I know you hate Donald Trump. Hey I hate him too! He is not going to be the nominee. I know you took your orders from Rhino central to pull out the bogus "woman question." I mean you are pissed off because the Rug said that a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice would look good "down on her knees." Well sweetheart Hillary's husband had his interns on their knees. That is where he would put any hot looking subordinate or they would lose their job. Paula Jones. Doncha remember that? Are you going to ask Hillary about that? Or would that mean you don't get invited to those Georgetown Cocktail parties where you can flirt with Pajama boy?
So take your politically correct "You are offending womens delicate sensibilities" and stuff it in one of your many unoccupied holes.
Here's the thing. If we can't make fun of Rosie O'Donnell then the terrorists have won.
26 comments:
I admit that I really just don't like overconfident bombastic men like Trump, and I avoid them in life and business, but I do love that he owns up to what he says, and doesn't do that silly and dishonest walking it back crap. I wish someone in his position in life would avoid talking about people in such a childish fashion, especially in public, but that's who he is, and you can take him or leave him - do business with him, vote for him, or not.
I do like that when Kelly brought up this stuff that he didn't try to deny it. He fully owned it, and then made the valid point that it's all trivial in the scheme of what they are there for. On that, at least, he was right on, and Kelly was off on a silly side track.
Try as I might I can't gin up any antipathy towards Megyn. This is probably a function of my subconscious mind calculating that that antipathy will lower the possibility of mating with this particular female. I understand consciously that quantifying that possibility would require division by an exponential function of some sort but apparently that's not how my subconscious works.
So I'm saying there's a chance and I wouldn't want to blow it. Her show comes on in 20 minutes for those interested.
I realize Trump should have really said, "what war on women? Are you joking? Is this a joke? You are falling for that Democrat crap about the war on women? Democrats have been using women for decades as a tool and right now you are that tool. Stop it." and then went on to give that signature pout and shrug.
I'm not a Fox regular or a TV news watcher at all, but I've seen Kelly several times. Last night she seemed a bit overdone in the makeup department. Is that normal?
The Donald shows Rs how to deal with the Lefty media.
As with his attack on the immigration mess, you don't have to love him or be on his side.
You just have to realize he's doing our side a lot of good.
"You just have to realize he's doing our side a lot of good."
If he pushes the debate on immigration to the right, you are spot on.
And by generating interest among previously uninterested and uninvolved conservatives he's increasing the likelihood that they will eventually vote even if Trump isn't the candidate. And the ones I know won't be voting for Hillary. The media and party organization haven't yet grasped what Trump is doing. Unless they're part of the plan.
I know this based on a sample size of one. That one being a nearly totally apolitical friend who came by for coffee today. I doubt that he could name the VP. But he watched the debate - the whole thing. He loves Trump, but now he knows who Walker is and Cruz and even Fiorina. Although I did have to give him the names after he described the haircuts.
Rabel,
Megyn passed me a note in second period History today. It said that she would leave her husband for you if you just asked her. She really likes you, but thinks you like that Kim girl in home room that lets the boys look up her skirt for a quarter. I told her that you don't even have a quarter. She said that's OK because she makes millions and just wants to be your girl.
Cross my heart - hope to die.
Kim's nothing to me. I don't know where she heard that. It was worth the quarter though.
I watched the debate. I think all the candidates got asked barbed questions. Some of them were quite good on pivoting away from the barb and making their pitch and explaining what terrific human beings they are. Kasich and Rubio were particularly good at it. Trump got asked some hard questions, but he's said some dumb things in the past that need questioning. Trump doesn't explain and doesn't apologize. I guess that's part of his appeal, but I don't see how he can possibly woo the fat sluts away from their support of Hillary with such harsh tactics. Fat sluts are a significant and growing part of the American electorate. It would be well not to alienate them.......I think Kelly is auditioning for the Russert role--the journalist who asks the tough questions. She's hard on both the Dems and Republicans whom she interviews.
The CNN interview ... gross.
