96
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 08:19 pm
@blatham,
Carrier announced further layoffs today as well.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 08:33 pm
**** outta luck, yet again, eh, cheese-eaters?:

Quote:
White House physician: Trump in 'excellent health'

President Trump is in "excellent health," the White House doctor said Friday after the president underwent his first medical checkup since becoming president.

Jackson, Trump's physician, is a Navy rear admiral who was the emergency medicine doctor for a shock trauma platoon in Taqaddum, Iraq. He also provided care for President Barack Obama and became a White House physician in 2006.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 08:33 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I think Trump's announcement that he has sold Norway imaginary fighter jets that exist only in a video game might put him clearly in the lead again.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 09:16 pm
@layman,
I heard someone say about Ms. Deneuve's statement "That's so French!" (With a smile I might add)

The statement by the actress and her 99 friends doesn't confirm that she has any sort of classic French attitude towards sex, but that:

1) They are all strong and confident women who don't have a problem firmly rejecting and putting a stop to the unwanted advances of men whether they are simply cloddish flirtations or the beginnings of sexual harassment.
2) They understand that all flirtation (awkward or otherwise) is not necessarily sexual harassment and that all sexual harassment is not necessarily sexual abuse and predation, and they have the good sense and confidence to recognize what is what and deal with it appropriately
3) They are strong and confident women who enjoy being women and who, in general, appreciate and like men
4) They are all strong and confident women who are not going to on the one hand insist on being treated equally with men; capable of achieving the same levels of success and deserving of the same levels of reward, and on the other hand come down with a convenient case of the vapors or run crying to HR when a man pays them a compliment on their appearance or has the gall to tell an off-color joke in their hearing
5) They are strong and confident women who enjoy romance and sex and are quite capable of dealing with both without being overwhelmed by the brutish Patriarchy.

I understand Ms. Denueve has come under a lot of criticism from both her peers in Hollywood and some feminists in France. I suspect that Reese Witherspoon and #TimesUp is not going to invite Catherine to join their Coffee Klatch anytime soo, .

Meanwhile these same Hollywood peers made utter fools of themselves (once again) at the recent Golden Globe Awards ceremonies.

You may not have seen the show or read of it, but apparently just about every woman in attendance agreed in advance to wear black to the ceremonies. Why black? Beats me. Maybe because they were in mourning for the death of the last shreds of Hollywood's relevance, or because all of the colors of the rainbow (including the rainbow itself) have already been adopted by one movement or another.

Eva Longoria, the actress who spoke so passionately in support of Hilary Clinton at the Democrat's convention last year and who, apparently, has her fingers in every new Hollywood hashtag movement explained the decision to wear black thusly

Quote:
"This is a moment of solidarity, not a fashion moment. For years, we’ve sold these awards shows as women, with our gowns and colors and our beautiful faces and our glamour! This time, the industry can’t expect us to go up and twirl around. That’s not what this moment is about.


And here is how she appeared on the runway last Sunday night:

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/5c/49/da/5c49da887261d3a0a2f497a279896acf.jpg


Clearly, she was making a statement here that exposed cleavage and legs were no longer going to be acceptable in terms of the promotion of Hollywood by women!

And how about these left-wing Amazons who agreed to wear the black against the objectification of women and the notion that the Hollywood's female, Big House slaves are expected to sell cotton on the basis of their "beautiful faces and glamour."

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/44/56/11/445611ad8cc1fe78ec35b647842dc7b5.jpg

Of course one can always count on the pretentious bleating of Debra Messing and viewers of Sunday's award show were not disappointed:

Apparently, she went off on a female E! reporter about E!'s alleged dismal treatment of its female employees. In the middle of her tirade she managed to deliver this incoherent line:

Quote:
“I am wearing black to thank and honor all of the brave whistleblowers who came forward and shared their stories of harassment and assault and discrimination (Again, because ever-stylish black is so clearly the symbolic color of female actresses rising up against the objectification of women and the oppressive Patriarchy!) Time is up. We want diversity, we want intersectional gender parity . . ."


What the hell is "intersectional gender parity," and how is it any better than plain old "gender parity?"

"Time's Up" is something like an organization, a movement, or a hobby for a bunch of notable female actors including Reese Witherspoon, Longoria, Mary J. Bilge and Allison Janne with the goal of bringing awareness to the problem of sexual harassment in Hollywood. (As if there is anything they can do to make people more aware of it!)

It makes them feel good about themselves. America Ferrera said that it was "incredible to team up with other women", saying, "We've been on the phone, email, texts and have been able to engage with one another in ways that are unprecedented." (Really? phone calls, email and texts are unprecedented?)

