For a little break from American
politics I thought it might be interesting to visit a nice cold
place. Take some of the heat out of that emotional roller coaster we
have been on. If there is one entity that doesn't care about who is
in the White House it is planet Earth. She will do what she will do.
Unless, of course, you believe that human activity does have some
bearing on our climate. Then that might change things a little.
So today I have for you a video on
Antarctica. We have heard so much about the melting ice in the
Arctic and on Greenland, but we haven't really looked at the other
end of our planet. I think maybe we should do so.
This is just shy of an hour long. But
it is worth watching.
84 comments:
"This is just shy of an hour long. But it is worth watching."
At an hour long it'll be this evening before I get to watching that. However, there's nothin’ much on TV on a Saturday night, so…
How old is that video? I think I remember it from several years ago.
In any case, it shows how little we actually know about what's really going to happen as the temperature rises (ain't near as much doubt but that the temperature is gonna be rising, unfortunately).
It was dated 2016. I had never seen it before.
No, even the scientists in the video make clear that predicting the ice is not always a hard and fast thing. Just like climate change. But what seems to be certain from their research is that the ice has melted and reformed numerous times. Along with that will come sea level rise that will flood the coasts. It would seem that we should make some preparations to adjust.
I think that Marcus will find this interesting.
The provocative author who wrote a book alleging corruption between the Clintons and their philanthropy now says he sees similar conflicts of interest between Donald Trump and his business now that he's President-elect.
Peter Schweizer, whose book, "Clinton Cash," sent the Clinton campaign into damage control as she kicked off her bid in spring 2015, said he foresaw attempts by foreign actors to ingratiate themselves to Trump's children, who will take over the President-elect's business empire. That could be an attempt to curry favor with the White House.
I watched Schweizer being interviewed on CNN tonight. He specifically cited Russia as a possible problem with regard to conflict of interest.
"It was dated 2016. I had never seen it before."
Sometimes NOVA recycles some film clips from prior shows, may have happened here. Maybe that's what I remember.
This was too good to pass up, even if we are trying to be non-political for a few days.
"Steve Bannon, set to be a top strategic adviser in President-elect
Donald Trump’s White House, lashed out at the media in an interview
published Friday evening by the Wall Street Journal.
"Democrats and the media, he told opinion columnist Kimberly Strassel,
are casting him as a “cloven-hoofed devil” by associating him with the
views promoted in the website he headed…"
Politico.com
Lynnette:
"Peter Schweizer, whose book, "Clinton Cash," sent the Clinton campaign into damage control as she kicked off her bid in spring 2015, said he foresaw attempts by foreign actors to ingratiate themselves to Trump's children, who will take over the President-elect's business empire."
That's an obvious risk. And Trump will need to be careful to avoid being seen as doing, or actually doing, something that is un-ethical with regards to his many business holdings. He probably should get himself a lawyer for just that alone. And listen to that lawyer (which might not be in his nature to always do to be honest).
Lynnette:
"I watched Schweizer being interviewed on CNN tonight. He specifically cited Russia as a possible problem with regard to conflict of interest."
They always say that. It's always the bad Russkies.
Myself I think Trump and Putin are gonna get along just fine and that tensions will de-escalate and that the Russians won't be stupid enough to poison the relationship with crap like that. The Russians are rarely stupid btw, they tend to be very strategic minded and pragmatic about most things.
"Democrats and the media, he told opinion columnist Kimberly Strassel,
are casting him as a “cloven-hoofed devil” by associating him with the
views promoted in the website he headed…"
*sigh*
When people only know someone through their public stance on issues, and their support for a media outlet whose views can be considered less than moderate, what are they supposed to think? Seriously?
“Does Paul Ryan think that everything Breitbart stands for, Steve Bannon stands for, is great?” Bannon said. “No. Do I think that everything he stands for — in particular his omnibus [spending bill] — is great? No. Can we work together to implement Donald Trump’s vision for America? Can we do that? Oh yeah.”
We'll see. Also it might be wise to consider the fact that Trump does not have a mandate for all of his policies. While he won the electoral college he did not win the popular vote.
This is a few weeks old and you might have seen it already but if you have't you should:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI7IDprbS8M
Donald J Trumps contract with the America people.
The Russians are rarely stupid btw, they tend to be very strategic minded and pragmatic about most things.
