This is not about what the title might suggest.
I'm talking about the 20 or so unfinished & unpublished posts still in "draft" stage on Lem's blog. They are invisible to most readers. Some of them are accidental -- a few errant keystrokes led to an unwanted brain child -- the one from Freeman Hunt for example is just a title (titular posts is my tag for that). Others appear quite well along in development -- those from Pastafarian and Michael Haz, and Trooper York for example. There's even one from Darcy. Some of these authors are no longer contributors to Lem's blog. What should become of them? Of course it's Lems decision, but I wish they'd stop by here and say hello. I'd like to wish them all Happy New Year.
Sunday, January 3, 2016
KLEM FM
UKIP leader Nigel Farage escapes attempted sabotage of his car
The shit's getting real. I can image that anyone who seriously threatens the political status quo in the US will be similarly targeted. Recall the death threats against Scott Walker in Wisconsin.
Goon Squads:
lyrics after the jump
[added: if you don't know who Nigel Farage is, check out this earlier post: link h/t rcommal]
The shit's getting real. I can image that anyone who seriously threatens the political status quo in the US will be similarly targeted. Recall the death threats against Scott Walker in Wisconsin.
Goon Squads:
lyrics after the jump
[added: if you don't know who Nigel Farage is, check out this earlier post: link h/t rcommal]
Saturday, January 2, 2016
Oh please, Mr. Pfeiffer, don't throw us into that briar patch.
Dan Pfeiffer threatens total shutdown of Homeland Security.
They must have discovered a planet where this reasoning makes sense. This is Dan Pfeiffer describing how Obama can deal with Congress. This is reported on Conservative Tribune who is relaying reporting on The Daily Caller. The problem: Obama wants funding for his executive amnesty. Republicans are pretending to fight by imposing cuts to stop or slow Obama's plans to allow illegal immigrants into the country.
Dan Pfeiffer speaking:
1) Obama will block all funding for the entire department and would veto any spending bill if the Republicans try to impose cuts.
2) Are Republicans going to shut down the Department of Homeland Security to undo our executive action? I don't think they are going to do that.
3) It's possible that insanity will prevail upon the House Republican caucus as it did last October during the 2013 shutdown.
Tell us more of your homeworld, Usul. On our world that is no threat, in fact, a welcome development. On my world the shutdown is a ringing Republican success putting the check on Democrat crazy and the spotlight on Presidental menace for all to see ultimately doing terrible and lasting damage to Democrat party, trust in government generally and putting Republicans on notice to shape up, the shakedown is started. No matter how many time you repeat the opposite, slapping stucco on your rickety shed, results show you're wrong. #empty threat
They must have discovered a planet where this reasoning makes sense. This is Dan Pfeiffer describing how Obama can deal with Congress. This is reported on Conservative Tribune who is relaying reporting on The Daily Caller. The problem: Obama wants funding for his executive amnesty. Republicans are pretending to fight by imposing cuts to stop or slow Obama's plans to allow illegal immigrants into the country.
Dan Pfeiffer speaking:
1) Obama will block all funding for the entire department and would veto any spending bill if the Republicans try to impose cuts.
2) Are Republicans going to shut down the Department of Homeland Security to undo our executive action? I don't think they are going to do that.
3) It's possible that insanity will prevail upon the House Republican caucus as it did last October during the 2013 shutdown.
Tell us more of your homeworld, Usul. On our world that is no threat, in fact, a welcome development. On my world the shutdown is a ringing Republican success putting the check on Democrat crazy and the spotlight on Presidental menace for all to see ultimately doing terrible and lasting damage to Democrat party, trust in government generally and putting Republicans on notice to shape up, the shakedown is started. No matter how many time you repeat the opposite, slapping stucco on your rickety shed, results show you're wrong. #empty threat
24 days to Al Gore's 10 'years to save the planet' and 'point of no return' planetary emergency deadline
Anthony Watts reminds on Wattsupwiththat.
Clever boy, we know what he's going to do; compare Gore's dire predictions to actual outcomes and hold up for ridicule.
Goody. That should be a simple list of exaggerated predictions.
On January 25th, 2006 at Sundance screening An Inconvenient Truth Al Gore said,
Oh. This is longer than I thought. Bummer. I thought it would be simple. Anthony Watts actually treats each item seriously providing graphs and satellite data indicating first that little has changed the intervening ten years with supportive scientific opinion. He continues with a chart of surface records for the last ten years. It's boring and scientific and serious rebuttal ending, "Gaia seems to be a "Gore denier". How inconvenient.
Disappointing. I wanted a list with obvious misses.
Originally the intention was to accompany Gore's story of anthropomorphic CO2 increase leading to climate change to the traveling salesman of elixir in the wizard of Oz, also the wizard in Dorothy's dream, who awards the protagonists with things they already possess.
