Whaaat?

[billy.pilgrim]

gomerts aside, is Ron going to restore my faith that there can be a little twinge of good in a republican?

In his first 24 hours he had a fight with the medicare fraudster teaperson and now this on his 3rd day.

What will trump say?


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... n-desantis

“Make no mistake, these men were victims,” DeSantis said in a statement in which he praised the tenacity of the campaigners.

“Seventy years is a long time to wait, but it is never too late to do the right thing. Though these men now lie in their graves, their stories linger in search of justice.”

[O Really]

So far, it's surprising what he has brought up early on. We'll see.

[Vrede too]

Could be low hanging fruit meant to make people forget his racist campaign, his being a diehard Trumpette and the fact that very nearly as many people opposed him as supported him.

[O Really]

Could be low hanging fruit meant to make people forget his racist campaign, his being a diehard Trumpette and the fact that very nearly as many people opposed him as supported him.

Possibly more, depending on who's doing the counting.

[billy.pilgrim]

Guess who said all this crap Tuesday night April 2, 2019.
It is a strange land we have become.


"You gotta be a little bit more paranoid than you are

If you have a windmill anywhere near your house, congratulations, your house just went down 75 percent in value. And they say the noise causes cancer,” Trump said. “And of course it’s like a graveyard for bird. If you love birds, you never want to walk under a windmill, because it’s a sad, sad sight.

and of course it's like a grave yard for birds. If you love birds, you'd never want to walk under a windmill because it's a very sad, sad sight. It's like a cemetery. We put a little statue for the poor birds. It's true. You know in California if you shoot a bald eagle they put you in jail for five years. And yet the windmills they wipe them all out. It's true. They wipe them out. It's terrible."

It’s like a cemetery. We put a little statue for the poor birds. It’s true.”

“In California, if you shoot a bald eagle, they put you in jail for five years. And yet the windmills wipe them all out. It’s true,”

If Hillary got in … you’d be doing wind,” Trump said. “Windmills. Weeeee. And if it doesn’t blow, you can forget about television for that night. ‘Darling, I want to watch television.’ ‘I’m sorry! The wind isn’t blowing.’ I know a lot about wind.

the woman, she wants to watch television and she says to her husband, 'Is the wind blowing? I'd love to watch a show tonight, darling. The wind hasn't blown for three days. I can't watch television, darling. Darling, please, tell the wind to blow.'"

No, wind's not so good and you have no idea how expensive it is to make those things. They're all made in China and Germany, by the way, just in case you, we don't make them here, essentially."

[O Really]

Sounds like a writer for a club comedy act.
Seriously. Imagine the same words done in a stand-up environment by, say, Seinfeld in his younger days. Or Rita Rudner. But hand it to the guy, he does know his supporters and we know he "loves the poorly educated."

[Vrede too]

Sounds like a writer for a club comedy act.
Seriously. Imagine the same words done in a stand-up environment by, say, Seinfeld in his younger days. Or Rita Rudner. But hand it to the guy, he does know his supporters and we know he "loves the poorly educated."

If any of the current late night comics did it in a POSPOTUS voice, which they've all gotten pretty good at, we would be amused but take it as hyperbole for effect. Not many people manage to become caricatures of themselves.

[Vrede too]

Found:

Dementia, going full Reagan.

Whadayaknow, there are still a FEW things that even Repugs can't abide:

Donald Trump said wind turbines cause cancer. Chuck Grassley called that 'idiotic.'

[O Really]

"But where does the president's public opposition to wind energy stem from?

It appears to date back to his days in the tourism business, and specifically, the recent development of his golf course opened in 2012 in Aberdeenshire, Scotland. When the city sought to install windmills nearby, Trump fought against the Scottish government, eventually taking legal action. His attempts ultimately failed and, in 2018, the newly installed windmills were generating enough electricity for at least 75 percent of all homes in the city of Aberdeen, according to Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

In 2012, however, Trump took his fight against windmills before the Scottish Parliament, marking one of the first times Trump was publicly challenged on the evidence behind his opinions on wind turbines.

At the time, Trump said he spent "tremendous money" on what "many already consider to be the greatest golf course anywhere in the world," and he didn't want to see the property destroyed by "monstrosities." He also argued that installing them would put the entire country in "serious trouble."

"Almost most importantly -- other than the fact that the subsidies are enormous -- almost most importantly, is the fact that the windmills are so unattractive, so ugly, so noisy and so dangerous that, if Scotland does this, I think that Scotland will be in serious trouble," Trump said, repeating claims he continues to use in political rallies as president.

Immediately after Trump's testimony, he was reminded by a member of the Scottish Parliament that the hearing wasn't on any specific wind turbine developments and had nothing to do with his golf course. Scottish Parliament Member Chic Brodie also dove into Trump's multiple claims, pressing him for data to back them up.

Brodie cited research that refuted each of Trump's claims about Scotland, saying that surveying showed tourists would not be deterred from vacationing in Scotland, that 70 percent of Scots themselves supported wind power, that some wind turbine farms in Europe were known to actually draw tourists and that, despite Trump's concerns for the environment, the World Wildlife Fund of Scotland supported turbines.

Brodie then asked Trump for evidence. Twice.

"First of all, I am the evidence," Trump said to laughter in the parliament's chamber. Though it was four years before he would announce his run for president and make similar claims about wind energy at political rallies across the U.S., it would be a preview of his unwavering political style as president.

"You know what? I think that I am a lot more of an expert than the people who you would like me to hire, who are doing it to make a paycheck. I am considered a world-class expert in tourism," Trump said at the time. "When you say, 'Where is the expert and where is the evidence?' I say: I am the evidence."

