Monday, September 26, 2016

Chang W. Lee writing for the NYT brings the stupid, and comments to the article are even worse.

I come unglued reading them. The article and the comments cannot be borne. They remind me too much of the people I know, of the things they say, they remind me of being born among and abiding the incredibly retarded and self-righteous sanctimonious and perfectly unteachable. It drives me insane.

Lee thinks, and believes and mostly feels that Hillary has a record of service and a raft of pragmatic ideas while Trump discloses nothing concrete. (About himself, or his plans, while promising the moon and offering the stars on layaway.)

ORLY? Do, elaborate Hillary's so-called record of service. And don't bother to cite her experience as senator on the coattails of her husband. And don't dare cite her experience as Secretary of State. Nor her bogus foundations. Your goddess is world class grifter. Her service is to herself. Your loyalty is to your party and not the United States. You're not worth reading since you haven't contemplated what your party is doing to this country without recognizing your part by supporting it. Your duty is to demolish your party, not support it. But there you are, just another silly person perfectly satisfied to participate in your party's corrupted long march through American institutions by means you're sensitive yourself and deride as McCarthyism at the faintest detection. You'd be quite satisfied with a one-party system that pervades every aspect of American society, a party that promises the moon and the stars on layaway while delivering Baltimore and Detroit and St. Louis. That's you. You vote for Hillary because you are gay. You vote for Hillary because you are black. You vote for Hillary because yo are a woman. You vote for Hillary because you are minority. You vote for Hillary for your identity as any specific thing and not because you are American first and foremost.
The best case is, [for endorsing Hillary] instead, about the challenges this country faces, and Mrs. Clinton’s capacity to rise to them.
Rise with the help of two medics. One taking her pulse. Rise with the help of optometrists fitting her with first Fresnel lenses then with Zeiss Z1 lenses. Rise with the help of Secret Service agents lifting her off the pavement and tossing her into her bulletproof medivan while leaving behind her shoe. Rise with the help of her aids explaining her health, blood clot, fainting during campaign speech, elbow fracture, deep thrombosis, stumbling into jet planes, concussions, more blood clots, Bill explaining long six month recovery, coughing fits going on for months, seizures on camera, explaining away as heat then dehydration, then finally pneumonia, and hours later waving and hugging a child and insisting everything is just fine then jumping into the same medivan. Rise with the help of 29% of doctors polled who haven't said her health is disqualifying. Rise with the help of corrupted Democrat DOJ refusing to indict for crimes obvious to all paying attention. Rise with the help of corrupted Democrat FBI passing out immunity like Halloween candy.

We're already at the fourth paragraph.

You know what, Chang Lee, whoever you are, you are impossible to read. Your hagiography of Hillary is blind, while your x-ray vision into Trump's mind and heart and soul is myopic and deeply flawed. You are, frankly too stupid to read.

If Lem's Levity readers care to indulge the stupid, it's here. If you must enter through Google then c/p, [Our endorsement is rooted in respect for her intellect, experience and courage Hillary Clinton for President.]