Quote:
"Natalie Portman even said that she joined Instagram because of the #TimesUp movement: 'We want our workplaces to reflect the world we live in and have everyone represented,' she said" (So she sacrificed and had her personal assistant create an Instagram account for her! What a hero!)


https://i.pinimg.com/564x/58/7e/7e/587e7e9f55e0a2a14a4b45d33eb7919f.jpg

When I saw this photo in Vogue, (Yes, I read Vogue and why shouldn't I?) I assumed that the sleek, stylish power suit was the primary vehicle for Foy's "statement." Not so. According to Vogue:

Quote:
"...many actresses reached for a timeless symbol of empowerment in the form of a bold red lip"


Wow! It then went on to describe Foy's look as "striking elegance with gamine, slicked-back hair and a stamped-on crimson mouth"

Apparently, the "bold red lip" was, like black garments, part of the uniform of the evening:

Quote:
"Jessica Chastain, who has been outspoken throughout the #MeToo movement, proved retro waves and a vermilion pout are always a winning combination."


You can't make this **** up!

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/17/c0/33/17c033df8893dc50bc2b3cb9b768454a.jpg

I don't know who this old broad is, but at least she could have walked the red carpet with a less colorful bottle of beer, or used a black cozy. #TimesUp Fail!

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/7e/9f/0a/7e9f0a96a9428f2621048fa43e761cec.jpg

And how about Blanca Blanco? I can't wait to hear her reason for going a full 180 degrees from the #TimesUp marching orders. If it was as simple a thing as just wanting attention, mission accomplished, however, this choice of hers, in a way, exemplifies how Weinstein and other creeps in entertainment, journalism, and politics were able to get away with preying on women for so long:

The level of ambition and hunger for stardom in some of these folks is so great that they are willing to do things no lesser mortal would ever dream of: Like pissing off every powerful woman in Hollywood. (Viva Blanca!)

Blanca's a stunner, but stunners are a dime a dozen in Hollywood and so, for that matter, are stunners who can act, sing, dance or tell a joke. A competitive edge is everything. It's sad really. They shouldn't have to put up with pigs like Weinstein, Lauer, Franken & Trump, and there is no excuse for piggish behavior, but life isn't a fairy tale, and what should be the case frequently is not.

I have no idea what the real Blanca Blanco (Real name? Give me a break!) who is someone's daughter, maybe someone's little sister and even, possibly, someone's mother, might be like, but would it stun you to learn that she acquiesced to the sexual advances of some 60-year-old Hollywood producer in order to land a plum role in a movie?

It's her body, her morality, her self-esteem. If she thinks a romp in bed or a passive witness to masturbation is a small price to pay for fame, I'm not about to challenge her choice...unless she comes out on a stage, stands behind a podium and goes on and on about harassment and inequality. Blanca, Eva, Halle, Catherine and Meryl. None of them would have died and seen their children starve to death if they hadn't become Hollywood stars. Except with Streep, I don't know what these women were willing to do to achieve fame and I'm making no claim that they did anything other than show their talent, but my point is that no women has to degrade herself in Hollywood because no woman needs Hollywood to survive.

We all want an equal playing field upon which to pursue our dreams and demonstrate our abilities, but none of us has a right to such a thing and all of us have a choice as to what we are willing to sacrifice for success. It seems, at best, disingenuous and at worst pure cynical bullshit for any of them to trade sexual favors for stardom and them bleat about harassment and inequality. However, the allure of victimhood is too compelling for liberals as it not only gives them highly coveted and unearned status, it covers a multitude of sins.

It doesn't seem that Streep was willing to surrender her body and personal dignity to the Harvey Weinsteins of Hollywood, but she (along with others like Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, and Oprah Winfrey) was clearly willing to surrender her integrity once she got hers and in order to preserve it.

These people are among the most vapid humans on the planet and guess what? They are, in the great majority, all liberals. Coincidence? I don't think so.




Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 09:17 pm
@blatham,
As has been pointed out by many...he did himself in.

Good riddance.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 09:20 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

"Funny" ... Trump says today that the U.S. delivered F-52 and F-35 fighter jets to Norway - but the fighter jets don't exist.

Trump lauded delivery of F-52s to Norway. The planes only exist in ‘Call of Duty.’


And Obama claimed he visited more than 50 states during his campaign for the presidency.

What this has to do with the Hoekstra story is beyond me but leave it to a left-winger to find a way to take a cheap shot whenever the opportunity arises.

0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 09:34 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
I fail to see what the occupancy rate of US embassies around the world has to do with this story, but as I just wrote: Leave it to left-wingers to ride a non-sequitur if it slams a conservative.

Wow! WapPo declared that the Dutch reporter's snarky comment "This is the Netherlands..." was a shot at US Media too! Must be true then.