I don't think the Russians are stupid. I have never thought that They just believe in a different system than do most Americans. And that is where we will always be in conflict with them. Can we rub together in peace? Well, we have done so for some time now, despite underlying tensions. Hopefully we will continue to do so. But what I do not want to see is our system morphed into a clone of Russia's authoritarian one. So I think it wise to be careful on how closely we work with someone like a Putin.
I'll have to listen to that a little later, Marcus. It's 24 minutes long and I have cleaning to get done.
"…and that the Russians won't be stupid enough to poison the
relationship with crap like that."
I might point out that The Donald introduced his daughter to Japan's Prime Minister during their recent visit. In fact, she sat in on the entire meeting. Trump has said that he is turning his commercial enterprises over to his children, and his daughter has said she will not be taking any political positions in his administration.
The obvious inference from these things is that Trump was introducing Abe to his financial intererests and the woman who is going to manage them.
If Putin expects to ‘get along just fine’ with Trump then ignoring Trump's financial interests may not be the way to do that.
I guess we'll know more when we find out who from the Trump financial organization gets to attend Trump's first meeting with Putin.
Watch this too, it's eally hilarious with hindsight:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahkMA6JPOHU
So smug and certain they all were, so misinformed, so out of touch, so wrong.
"So smug and certain they all were, so misinformed, so out of touch,
so wrong."
I suppose they forgot that one can win the popular vote and still lose the Presidency. The win does not always go to the winner in our system. Those smug, certain, misinformed, out-of-touch people seem to have forgotten that.
Lee: "The obvious inference from these things is that Trump was introducing Abe to his financial intererests and the woman who is going to manage them."
Yes, keeping a distance between his business interests and his now public role is one of the greatest possible liabilitis I can see so far. Which is why I said he should have a lawyer (or maybe a team of 'em) to make sure he doesn't go about screwing his presidency up by nepotism or corruption. After all, he doesn't really need any more money, does he.
Lee: "I suppose they forgot that one can win the popular vote and still lose the Presidency. The win does not always go to the winner in our system. Those smug, certain, misinformed, out-of-touch people seem to have forgotten that."
I think that people like that knew very well that that was the case. It was just a few years ago it happened last. No Lee, they were smug despite knowing that. They never thought he stood a chance at all, system or no system.
"After all, he doesn't really need any more money, does he."
That's kinda hard to say, given that he's kept his tax returns hidden and not issued a real, actual financial statement either.
I've read some stuff which says that his (otherwise unsupported) claims to be worth in the neighborhood of $10 billion are based on his valuing his own name at $7 billion of those dollars. In other words he's got around $3 billion in real assets (leveraged) and he values being Donald Trump to be worth the other seven billion.
Of course, being Donald Trump could conceivably be worth much more now that he's got the White House to work out of and got the federal government under his influence. Have to work it right, but it could be extremely lucrative now, being Donald Trump.
"It was just a few years ago it happened last."
I'm not sure that's adequate basis for assuming it could happen again so soon.
However, I do suspect that the Republican structural advantage in the Congressional elections has now manifest itself in the Presidential elections, and the Democrats are going to have to factor that in going forwards.
And, while we're on the subject of Trump's assets… I read that Trump is going to try to keep his residence in New York City, in Trump Tower, rather than actually move into the White House, use the White House mostly for ‘official’ functions.
One great actor suppports Trump:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwRKdP5zIFo
It taken mighty big balls to go against the whole establishment like that. Which is why usually only older folks who are financially secure and in the possession of "fuck you money" will ever do that.
Kanye West is another celeb with "fuck you money" who is rich enough to go against the establishment, and had the courage to do so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHmzm_NgpM0
Black man, huge celeb, for Trump, now that wasn't supposed to happen.
"It taken mighty big balls to go against the whole establishment
like that."
Voight has been considered a right-wing flake by the Hollywood crowd for years and years now, but I'm not sure how much money he's got.
It's been years since he was considered a first tier actor, capable of carrying a movie as lead. Hard to say how much those two things have to do with one another.
Kanye West didn't even bother to vote (they can check that; it's public record who votes, but now how they voted). He's married to Kim Kardashian. He knows the value of being outrageous in public; she taught him that. He may well support Trump merely to get the name Kanye West in the papers again today.
Scott Biao supported Donald Trump too. And, far as I know, he may have actually voted. Maybe he's got big balls too? Ya'll just a bunch a big balled fellas together?
The USA sides with the Ukraine and Palau (an island with 21K citizens) against an ant-Nazi program.