Idiot.

[billy.pilgrim]

'"First of all, I am the evidence," Trump said

"You know what? I think that I am a lot more of an expert than the people who you would like me to hire, who are doing it to make a paycheck. I am considered a world-class expert in tourism,"

. "When you say, 'Where is the expert and where is the evidence?' I say: I am the evidence."



Why did people vote for this idiot?

[O Really]

Why did people vote for this idiot?

Even after reading a lot of articles, and having somewhat of an understanding of the hard-core Trumper attitude, I still don't know how he actually got the nomination. There were 15 or so candidates, ranging from generic Republican crazy down to slobber howling at the moon crazy and all points in between. And then there was Trump - clearly the craziest, least qualified, most baggaged, least knowledgeable of them all. And yet he got the nomination.

[billy.pilgrim]

Why did people vote for this idiot?

Even after reading a lot of articles, and having somewhat of an understanding of the hard-core Trumper attitude, I still don't know how he actually got the nomination. There were 15 or so candidates, ranging from generic Republican crazy down to slobber howling at the moon crazy and all points in between. And then there was Trump - clearly the craziest, least qualified, most baggaged, least knowledgeable of them all. And yet he got the nomination.

And they still love him.

[Vrede too]

... Why did people vote for this idiot?

Even after reading a lot of articles, and having somewhat of an understanding of the hard-core Trumper attitude, I still don't know how he actually got the nomination. There were 15 or so candidates, ranging from generic Republican crazy down to slobber howling at the moon crazy and all points in between. And then there was Trump - clearly the craziest, least qualified, most baggaged, least knowledgeable of them all. And yet he got the nomination.

And they still love him.

He's a man of the people, they identify with idiocy, crazy, unqualified, baggaged and/or ignorant.

[O Really]

He's a man of the people, they identify with idiocy, crazy, unqualified, baggaged and/or ignorant.

Some do, but the same people who nominated Romney, McCain, and Bushes before them all of a sudden thought nominating a pussy-grabbing reality TV character Twitter insulter was a good idea?

[Vrede too]

Some do, but the same people who nominated Romney, McCain, and Bushes before them all of a sudden thought nominating a pussy-grabbing reality TV character Twitter insulter was a good idea?

I'm sure there are many factors, but a few pop to mind.

The Repugs or at least a segment of them have been getting more and more wingnutty.

Some were devastated by 8 years of black "rule". Never mind that it wasn't tangibly different from prior admins.

Citizens United allowed some Repugs to keep campaigning long past when they historically would have dropped out, a few with only one real benefactor. This gave 45SHOLE and his cadre of lunatics the illusion of "winning". By the time enough Repugs dropped out to make for the traditional 2-4 person race, it was too late. People like to hitch their wagon to success and that illusion of "winning" became the real thing.

[neoplacebo]

Some do, but the same people who nominated Romney, McCain, and Bushes before them all of a sudden thought nominating a pussy-grabbing reality TV character Twitter insulter was a good idea?

I'm sure there are many factors, but a few pop to mind.

The Repugs or at least a segment of them have been getting more and more wingnutty.

Some were devastated by 8 years of black "rule". Never mind that it wasn't tangibly different from prior admins.

Citizens United allowed some Repugs to keep campaigning long past when they historically would have dropped out, a few with only one real benefactor. This gave 45SHOLE and his cadre of lunatics the illusion of "winning". By the time enough Repugs dropped out to make for the traditional 2-4 person race, it was too late. People like to hitch their wagon to success and that illusion of "winning" became the real thing.

Yeah, I think the biggest reason is a rabid backlash against eight years of black rule; it made them crazy wacko and anything would suffice to salve the hurt. And here it is.

[Vrede too]

Yeah, I think the biggest reason is a rabid backlash against eight years of black rule; it made them crazy wacko and anything would suffice to salve the hurt. And here it is.

The first two are pretty much 'why', the 3rd is 'how'. Then, there must be things I didn't think of, there are books on the topic.

[O Really]

Some were devastated by 8 years of black "rule". Never mind that it wasn't tangibly different from prior admins.

And nevermind that the "ruler" wasn't very black, either. Which brings up an interesting question - why is it that a half white/half asian is bi-racial, but a half-white/half black is "black" and a half asian/half black is also "black." Didn't that come from back in reconstruction or so when a person with only a tiny percent black was black? And isn't it time that changed?

[billy.pilgrim]

Some were devastated by 8 years of black "rule". Never mind that it wasn't tangibly different from prior admins.

And nevermind that the "ruler" wasn't very black, either. Which brings up an interesting question - why is it that a half white/half asian is bi-racial, but a half-white/half black is "black" and a half asian/half black is also "black." Didn't that come from back in reconstruction or so when a person with only a tiny percent black was black? And isn't it time that changed?

It's been well established that it takes 16 generations to cleanse back to white. Until the process is complete, descriptive labels are often necessary to maintain purity.

[neoplacebo]

Some were devastated by 8 years of black "rule". Never mind that it wasn't tangibly different from prior admins.

And nevermind that the "ruler" wasn't very black, either. Which brings up an interesting question - why is it that a half white/half asian is bi-racial, but a half-white/half black is "black" and a half asian/half black is also "black." Didn't that come from back in reconstruction or so when a person with only a tiny percent black was black? And isn't it time that changed?

The so called "one drop rule" states that if you've got one drop of black blood or one black ancestor, that makes you "black." This was actually codified by several states but never was part of federal law. And it wasn't during Reconstruction that this term became extant; it was the early 20th century when it first surfaced. Sort of like an early version of trumpism.