But then maybe it was. I wouldn't be surprised. Clearly, the reporter has a very high opinion of the Netherlands, it's press and her fellow citizens so it wouldn't be surprising if she thought their news media was superior to ours, however her peer, Roel Geeraedts, who joined her (albeit more politely) in hammering the new US Ambassador admitted that in terms of dogging evasive politicians the Dutch press is, in fact, no more of a pit bull than their collective American colleagues.

(I already provided the quote supporting this. Maybe you didn't notice it, as I understand that for many an A2K member, a post longer than 200 words is too hard to digest)

0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:14 pm
@oralloy,
Yep, h fluffed it and claimed he'd sold them imaginary plane, kindaa like Obama misstating the number of states. Not a stellar performance from Trump, which was the whole point.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:24 pm
@oralloy,
Bannon was doine in by his own mouth, trashing, probably truly, Trump Jr., and NO ONE trashes the Trump family and gets away with it if Donald has his way. It's the unforgivable sin in his eyes, no matter how true the rashing may be. Bannon's own hubris did him in. He got too big for his britches, and the Don cut him down.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:28 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
Many politicians of all stripes seem to think the world will come to an end if they admit they've been wrong and that's probably due to the no-win situation they are placed in by the press: If they refuse to admit they were wrong, they get hammered and if they admit they were wrong...they get hammered. Reporters (whether Dutch or American) are being entirely disingenuous when they suggest that Hoekstra or politicians like him need only admit they were wrong and they will move on. A few may, but most won't until hammering the person about being wrong no longer sells newspapers, and most of them will be all too willing to bring up the error in the future if it suits them:


From this, it is difficult to imagine how you might think the press ought to behave when politicians lie or filibuster or say something really stupid and ill-informed.

Not quite a very astute observation considering that further in my post I indicated that I could not imagine how the press could possibly do more than they already do to put a stop to the filibustering of evasive politicians. I explained why in fair detail but, again, I recognize that the length of my comments often challenges A2K members to remain awake.

BTW - What is it you think they should do? Reach across the table and slap the person in the face? Hurl a string of curses at their guest and storm out of the studio? Cut off the guest's mike, piss off a portion of their audience and ensure that the person never comes on their show again? Following the Dutch Approach, as evidenced in this clip, sure as hell won't put an end to filibustering and evasion. Do you really think that from this day until he leaves his post, every press conference Hoekstra gives will be consumed entirely by Dutch reporters asking him the same question, until he finally gives them the answer they want?

This brings us back to a prior assertion I've made. You and many of your friends seem to have the ludicrous notion that only Republican politicians are guilty of transgressions and are evasive and tell lies. I've no idea what your reaction was to Matt Lauer's tough questioning of HRC but a great many of her supporters were prepared to cast him adrift at sea after that interview. It was total BS that they didn't mind the tough questioning of Clinton, they just wanted the same tough questioning of Trump. Overall, the MSM was and has been tougher on Trump than they ever thought to be with HRC or Obama. This doesn't mean they shouldn't call him out on BS and falsehoods, but it's blatantly ridiculous to suggest that the Left's ire with Lauer was due to inequity rather than a sense that he betrayed his side and savaged their favored standard bearer.

Like I wrote, I like pit-bull reporters who don't immediately roll over for bull-shitting politicians, but I have no use for the ones who only go after politicians of one side or the other while tossing softballs to the leaders of their personal tribe. Lauer, before it was revealed that he was a sexually offensive pig, had a long history of unequal treatment of guests; favoring those on the Left. Why he decided that HRC didn't deserve the soft treatment is beyond me and, frankly, I think it was one of his best interviews ever (His one with Trump was not), but he paid a price for it and it had nothing to do with inequity.


Further, it depends on the magnitude of deceit or how ill-informed it was (or how often the individual demonstrates his lack of care for accuracy) or how negatively consequential it was which determines whether the press has every reason to keep the politician under scrutiny or subject him to grilling in the future. That is what they should do.

Really? How naive of you. It doesn't matter how flagrant the evasion or even lying may be, journalists employed by major news outlets, for reasons I already laid out, are never going to devote an entire segment to following up on a single question. I'm certainly not saying that I wouldn't like them to, or that they shouldn't, but I would also like no one to ever abuse a child again and I believe no such bastard ever should, but guess what? Bastards will be abusing children long after you and I have passed from the is vale of tears.

Pretty incredible that I'm defending the US press against your outlandish expectations and demands


There's nothing the press did wrong here.

Did I assert that the Dutch press did anything wrong (other than the one woman who took an overly belligerent approach for the likely intent of advancing her career (a la Dan Rather and Jim Acosta)?

But Hoekstra, on the other hand:

Did I defend Hoekstra? Maybe I put myself to sleep when I reread my long comment and missed this.

