records playin'
And writin' in the streets.

Oh, it doesn't matter what you wear
Just as long as you are there.
So come on, every guy (come on) grab a girl
Everywhere around the world.
There'll be writin'g -
They're writin'g in the street

This is an invitation
Across the nation;
A chance for the folks to meet.
There'll be laughin', singin', and music swingin'
And writin' in the streets.

Philadelphia, PA. (Philadelphia, PA.)
Baltimore and DC now (Baltimore and D.C. now)
Yeah, don't forget the Motor City.
(Can't forget the Motor City)
All we need is music (sweet music),
Sweet music (sweet music).
There'll be music everywhere (everywhere).
There'll be swingin' and swayin' and records playin'
And writin'' in the street, yeah.

Oh, it doesn't matter what you wear
Just as long as you are there.
So come on, every guy (come on, come on) grab a girl
Everywhere around the world...

LOL!

I hope that all will watch the full tape and/or read the accompanying transcript.

No need to mock Mr Trump or his acolytes. No need at all.

“You people”
Such an enlightening phrase.

I love to see tortured twisting and turning to make this plain-speaking President understandable to the masses.

“Go.Die.CNN”
Again, such an enlightening phrase.

Vote for Mr. Biden.

It’s not us. It’s him.

Here’s another example of why no one needs to mock Mr. Trump or his acolytes:

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-minnesota-good-genes-eugenics-dog-whistle-202828480...

They make a mockery of themselves with their meaningless attempts to insult and degrade “you people.”

Vote for Mr. Biden

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-claims-protesters-throwing-cans-goya-bumbl...

Another proof that Mr Trump makes a mockery of himself, his followers, and the presidency.

I’ll wait while supporters scramble to explain how he didn’t mean what he said he meant.

Someone? Anyone? No?

Honestly, the bitter jokes write themselves.

Vote for Mr. Biden.

#24--anyone else who would make that claim that Trump did here would be heading for the nuthouse. Anyone who would take such nonsense seriously has pretty much gone off the rails. Chucking tuna and soup cans......really?

Yep---I really don't like Biden but voting for him anyway.

For those who believe, along with Mr. Trump, that rioting and anarchy will happen if Mr. Biden is elected:

Who is President now? Is there rioting now? Is the rioting/protests/anarchy, call it what you will, more prevalent now, or was it more prevalent when Mr. Obama was President? Is there more violence now, or was there more violence when Mr. Obama was President?

Again and again he condemns himself out of his own mouth. I can only hope that people are paying attention. Paying attention, that is, to what is actually happening, rather than the bombastic lies that come out his mouth and the mouths of his followers.

All one has to do is look at the numbers: now versus then. The answer will become undeniably obvious.

>25 lriley: Mr. Biden isn’t my first choice. But Mr. Biden is the best realistic choice we have in this election.

On Biden---the idea that he's going to go all socialist is such a load of shit. I mean I wish. This guy still believes he can work with at least some if not a lot of the Republicans in the Senate. Biden is a center/right candidate and more conservative than Obama (who was fairly conservative) by far. Biden's not interested in M4A nor all that enthusiastic about a green new deal---he's said over and over again he's not for defunding the police and he has his hand out to every corporation or billionaire that will give him money. He's way more interested in appealing to those in the center and on the right than appeasing to the lefter parts of his own party.

It's like this guy was a Senator for 30 years and VP for 8 more but so very many conservative voting republicans need to be introduced to him. It shows just how little most conservatives actually know about politics. They're like rooting for a Major League baseball team and only knowing one or two guys on the roster. They really know nothing about their team let alone any other team--can't read a boxscore and don't even understand what a foul ball is.

>27 lriley: Biden is a center/right candidate

This is something that needs to be pointed out again and again. Mainstream US politics is right wing; US Democrats (with a few notable exceptions) are right of centre. The spectre of socialism or even a shift to the moderate left in mainstream US politics is currently far-fetched, although as you say, "I wish".

>27 lriley: Imagine them trying to cope with the political equivalent of the Infield Fly Rule.

And yes, voting record checks, his own speeches, news conferences from the past, etc., reveal Mr. Biden as quite conservative. And like you, I wish he were more to the left. This “socialism” chimera is just another demagogue’s ploy to frighten the masses who won’t do their own research but would prefer their political leaders to be father figures telling them what to do, who to believe, where to worship, and how to conduct their intimate lives.

Bad cess to them.

#29--and at the same time Trump doesn't really talk about anything substantial. It's all dog whistle shit. He's running on border stuff. He's running on a Supreme Court Justice--no environmental policy, no economic policy, no real social policy issues either. Completely bereft of ideas.

>31 lriley: Absolutely. And if he doesn’t win, the election will have been rigged. I’ve never seen such a pathetic blowhard. He runs on division, fear, and hatred. He himself has said he thrives on chaos.

Time to stop that chaos.

>32 Matke: I disagree with your assessment of the current President, but we're both adults and can handle disagreement without being disagreeable.