131 nations voted for a Nazi ban, 48 nations declined to vote, and the US with just Palau and the Ukraine in tow voted for Nazism.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-votes-against-anti-nazi-resolution-at-united-nations/
What does Trump have to say about this?
Gonna havta let ya go hunt them big balled fellas on your own now Marcus. Got football coming on that I do wanna watch.
Ciao for now.
Trump has apparently told the press that the Trumps will be residing in the White House, with Melania and Barron joining him there after the school year lets out in the spring.
One wonders if he's gotten Melania's agreement on this?
I recall that Trump announced that Melania would be giving three (3) major speeches on his behalf near the end of the campaign. This was apparently news to Melania at the time he announced it. It didn't happen.
They are interviewing Erogan on 60 Minutes tonight.
*sigh*
"Erogan" should be Erdogan
I'm guessing Trump will largely give Erdoğan whatever he wants (considering that Muslim thing about women being property this will probably come after Erdoğan gets properly introduced to Jared Kushner standing in for Ivanka).
Donald J Trumps contract with the America people.
We will have to wait and see if he fulfills it.
Monkey starts clan-war in Libya:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-libya-security-sabha-idUSKBN13F0PD
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/11/monkey-attack-sets-deadly-tribal-clashes-libya-161120162450750.html
"Pet monkey pulled off girl's headscarf igniting days of tribal fighting in the south, killing at least 16 people"
Shia militias which have been sidelined during the battle to retake Mosul have used their time to discover other mischief they can get into. (ForeignPolicy)
"Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, Trump's
designated White House chief of staff, asserted that the
president-elect won an ‘historic landslide’ and Kellyanne Conway, his
campaign manager, claimed he won a ‘mandate’ from the voters.
***
"In the history of U.S. presidential elections, no president-elect has ever
lost the popular vote by as much as Trump."
Bloomberg
Rather than holding a press conference The Donald has outlined his incoming priorities in a five minute video--linked through NBCNews. Notably absent from his list of priorities is any mention of a wall across the southern border (or anywhere else for that matter).
The Donald has told a press gathering that "Mitt Romney “really wants” the secretary of state position." (Politico.com) My guess is that this is the set-up for Trump giving it to someone else (Rudy Guiliani is almost groveling for it).
"Pet monkey pulled off girl's headscarf igniting days of tribal fighting in the south, killing at least 16 people"
So that's just...weird.
The Donald has outlined his incoming priorities in a five minute video--linked through NBCNews.
I see he has mastered the teleprompter. The one point I will be interested to see how he does on is the removal of two regulations for every one that is created.
The media has been speculating about Trump's not holding a press conference since his election. After watching that video I have to wonder if Trump is choosing not to expose his inexperience in that kind of forum, rather than deliberately snubbing the press because he doesn't like them.
"I have to wonder if Trump is choosing not to expose his inexperience…"
There's no particular reason both those things cannot be true.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Looks like France is going to get a Putin-friendly government, whether or not Le Pen does well or poorly in the upcoming elections. (Bloomberg)
Some clowns are contemplating a challenge to the electoral college system. The idea is to throw this election into the House of Representatives (where, presumably, the Republican majority would elect Trump anyway). But, it would possibly get some changes made to the system whereby the minority candidate manages to get himself elected (always been a himself up to and including now).
I don't think it's likely to go anywhere, but it is worth noticing just in case they manage to stage a revolt. Been a weird year in politics already; it's outside possible there's more weirdness that could still yet happen I guess, but I ain't holdin’ my breath on this one coming to pass. (Politico.com)
I hear that The Donald is pissed off at Saturday Night Live again and wants equal time. If I were NBC's programming director I'd offer Trump equal time--one whole hour, live, and he'd have to memorize his lines just like the SNL folks do--no teleprompter. Put a stop to those demands right quick.
For Marcus
http://710wor.iheart.com/onair/mark-simone-52176/60-minutes-goes-to-sweden-to-14515160/#ixzz4Qk1BKYtA
Apparently the ‘lock her up’ thing ain't gonna happen either. MSNBC (Morning Joe) is reporting that Trump has abandoned the promised special prosecutor for Hillary Clinton. It appears that spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway has confirmed that information to reporters.
Trump has canceled and then de-canceled his meeting/interview with the New York Times. He claims that the NYT has changed the rules for the on-the-record part of the interview. The NYT claims otherwise. Calling the paper a pack of liars and then agreeing to an on-the-record session with their reporters strikes me as a really, really bad idea--an amateur-hour move if ever there was one.