You'll be treated to paragraphs ridiculous as this:
Over 40 years in public life, Hillary Clinton has studied these forces and weighed responses to these problems. Our endorsement is rooted in respect for her intellect, experience, toughness and courage over a career of almost continuous public service, often as the first or only woman in the arena. 
See, Lee, that's the problem right there. The very thought of professional politician, of a political class is antithetical to the American ideal. This attitude elevates the wrong people for the wrong reasons. And you're wrong in imagining Hillary's experience means anything at all. She is a disaster plain and simple. There is nothing there to respect. Nothing whatsoever. Let's be clear about one thing in particular. In business it's fine to attempt to build something from nothing, to try and to fail. Failing in business is not a disgrace. It's how business people learn. Failure at taking risk is fine. That truly is American. That is singularly the trait that sets Americans apart. But it is not fine on the public dime. In politics it is not fine to fail your way up and that more than anything characterizes Hillary's experience. All her failing is in politics. You say "public service," that's nonsense. That locution was invented by Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. because the term "politician" was too distasteful. But that is what Hillary is, a politician and not a public servant. Public servants don't steal furniture and china from the public homes they inhabit. Self-servers do that. Public servants do not sell access and services of State through their foundations. Public servants do not use party to corrupt government agencies. Self servers do that. Chang Lee, you give your respect to criminal enterprise. Your loyalty is sorely displaced.
As a candidate, she has struggled to step back from a pointillist collection of policy proposals to reveal the full pattern of her record. That is a weakness of her campaign, and a perplexing one, for the pattern is clear. It shows a determined leader intent on creating opportunity for struggling Americans at a time of economic upheaval and on ensuring that the United States remains a force for good in an often brutal world.
Oh for Christ's sake, she is exactly pointillist, her full pattern is disqualifying. Her weakness is her entire self, her entire history, her personality, her voice, her health. the weakness of her campaign is evident in her spending other people's money to the tune of 50-1 compared to her opponent while remaining even. That's how she handles money, your money, taxpayer's money, your children's money and their children's money. Money means nothing to her. Your money means nothing to her, and yet here you are giving her your endorsement. She does not create opportunity. On the contrary she dissolves opportunity by burdening citizens with even more taxes. Taxes! The word means burden. She burdens citizens. She is perfectly incapable of producing opportunity in any way except by graft.
Similarly, Mrs. Clinton’s occasional missteps, combined with attacks on her trustworthiness, have distorted perceptions of her character.
No, Chang Lee, that is her character.
She is one of the most tenacious politicians of her generation, whose willingness to study and correct course is rare in an age of unyielding partisanship. 
Now you're just making stuff up. Tenacious yes. She is pure politician. 100% politician. The exact opposite of American ideal. She is stuck solidly in the persona of politician. There is nothing else available to her but pure ambition. That is not a good trait. Study and correct course? You're out of your mind. Do you even listen? You're just making shit up.
As first lady, she rebounded from professional setbacks and personal trials with astounding resilience.
She bullied the women that Bill abused in office. You keep overlooking these deep and disqualifying personality flaws and mold them in your mind into attributes instead. You get even more stupid as you go. Lee, you are not convincing anybody of anything. You're singing the praises of a fraud. One who considers herself entitled by dint of tenure.
Mrs. Clinton’s record of service to children, women and families has spanned her adult life. One of her boldest acts as first lady was her 1995 speech in Beijing declaring that women’s rights are human rights. 
And what record of service is that? Saying so does not make it so. Repeating such does not produce such a record out of thin air. What record? Children's books? Thin and vapid books that propose children belong to the State? Saying something in China? That's what you laud as service to children and women? There's a very long list of women with very strong opinions to the contrary that you must dismiss to make such an incredibly empty claim.
This year, she rallied mothers of gun-violence victims to join her in demanding comprehensive background checks for gun buyers and tighter reins on gun sales. 
This year she promised as president to use executive order to erase second amendment from American Bill of Rights. We know that doesn't bother you as your attention is focused off the gun problems recorded mostly in Democrat controlled cities and onto NRA and the vast majority of law abiding gun owners. Your own opinion on guns is so distorted by party that a rational discussion is quite impossible.
After opposing driver’s licenses for undocumented immigrants during the 2008 campaign, she now vows to push for comprehensive immigration legislation as president and to use executive power to protect law-abiding undocumented people from deportation and cruel detention.
You know, she knows, your party knows, all observers know this is another wedge issue  exacerbated by your party to create more Democrat voters and nothing more. Your support is for doing away with border protection altogether by fiat, by fait accompli, that cannot be accomplished by upright and straightforward means. You know this policy does not have the support of the United States population, but you would have it for your own party's interest and nothing more. Your pulling of heartstings about law-abiding illegal immigrants renamed is rejected. Again, for the millionth time, look to Mexico's own immigration laws and compare. Look at Canada's immigration laws and compare. Not that we should aspire to be like Mexico or Canada, but you're demanding again, and we're quite sick of having this same argument you're demanding the United States be the only country on earth with wide open border policy and you demand that because you perceive advantage to your party and not because of any heartfelt empathy toward people who decided to sneak into this country and squat here for decades.
Mrs. Clinton and her team have produced detailed proposals on crime, policing and race relations, debt-free college and small-business incentives, climate change and affordable broadband.
Now you're really are too stupid to even engage. You sound positively British in saying "free" healthcare. Apparently you don't know that nothing is free. Nothing is free. Nothing! In the United States your party insists even air that you breath is not free. Your party will tax everything. Everything! Your party will tax rain water. Your party will tax the ground that you walk. Your party will tax your very being, your death. Your party will tax to the extent that your debts can never be paid in your lifetime and by so doing enslave all citizens to government. That you cannot see this makes you impossible to engage. Economics is beyond you. You are too thick and too locked up to even talk to.