Kelly was snippy and way too Belle of the Gotcha Ball. I especially thought that the God question was obnoxious and unserious. Something one would expect from an immoderator on one of the alphabet networks. Like, here I am pretending to care WWJD; care to join in without offending anyone? That question went to a lot of them though. Trump got pressured and the Foxes def don't like him but he's also way out in the lead so he's going to get more pressure. And this is how he handles it, by doubling down on the stupid.
Politicians are the lowest form of life but the successful ones are the ones that can take a punch, including a low blow, and roll with it and not cry. This guys got a glass jaw (like Obozo, yes, but unlike O he's not going to get any protection from the media). He's not qualified and should get out.
The question for guys is :what is good for the nation vs. what fuels your personal fantasy of getting laid w/ Megyn Kelly.
Kasic makes me barf. He does. That was his home turf. I think the crowd was pleased to see him there. The applause seemed off, greater than warranted.
Here's the barfy thing; Telling us he went to a gay wedding is just too barfy to bear. Is the same thing as saying, why, some of your best friends are black. Or that you know a few personally. The EXACT same thing, 'cept diff'rnt. I'm in another room rolling my eyes at what I'm hearing and I say to nobody, "Great. You've caught up with Darth Cheney." You've done something so perfectly ordinary and bragged about it like a boy who drank all his milk. Big f'n deal. It's embarrassing. It's so anachronistic it's antique and yet he fancies himself up to date, the hottest newest thing going. It's just so f'k'n STUPID and there he is accepting enthusiastic applause and the whole time I'm thinking no wonder you dumb slow bastards so often lose.
This analysis by Mark Levin I think is spot on regarding some of the questioning by the Fox moderators. He puts some context into the War on Women type questions from Kelly and wonders why, with all the crises around the world, they somehow managed to bring Rosie O'Donnell into the mix.
What's the difference between Rosie and a bowling ball?
@nick,
And, if he really, really has to, a man can eat a bowling ball.
A bowling ball knows that fire can melt steel.
So Trump is persona non grata for implying that a woman he disagrees with might be hormonal, but Fiorina is great for implying that men she disagrees with have no balls.
That's making the system sexist. These are just common insults that any grown up should be able to handle without banning people from participation in the discussion. Just ridicule the insult. Don't take your ball and go home tender ones.
While Trump is stirring things up that need stirring, he's not too swift on his feet really: When he said he'd not run as a 3rd party candidate if he won the Republican nomination ....no, really, well that's fascinating...e.g., why would anyone run 3rd party if you had the Republican nomination nailed down? Putting that answer together is fuzzy thinking at best and not what I'd expect from a POTUS.
Next, I am suspicious of all the candidates who talk about a "fair tax" or a "flat tax", some clarify it as a "consumption tax" and some not, then say it'd eliminate the IRS. That is 100% baloney and anyone who has had my experience with state treasuries knows it (both in the private sector and in DOD) ... policing the tax collectors under a consumption tax is harder than policing individual payers. Even the IRS gave up on retail level collectors of the federal excise tax on fuels...they switched it to a wholesale level collection scheme where the retailer pays the tax and can only be reimbursed for it if he provides a certificate of legitimate exemption for individual sales on a quarterly return. That scheme removes any record of tax payment for the individual in my USA experience with VAT taxes...unlike Canada and their VAT that does appear on your receipt for tax purposes and reimbursement purposes when appropriate. Our now dead Michigan VAT (Single Business Tax...no exemption for labor expense) was totally concealed, and that was on purpose. And worst of all, it was put in place by a Republican Governor.
I am against any form of a federal VAT or consumption tax....but I would favor a very simplified, loopholes eliminated, income tax that was relatively flat. It could be written on a single 8.5 x 11 sheet of paper. The mechanism already exists for reporting and collections via the IRS Forms 940 & 941 (and state equivalents where applicable)...reports you risk a lot to skip or delay if you're in business...it immediately flags you for investigation or audit or both...and the IRS follows up within 6 months max. Penalties and interest double the tax debt & grows exponentially and applies to the CFO individually as well as the business...and even if the business pays up, the individual CFO is still liable for the same amount. It is literally non-judicial punishment.