"Kanye West is another celeb with ‘fuck you money’ who is rich
enough to go against the establishment, and had the courage to do
so.
***
"Black man, huge celeb, for Trump, now that wasn't supposed to
happen."
Marcus @ Sun Nov 20, 12:21:00 pm ↑↑
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Kanye West was involuntarily hospitalized for psychiatric problems on Monday. (WaPo) Supposedly he had to be physically taken down and placed in restraints (handcuffs) and then had to be tied down on the bed once they got him to the hospital, or so the rumors are going ‘round.
"Anonymous said...
For Marcus"
Yeah, I've seen that before. It looks like that in quite a few places here. In an other instance a foreign camera team almost got run over by a car in a similar scenario (or if it was the same team in another place, can't remember exactly).
The Donald has told the New York Times that, as President, he will be exempt from most conflict-of-interest and public ethics laws. (ChicagoTribune) He is essentially correct.
He may well be worth that $10 billion he already claims to be worth when he leaves office after four years. He may find a way to turn ‘being Donald Trump’ into actual cash money.
I thought that Kanye West incident was rather bizarre, whether it was exhaustion or something more serious.
Apparently the ‘lock her up’ thing ain't gonna happen either. MSNBC (Morning Joe) is reporting that Trump has abandoned the promised special prosecutor for Hillary Clinton. It appears that spokeswoman Kellyanne Conway has confirmed that information to reporters.
Yeah, I saw that. He had hinted as much in the 60 Minutes interview I watched last Sunday(not to be confused with the 60 Minutes show in Anonymous' link for Marcus). He said something then about not wanting to "hurt" the Clintons. Considering all of the acrimony in the election campaign I thought that an odd turn of phrase.
I hear that The Donald is pissed off at Saturday Night Live again and wants equal time.
More and more Trump reminds me of Jesse Venture.
*sigh*
"Venture" should be "Ventura", our former Governor.
Lynnette: "He said something then about not wanting to "hurt" the Clintons. Considering all of the acrimony in the election campaign I thought that an odd turn of phrase."
My best guess was that all that talk was aimed at firing up his base, get them energized, get them to turn out for the vote. Not that he actually intended to try to put Hillary in jail. Now that he's won there's little to gain from persuing that, especially since he will have a hard enough time to heal that huge divide in American society as it is.
Myself I'm looking at the mentioning of Bolton in government with unease. A hardcore Neocon in an important position is NOT what was promised and even if I have no say in the matter I see that as a possibly great mistake.
"…especially since he will have a hard enough time to heal that huge
divide in American society as it is."
Getting a conviction would be a bigger problem. Most of Trump's supporters have been listening to Radio-Right-Wing and FoxNews and are of the mistaken impression that Hillary broke the law by putting ‘secret’ material on her private server. This is, of course, not true. (Not true that she broke the law--is true that she used a private server and some small percentage of the material was later reclassified as ‘secret’.) However, that is a violation of State Department regulations, not a violation of the law--a legal case requires that she also transmit or intend to turn over that ‘secret’ information to someone without an adequate security clearance. FoxNews viewers are unaware of this because FoxNews never mentions it. Therefore, Trump's supporters, by and large, think the case against Hillary is open and shut, while the FBI Director (who's obviously no friend of Hillary's) doesn't think there's a chance in hell he could ever get a conviction or even get a sane prosecutor to prosecute the case.
Filing the charge and having it summarily tossed out of court with a stern lecture from the judge about wasting the court's time with frivolous matters is not in Trump's interest.
Just to be clear on this…
"However, that is a violation of State Department regulations…"
For this she could be fired, or maybe even impeached, but not convicted of a crime, on account of it's not a crime without more, i.e. not without the intentional transmission of the classified information to an unauthorized recipient.
"Myself I'm looking at the mentioning of Bolton in government with unease."
Well, Ambassador to the United Nations is already taken (Nikki Haley, governor of South Carolina). But, Secretary of State is still open.
By the way, Hillary Clinton's lead in the vote count is up over 2 million votes now. (Not that it changes the fact that Trump's got the majority of the Electoral votes locked up, but it is the largest ever loss by a person who went on to be President anyway.)
Some of Trump's retinue of supporters and hangers-on are publicly calling on Trump to not offer the Secretary of State position to Mitt Romney. (Politico.com) This probably means Romney turned him down. Chances of it going to Rudy Guiliani or John Bolton go up accordingly.