1) made an initial claim that was erroneous because he has clearly paid no attention to the credibility of his sources and because he was too ******* lazy to do his research.

Probably, but the central issue in this story is his refusal to respond to the Dutch press; not his original statement...although I understand why you prefer to comment on the original statement.

2) he lied about what he had claimed then lied about it a second time

Not at this press conference, but I understand why you prefer to focus on his prior statements.

3) didn't have the balls or integrity to come clean, correct himself and apologize.

I'm pretty sure I wrote essentially the same thing, but with far less emphasis on the machismo aspect, and I foolishly acknowledged the slim possibility that he might have the facts to back up his claim. He's a conservative though! How could I possibly extend him the benefit of even the slightest doubt?!

So in the end, you're really not interested in discussing the story at hand. You prefer to assume that the Dutch Press are correct and hammer Hoekstra. Not surprising.

However you are the main advocate, thus far, of the need for the US press to emulate the Dutch press even though all the Dutch press did was to generate a story about Hoekstra refusing to answer their questions and, in the case of one, firing an essentially blank salvo aimed at the US press if not America in general. One of their own (you'll need to consult my post for his name) admitted that the Dutch press is not the truth-seeking bulldogs the one woman (and you and Walter) would have us believe.

Still, it serves your ongoing narrative, so why bother to stick to what was written by either the cited/quoted journalists or me?

blatham
 
  3  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:41 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Do I have your permission to print that off and send it to a psychiatric journal?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:49 pm
@glitterbag,
Haiti is a **** hole and so is Bangladesh, Syria, one or more of the Eastern bloc nations, Venezuela, and a great many other nations around the globe...and it has nothing to do with the color of the citizenry's skin or, in most cases, the basic character of the average person who lives in any of them.

If they weren't ****-holes why would so many people be so keen on giving immigrants from these nations asylum and refugee status? How many people are fleeing from the UK, Japan or Chile to come to the US? How many people are fleeing to Haiti, Syria and Venezuela?

As Rich Lowry asked the CNN contributor: "Which country would you want to move to? Norway or Haiti?" Maybe you can come with a better answer than she did --- awkward silence.

If Trump said what it is claimed he said it was inartful, missed the point, and was incredibly stupid given that the room was filled with his enemies, but it was only unprecedented in terms of the latter. JFK referred to certain countries in Africa as "Boogy Nations" which is a hell of a lot more racist than "shitholes"

It's a nothing burger that Democrats and Trump-haters are trying to turn into a filet mignon because 1) The Dems are bombing in the negotiations on immigration (Despite of, or because of the efforts of the "five white guys" Nancy Pelosi so scornfully called out - Steny Hoyer being among them) and 2) They are Trump's avowed enemies and are going to take every such opportunity to strike a blow against him. Durbin's eyes must have almost popped out of his head when he heard Trump make this crack - out of gratitude, not outrage.

It seems more the case that you, not Trump, are hell-bent on casting the US as a "Third World Pariah" BTW what's so bad about Third World nations? They're not all shitholes you know.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 10:56 pm
@blatham,
"Barrack Obama" wrote:
“I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters. I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”


Apparently, it goes with the territory
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:04 pm
@ehBeth,
Yeah...bring her on

https://i.pinimg.com/564x/55/f1/a2/55f1a2491c1b115cdf3c8bd4a00f0848.jpg
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:06 pm
@blatham,
Be my guest
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Fri 12 Jan, 2018 11:29 pm
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Do I have your permission to print that off and send it to a psychiatric journal?


Would you please remind mr. pissy pants (the king of yellow journalism) that it wasn't you who lamented that the US's walking carbuncle is turning my country into a third world pariah state. There was no gotcha by asking an American if they would rather live in Haiti or Norway, that's just flat nonsense, most of us want to live here, because our ancestors made the decision their life would be better here. All of us have immigrant parents who sought either religious freedom, or to escape starvation or avoid being rounded up and burned in ovens or flee from genocidale massacres. I can visit Haiti or Norway if I wish and so can everyone else with the price of a ticket.

I think people like him grew up watching shows like Jerry Springer or the 'Real Housewives' or the vacuous Kardasians....but it appears shows like that have obliterated the ability of some Americans to discern between **** and shinola, and at least you could have used shinola to polish your leather shoes. Some one will soon fire back that all he watches is Shakespere's plays and listens to opera. Oh sure, I believe that's true, it has to be true because his posts are so informative and balanced and simply stinking of intelligence and book learning,.

But don't send it to a psychiatric journal, they might think it's you and the next thing you see will be the men in white scrubs and great big butterfly nets. On the bright side, you have Universal Health Care just like Norway and Cuba.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/19/2018 at 09:03:20