Honestly, I cannot stand another word of your blather. Yet you do go on.
...she fought for money for farmers, hospitals, small businesses and environmental projects. 
She stuck her stupid f'k'n government nose where it does not belong.
As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton was charged with repairing American credibility after eight years of the Bush administration’s unilateralism. She bears a share of the responsibility for the Obama administration’s foreign-policy failings, notably in Libya. But her achievements are substantial. She led efforts to strengthen sanctions against Iran, which eventually pushed it to the table for talks over its nuclear program, and in 2012, she helped negotiate a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. 
And she failed miserably. That you even bring it up. She shares responsibility for the massive failure in Egypt, Syria, Russia and China. The agreement with Iran is nothing to brag about, it's actually shameful. Hillary and your party are a disaster complete. Globally. The power vacuums created invited opportunists worldwide. Foreign policy is a distinct Democrat weakness. Still, this late you insist of your mischaracterization of Bush's foreign policy as unilateralism, your conceit driven again, when it is your party, your president and your Secretary of State that forfeited the gains made in that country to the ruin of the entire region. That is your responsibility as voter, the result of your ossified utterly unmalleable conceit.

Chan Lee contines ridiculously. I'm weary of quoting the writer. It's simply the weakest, sickest, most disgusting essay I've bothered to endure. So attention is diverted to comments instead and they're even worse!

Honestly, it's best I live by myself, best to not socialize right now because my impulse is to crack people across the head with my canes. And they're heavy. Unusually heavy. Very strong wood. They'd do real damage, and my arms are quite strong. My impulse control is becoming more difficult to check. Yes, best I not socialize so much anymore. Best keep it to minimum. I cannot take the resolute stupid.

Let's look at a few comments and see again just how remarkably thick. There are nearly 3,000 at present. (They're not all bad.)
... from a European point of view it's satisfying that one of the leading newspapers do this. US needs to keep on that road the government has been on over the last 8 years. A society where equality and wealth walks hand by hand will make US stronger in a competitive world.
Oh, shut up, European person.
as an Middle Eastern resident. we are all talking what if Trump becomes the next president of USA and continue his childish speeches and mean comments about everything, particularly his comments about Muslims that stoke the flames of terrorism much more, by giving the terrorist groups the pretext they need for recruitment that west is our enemy.
Oh, shut up, Middle Eastern person.
Like Bill Maher joked, you don't have an overflowed toilet leaking all over your home and say get me anyone here to help except a plumber. In effect, that is exactly what Americans are doing when they say that they reject anyone with experience. 
Oh, shut up, Bill Maher listener.
As a young African American male who has seen many of the problems of modern day America, from police brutality to a justice system stacked against blacks and other minorities, the high costs of higher education, and the widening income inequality gap, I firmly believe that Hillary Clinton is a great candidate for president.
Oh, shut up, identity voter.
...the notion that Mrs. Clinton is not a candidate of change overlooks the most obvious fact; Mrs. Clinton is a woman, and a committed feminist woman at that. Those who have convinced themselves that this is a merely cosmetic or symbolic matter are kidding themselves... 
Oh, shut up, identity voter.
Hillary Clinton will work tirelessly for you and the country. Do you honestly think Mr Trump will do the same ?  
The choice is clear. 
Hillary Clinton is the most qualified person for President of the United States, Commander in Chief and Leader of the free world.
Oh, shut up, Stupid.
If Hillary is a passenger jet, Trump is a missile. The jet serves to safely carry people to their desired destination, is capable of flying above bad weather and around obstacles and then landing safely, nearly always without drama.
Oh, shut up, Fabulist.
A very persuasive editorial. Voters must abandon reasoning such as "I am a Republican and so I can't vote for Hillary" in favor of "I am an American and I must vote for the best candidate."
Oh, shut up, Projectionist.

And so on. For three thousand NYT reader comments. 95% of them will be voting for Hillary Clinton for insanely stupid reasons. It's our duty to crush them with disappointment since it's quite impossible to disabuse them of their sanctimonious self-righteous insane stupidity and sorrowfully displaced loyalty. Displacement, it's not just another river in Egypt.

The amazing vapid Chang Lee writing for NYT.


edutcher said...

And yet, at the end of all that obfuscation and mendacity (I wish I had Chip's command of the language), Lee still has to beg people to vote for her and states his paper's mission (openly, for once) as being to actively convince readers she's actually a viable candidate.

A mighty tough row, considering she's conceding OH.

Third Coast said...

Scott Adams is right. We think we're rational, but when it comes to politics, it can become all wishful thinking based on unicorn farts and my team, my team, rah rah rah. Reading the NYT comments, one wonders how people that think they're so smart can be so willfully ignorant and deluded about the Hildabeeste.