On another matter, not political; just to pick up on something Lynnette was following a few short weeks ago, back in the pre-Trumpian days…. Why it's never aliens behind the radio transmissions
Lee: "By the way, Hillary Clinton's lead in the vote count is up over 2 million votes now. (Not that it changes the fact that Trump's got the majority of the Electoral votes locked up, but it is the largest ever loss by a person who went on to be President anyway.)"
I read a lot of wailing abut that. But there are three points to make that really makes that irrelevant.
#1: IF it was all about the popular vote then the two campaigns both would have been very different. Both would have focused their campaigns in large-population areas. It might very well be that this would have favoured Clinton but it's not a given fact.
#2: There's a reason for the current system. You know that Lee, even if many others don't.
#3: If the system was to be changed it would have to be changed well in advance of an election, not as a by-product of an election where some feel slighted.
Remember that it was specualated in some outlets that it would play out the other way around, that Hillary would get the electorate and that Trump would get the majority vote. (Now I myself have some difficulty seeing that outcome as a possibility but it was speculated).
In any case, what's your point here? I'm curious.
"#2: There's a reason for the current system."
Yes, Originally it was done this way because the general population wasn't trusted with the vote. Actual democracy was frowned upon.
"In any case, what's your point here? I'm curious."
My point would be that these people are living in a fantasy world; to wit:
"Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus, Trump's
designated White House chief of staff, asserted that the
president-elect won an ‘historic landslide’ and Kellyanne Conway, his
campaign manager, claimed he won a ‘mandate’ from the voters."
Bloomberg @ Mon Nov 21, 08:27:00 am ↑↑
They need to be brought back to reality on a regular basis, or they'll be wingin’ along out there forever and gettin’ nothin’ done right.
Still:
Trump spend less than half of money compared to Hilllary in total.
In Florida in the last two weeks 80% of TV-Ads were pro Hillary.
The combined mass media, basically all of 'em, were for Hillary.
The Democratic party after (and even before really) Sanders backed down was for Hillary.
The Republican party did not come together for Trump, instead many knlwn figures basically campaigned against him.
In normal circumstances Hillary should have won easily. She had the most support any presidential candidate has ever had, by far. It's not even a question, she had such a smooth ride it was ridiculous really.
Yet Trump won.
You really should think hard about that. Ask yourselves why. Try to venture out of your thought-bubbles and take in new perspectives.
And, for whatever it's worth for the future… After two losses in the last five Presidential elections where they picked up the majority of the popular vote, I think the Democrats had best start preparing for a political world in which they have to get a majority + percentage of two or three percent, i.e. gotta go for 52% or even 53% if they expect to win the Presidency. (Currently they're under a structural disadvantage in Congressional elections of between 5% and 7%, meaning they need to win 55% to 57% of the popular vote to get a Congressional majority. In the future they may need to start figuring on a structural Presidential disadvantage as well.)
"You really should think hard about that. Ask yourselves why."
I've got why; it's not hard; it's not complicated. And, in spite of your situation in Sweden, it's not an ethnic problem.
However, Marcus trying to make Trump look good reminds me--I have to spend dinner tomorrow in house fulla Trumpkins. It's gonna be a chore.
Ya know… Now that I think about it… It occurs to me that the original purpose of the Electoral College system was to make sure that the ‘elites’ kept a fairly tight rein on the potentially populist masses. The whole point was to make sure people like Trump never became President. Of course, the system's been modified since then, and it no longer serves that original purpose. Hard to say it serves any legitimate purpose, but it is what it is nonetheless. Them's the rules.
The Electoral College.
It does still give the smaller states a greater say in the election then they would normally have if the popular vote were to be used as the determining factor.
You really should think hard about that. Ask yourselves why. Try to venture out of your thought-bubbles and take in new perspectives.
I have talked to various people who voted for Trump. The reasons ran the entire spectrum, from they hated Hillary, to jobs, to lets just shake up the system to see what happens. Sure you have the bigots out there such as the KKK supporting Trump, but you also had Americans who were angry over health insurance. And they weren't too interested into delving into why the ACA didn't work very well for them. I suspect that some of those people will be sadly disappointed in Trump.
Because of how the presidential election works in the States, giving more power to the smaller states through the Electoral College, we again had an election where the candidate garnering the smaller share of votes won. The majority of Americans actually voted for Hillary Clinton.
"It does still give the smaller states a greater say in the election…"
Smaller in population, yes. These tend to be rural states.