Not guessing...been through it as a CFO in my private sector days...took 15 years and a lot of lawyer money to solve...none the less the lawyer expense was about 25% of what was claimed I owed for taxes that were eventually paid by the firm, but still assessed against me, though eventually paid, for funds I never ever had possession of personally...e.g. I had not under reported my personal income or concealed any funds....it was assessed purely on my former position...and a shortfall covering less than 4 months, that was paid up finally, but for which I was held responsible in full (2nd collection) for as the fiduciary...and held responsible personally, as well as the firm...e.g., a double tax & penalty.
I spent some time advising bar and restaurant owners on tax matters and how to avoid the traps...and I'd say about 50% or more of them refused to listen...feeling once they collected the money it was theirs, not a tax liability. A few were padlocked by the state or the feds or both. Bar owners charge say $2 for a drink and figure that's all theirs...rather than dividing by a factor to calculate the net tax collected and owed.
It's easy to laugh now but before you know it Trump will take over America.
Kasic makes me barf.
The reason normal people disagree with you is because his story made him sound like the only one of the bunch who had any humanity or kindness. But you are unusual in not trusting anyone who wouldn't put you in a cage next to the large rodent exhibit.
R & B ... Trump cannot win with his off the cuff nonsense, like the instance I cited above. He's good at stirring things up, and IMO necessary, but not so good at remedies, in detail, on his solutions. If he runs as a 3rd party guy he's a progressive Democrat in hiding, pure and simple. Ross Perot was right about many things, but his 3rd party solution assured a Democratic victory. In short, he was impotent.
Well, I see your point - but then, that's just another justification for how I told you guys from the beginning how foolish it was to ever trust the guy. I don't even think it was intentional. The guy's the loosest cannon this side of the Navarone and admitting that he'll f*&^ over anyone who deviates one iota from being "nice" to him probably just counts for foresight and courtesy in his short book. Although I agree that he's good at what you say he is good at; I watched his clip with the black guy's dad who was shot by an illegal and concluded that if anyone can tie together effective points over those issues, he can. Hell, even I was impressed.
But he's a dickwad. Sure, he can't help it. But I doubt he'll affect outcomes. I suspect even Tea Party people will realize how damaging he is before it's too late. However, I could be wrong. It's not like I put a lot of faith in the TP not letting me down.
The larger point about women - sure, he made as effective a tie-in to political correctness as one could. But you guys take it too far. Blowback onto female hypersensitivity this way goes nowhere and just makes it seem like offensiveness for its own sake is how the right-wing defines itself. And that's as bad a personality defect as Trump's.
It's good to be willing to offend. Don't be willing to sacrifice the larger point on the altar of offensiveness.
Nobody trust Trump. We just enjoy him for the enmities he makes and the people he pisses off. The reaction to him exposes a lot.
I got a kick out of him until the debate and his idiotic comments vis a vis 3rd party and women, which I've cited before. If he's the nominee, I won't bother to vote. He's Hillary, but noisier & nothing more. I'm very confident he relishes this stage just now because his handlers can't control his dumb mouth. His comments about bankruptcy were also weak and dodgey. How many investors did he bury with those things? Anyone can go bankrupt, under adverse conditions, as he said, but how many consider it a strategy? That and the media loves him....not a high recommendation in my world.
Said another way, Trump said he, personally, did not go bankrupt. Fine, but 4 companies that he managed did and he came out untarnished or financially damaged...how'd he manage that? Insider information? Just like politicians do every day that's how...casually excusing themselves for losing other people's money. I repeat, there is no there there. He'd not find Congress or the Courts as pliable or foolish as his former (bankrupt) employees, they'd bite back...even though the Congress & Courts themselves are also foolish, or "bought", these days.
Enough about Trump...too much ink already spilled on his sorry candidacy.
Post a Comment