AllenS said...

Hard to believe that some of the most educated people that I've met are willfully ignorant and deluded about a lot of things concerning life and other people.

Well written, Chip.

AprilApple said...

If you support Hillary Clinton - you support corruption.

AprilApple said...

Hillary's top qualifications are money grubbing and using her positions of power to stuff her bogus family charitable foundation. She is excellent at selling us down the river for her own personal gain. She is excellent at removing as much private wealth from Americans as possible, all while the Clinton Foundation slush fund grows and grows.

She is very qualified as a corrupt politician- agreed. Nobody tops her corruption qualifications.

Amartel said...

Clinton Crime Family Stenographers.

Amartel said...

And their blinkered non-authority questioning yes-ma'am lock-stepping brown-shirted fun-sponging true believers.

It's just pathetic to see.

Lem said...

When I see a Carol Oats Twitter about politics she seems irrational.

ricpic said...

Trump has to show he's substantive and prove he's presidential. Rodham doesn't, she's a policy wonk.

Utter crap, right? Well, that's what every pundit has written in the run-up to this debate.

Why? They're insiders; she's an insider. And Trump's the arriviste who MUST BE KEPT OUTSIDE THE GATES.

Amartel said...

Someone actually put forward the following arguments to me:
(Yeah, years of experience cheating and lying to the American people with the able assistance of her stenographers.)
2. She's DEVOTED her life to PUBLIC SERVICE
(And squirreled away more money with less accountability than any Eeeeevil "private" sector corporate CEO could ever in a million years hope to gain)

They are desperate and scraping the bottom of the barrel so I expect some very dirty tricks from Nixon's True Heirs. (Yeah, I know. Nixon didn't kill anyone. But he's the left's first big coup and the point is to make them live up to their own playbook, non? She's Little Miss Trotsky in Waiting. Stalin in a rainbow pantsuit. That woman could go to prison for years; she'll do anything. Imagine the pressure she's under.)

edutcher said...

Experienced? Isn't that what you say about a hooker?

ricpic said...

Trump has to show he's substantive and prove he's presidential.

No, just show up and look reasonable.

Just like Reagan in '80.

edutcher said...

PS How scared are they at Casa Ozark?

One last practice debate - this morning.

AllenS said...

Jennifer Flowers is experienced. Hillary, not so much.

Methadras said...

AllenS said...

Jennifer Flowers is experienced. Hillary, not so much.

As repugnant and vile as this will sound, we know that Hillary has had sex at least once. Ugh, just saying that gives me the vapors.

edutcher said...

A pungent point made by Scott Adams, not only ahead of the festivities tonight, but regarding the race generally - Trump supporters are planning for the world’s biggest party on election night whereas Clinton supporters seem to be preparing for a funeral.

ricpic said...

You gotta start reading with a little care, dutch. I followed "Trump has to show he's substantive and prove he's presidential" with "Utter crap, right?"

There's no blue book final given here but a little care, 'kay?

edutcher said...

I disagree with Adams on that.

All he has to do is show up and appear to be a reasonable human being.

Remember, Adams was initially for Frumpty, so his judgment of who Trump might be is still a bit murky.

edutcher said...

PS Everybody knows how little I trust Ned Silver, which is to say, not at all, but this map dovetails nicely with the Adams quote.

Granted, I'll believe it when I see it for real, but it's illustrative of the way the Left is looking at the race right now.

ndspinelli said...

The reason Bush 41 got beat by Bubba was because Bush HATED campaigning/debating and it showed. Bubba ate it up. Hillary HATES campaigning and debating, and Trump eats it up. When someone loves what they're doing, people can see it. And vice versa.

Amartel said...

nd-TRUE. Compared to Hillary - or even just in general - Trump projects authenticity. Even I, who am not a yooge fan, saw that from the beginning. Authentically blowhardish and prone to authentic douchbaggery but any sort of authenticity at this point is a relief from the manufactured, gamed, poll-tested, robozombie lifelong corruptocrat and utterly inauthentic hackosaurus on the other side. He's back to enjoying campaigning after a bit of a wobble over the summer when he had to transition from primary campaign fun to general election fun. Now appears back on track. Hillary is just nonstop GRIM. Who would you want to have a beer with?

Trooper York said...

What Chip said.

ndspinelli said...

Amartel, Word is Trump is going to the spin room after the debate. He will love doing that. Hillary will be going to a hyperbaric chamber after the debate.

Amartel said...

Yaaasss! Unscripted Trump Rampages Through Stenographers Safe Zone Room. So much triggering.