And instead of finding that clip of the salesman, the bogus wizard, I found one of John Ritter as Frank Baum recalling his inspiration for that salesman character, and inspiring himself to "sell" his fiction to eager accepting children. It's beautiful. It's a great idea. This is how I leaned to write essays for school, by telling my story first to Toni, then just recall what I told her and write that. The organization come with the face-to-face sales pitch. Nice touch at the beginning of the clip of having the real life salesman who inspires Baum to sell his story and by doing inspires the character of the elixir salesman within it. Baum himself who learns how to do it, and Gore for different reasons, are the same people doing the same thing. Fine, similar types, doing similar things.
Do you think enthralling children with story is so fantastic an achievement? It's not.
Clever boy, we know what he's going to do; compare Gore's dire predictions to actual outcomes and hold up for ridicule.
Goody. That should be a simple list of exaggerated predictions.
On January 25th, 2006 at Sundance screening An Inconvenient Truth Al Gore said,
...a documentary chronicling what has become his crusade since losing the 2000 presidential election: Educating the masses that global warming is about to toast our ecology and our way of life.
Gore has been saying it for decades, since a college class in the 1960s convinced him that greenhouse gases from oil, coal and other carbon emissions were trapping the sun’s heat in the atmosphere, resulting in a glacial meltdown that could flood much of the planet.And more Gore words.
Oh. This is longer than I thought. Bummer. I thought it would be simple. Anthony Watts actually treats each item seriously providing graphs and satellite data indicating first that little has changed the intervening ten years with supportive scientific opinion. He continues with a chart of surface records for the last ten years. It's boring and scientific and serious rebuttal ending, "Gaia seems to be a "Gore denier". How inconvenient.
Disappointing. I wanted a list with obvious misses.
Originally the intention was to accompany Gore's story of anthropomorphic CO2 increase leading to climate change to the traveling salesman of elixir in the wizard of Oz, also the wizard in Dorothy's dream, who awards the protagonists with things they already possess.
And instead of finding that clip of the salesman, the bogus wizard, I found one of John Ritter as Frank Baum recalling his inspiration for that salesman character, and inspiring himself to "sell" his fiction to eager accepting children. It's beautiful. It's a great idea. This is how I leaned to write essays for school, by telling my story first to Toni, then just recall what I told her and write that. The organization come with the face-to-face sales pitch. Nice touch at the beginning of the clip of having the real life salesman who inspires Baum to sell his story and by doing inspires the character of the elixir salesman within it. Baum himself who learns how to do it, and Gore for different reasons, are the same people doing the same thing. Fine, similar types, doing similar things.
Snapped
Snapped is cable television show run on Oxygen network narrated by Sharon Martin and I realized by researching the narrator that I've misunderstood the show all along. I've been watching with the wrong attitude and been annoyed with it the whole time.
Martin's narration drips with sarcasm. She sounds like a teenage mean girl isolating another girl at school. He tone is prosecuting attorney assumes culpability of every movement.
I wonder each time when I hear her, "Who hired you?" Where tone is so important, why is her tone the one that is bought? Why? Why are they doing this? Come on. Of all the good readers available they pick this sarcastic immature and very mean-sounding woman.
You know, reading aloud is a bit hard to do. You're looking at words well ahead of your mouth and figuring out what tone to express them, and it wears over time, dry lips, throat and the rest. Her tone is consistently pre-teen mean girl sarcastic and incriminating.
Snapped episodes are popular on YouTube. This is how she sounds.
Okay, just a few seconds of that sample gets on my nerves. Who can stand this? Who would hire this? Why? What is WITH this woman?
Dude, it's a joke.
Everyone's in on it and I'm last to discover. It is not sincere.
I did not realize the shows focus mostly on cases of female murderers. Their victims usually their significant other. Knowing that changes everything. Women viewers are expecting the same type of story each time with differing details. It explains the tone. It really is intended for "can you believe she pulled this crap?" tone throughout. Even when introducing characters, as if people meeting people is planned malevolently.
I ask, what does this woman look like? And I'm answered.
Psych!
Now that's funny! Got me, you bitches. Putting a face to the narrator, Ha! Knocking them out on the red carpet receiving her award for excellence in narration.
I get it now. Cable is funnier than I imagined. This is women being catty as possible and knowing it and reveling in doing it excellently when the facts are all in and the verdicts handed down. The woman is adored for her feminine condemning narration.
Two days into 2016 and predictions are coming true
Background: During an ABC Democratic primary debate (Sat December 19th, 2015) Hillary accused Donald Trump of being ISIS "best recruiter"
That same night Politifact checked Hillary's statements and reported... "No evidence for Hillary Clinton's claim that ISIS is using videos of Donald Trump as recruiting tool"
Later, terror videos surfaced using Hillary's husband former president Bill Clinton and current president Barack Obama. But, alas, no ISIS Trump terror video.
Six days after the debate, December 22, Rush Limbaugh featured a CNN segment with this odd caption (below). Where upon Rush predicts "An ISIS Trump Video Will Materialize"
That same night Politifact checked Hillary's statements and reported... "No evidence for Hillary Clinton's claim that ISIS is using videos of Donald Trump as recruiting tool"
Later, terror videos surfaced using Hillary's husband former president Bill Clinton and current president Barack Obama. But, alas, no ISIS Trump terror video.