Originally only landed white men could vote (this was back when land was wealth, commerce as wealth hadn't risen to the fore yet, although it was on the way, and they just didn't see that comin’ yet). So, giving more political power to rural white males meant giving the ‘elite’ a greater say. Nowadays the rural areas are no longer the richer areas, and don't think of themselves as the ‘elite’ of society anymore. Nor does anybody else think of them that way.
"I suspect that some of those people will be sadly disappointed in Trump."
Yeah, I suspect Thanksgiving dinner with the family Trumpkins will be much easier to bear next year, after they've had time to gather their fill of him (much like the good citizens of Mosul eventually came to feel less than fully delighted in the governance of Da’esh.)
Here is an interesting view of Trump. I have to say that I have wondered if much of what Trump did during the campaign was a deliberate strategy to win, to garner votes from wherever he could. If so, if he is not so extreme in his views, then those KKK people who held the gathering celebrating his win may be the ones who were conned.
I still would prefer a President who presents a kinder, gentler persona. Encouraging division isn't a good idea.
The people I will be seeing tomorrow at dinner are all anti-Trump for the most part. The one fellow who is a Hillary hater is going to a different relative's home for dinner.
Astronomers love their radio telescopes because they get useful science done, but there are always all sorts of unexplained phenomena in the universe. That's kind of the reason astronomers remain employed — there's lots of stuff we simply don't understand. Signals, features, observations, the works. It's a big universe out there.
Yup. But that doesn't mean there aren't aliens out there...somewhere. ;)
"If so, if he is not so extreme in his views…."
I don't pretend to know whether or not Trump is actually a racist or a bigot. I know he ran as a racist and a bigot. That's every bit as bad as actually being one.
Lee: "And, in spite of your situation in Sweden, it's not an ethnic problem."
Huh? When have I ever claimed that? Anti-immigration is a factor, but it's not the biggest one.
I don't pretend to know whether or not Trump is actually a racist or a bigot. I know he ran as a racist and a bigot. That's every bit as bad as actually being one.
Yes, which is why, for the first time, I actually dislike a President on a personal level. I have disagreed with policies by various President's, but have never actually disliked them before. At least not the ones who have been alive during my lifetime that I am familiar with.
If Trump ran on a racist platform deliberately to garner votes from the far right, rather than that is his true nature, there is a small hope that he can move to a more moderate stance and allow the country to heal some of its divisions. If he can't do that we will have moved backwards, just like some in the Middle East are intent on doing.
It's been a week or ten days now. Time ‘nuff for you to deny it, and long enough ago I don't remember the exact day. Nor am I going to look it up just now (maybe later; maybe not).
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
"If he can't do that we will have moved backwards, just like some in
the Middle East are intent on doing."
He's already moved us backwards. Just by pretending he's normal, he's moved us backwards.
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
Turns out that the family Trumpkins were not mollified by my agreeing with them about Trump. Apparently they thought I should make an attempt to sound sincere. That was more than I could dedicate to the cause of peace.
On a more interesting note, they were finding it hard to come up with enthusiasm for him. Best they could seem to pull out was that he hadn't actually done anything yet to criticize. (That's not true, but I was able dedicate some silence on that point to the cause of peace.)
I notice that the Trumpkins' attacks on Mitt Romney have stepped up. I suspect that they expected Romney to have expressed some interest in the Secretary of State's position by now (need him to confirm publicly that he wants it before Trump gives it to somebody else--otherwise there's no humiliation of Romney involved when they give it to Guiliani, or whomever), and now they're getting frustrated at Romney's continued apparent disinterest in serving Trump.
He's already moved us backwards. Just by pretending he's normal, he's moved us backwards.
America's trajectory toward a "more perfect union" has never been straight. It has always seemed to be a series of starts and stops, sometimes going off at tangents. It has never been pretty, but we have always steered a course back to those goals set forth in our Constitution. Trump will be a challenge to what the people who wrote the Constitution created, the checks and balances, but I am not ready yet to lose faith that our governmental structure will fail.
I notice that the Trumpkins' attacks on Mitt Romney have stepped up.
I suspect they will be doing more of that. But in any case, this is Trump's first real test. Even more so than the Bannon thing. I will be interested to see what he does.
Turns out that the family Trumpkins were not mollified by my agreeing with them about Trump.
Mine was far more relaxed. No politics were talked about except with one person, and her description of Trump was "buffoon". So there were no arguments.
Post a Comment