Six days after the debate, December 22, Rush Limbaugh featured a CNN segment with this odd caption (below). Where upon Rush predicts "An ISIS Trump Video Will Materialize"
BURNETT: Bill Clinton has been used in ISIS recruiting videos, and Donald Trump surely may be in the future, but at least at this point he has not.
GERGEN: Don't you think there's a video coming now? (chuckles) Don't you think they're gonna make one real quick and get it out there?
BURNETT: I mean, they absolutely could.Which brings us to the present time. Ten days after Rush made the prediction, that ISIS would produce a video featuring Donald Trump, his prediction has comes true. The Hill: "Trump featured in terror group's recruitment video"
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump is featured in a newly released video from terrorist group al-Shabaab, according to multiple reports Friday.
"The West will eventually turn against its Muslim citizens," al-Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki, who has since been killed by a U.S. drone strike, says in the video after Trump's remarks.
"Slowly but surely, your situation is becoming similar to that of the embattled Muslim community of Spain after the fall of Granada," al-Awlaki tells Muslims viewers living in the U.S.
Elsewhere in the video, the group urges black youth in America to convert to Islam, invoking racial tension surrounding the police-involved shootings of black men in recent years.Are Hillary's enemy of her enemies a friend?
Former Social Justice Warrior in his own words
Reddit archive: Changing was a long process. I initially got into SJW groups sort of through popularity- feminism was supposed to be THE thing for equality, and I wanted everyone to be treated well, so I joined a bunch of feminist forums, which branched into more garden variety SJW circles. Initially I had no idea there was a dark side to it.
I had some weird views before; I think in a lot of ways I was a stereotypical white knight. I was depressed at the time, and being applauded for being progressive definitely was an ego boost. Fighting people I perceived as bigoted made me feel better about myself. My SJW tendencies were based mostly out of self loathing- I felt weird, like an outcast, had never had a girlfriend, hated myself, and thought that I was fixing myself by jumping deep into feminism. I armed myself with a lot of bad statistics (like the 1 in 4 rape stat) and felt smart because of it.
After a while it becomes second nature; you just sort of convince yourself that you're on the right side and see your opponent as a stereotype out of reflex. That can happen here too, but SJW's actively encourage it. You become utterly convinced that you're part of an elite, enlightened group fighting an aging generation of uneducated racists and sexists.
But eventually I started to realize that I had incomplete information. I lost a lot of arguments to people I'd stereotyped as being dumb. The people I called allies just jumped to ad hominem attacks and semantic arguments, and that made them secure in their beliefs. That's how they operate; when they lose, their mental gymnastics aren't supposed to convince you. It's to convince themselves, to justify not changing their sources or beliefs. And it's very effective at that. It worked for me for a while.
But eventually it wasn't enough for me. I started trying to revise feminist arguments with new, accurate sources. I'd correct people on my own side on forums and whatnot. They hated that, and jumped right to calling me a rape apologist and a woman hater. I was blown away, it contradicted my notion that we were the logical side.
At the same time I started college, my grades were pretty awesome and college was way less stressful for me than high school had been. I had so much more time I took an active interest in learning some real skills for the first time. I'm making my own indie game now in between my regular job, based on the skills I learned my first couple years of college in my free time. I also got a girlfriend for the first time. She was (and is) amazing, best thing that ever happened to me.
This stuff gave me a little bit of pride that was extremely harmful to the communities I was in. Whereas before when someone generalized most men as rapists, it had given me an opportunity to feel superior to other men while still hating myself, now all of a sudden it offended my new-found self worth. Their communities thrive on self loathing disguised as elitism. And then the womens' studies class I took in college cited people absolutely insane- like Andrea Dworkin. Even as indoctrinated as I was at the time, I still knew that class was too far.
I still find it funny that, though most of the class started out conservative and was roped into SJW mentalities, I started out SJW and by the end of the class it had practically ruined feminism for me. Because I'd been a part of it before. I knew when the professor was wrong. I knew how hollow the "peace and acceptance" spiel they preached was. I knew the counter points to their sources. It felt like a bad joke to me at the time; I knew how my classmates felt, I'd felt the same way months earlier. But I was powerless to actually explain that to anyone, they just demonise and talk in circles until the argument goes away. As I had done months earlier. At first I felt bad, ashamed, for going against everything. I wanted to be convinced again, I wanted to be a good SJW again. And all of a sudden I realized it wasn't going to get better. I was in a university class about feminism, overrun with SJW's, and they had worse arguments than I'd seen online. There was no smarter next level to feminism that I was just too stupid to see. That was it. I was at the top and our arguments still sucked.
The last straw was when I made a desperate, ditch effort to convert my brown female girlfriend to feminism with me. It failed; she said feminists in her country were crazy. We argued a bit. Finally it felt like a curtain was being pulled back and I realized the ridiculousness of it all. I was a stupid white knight arguing with a brown girl that she should be more feminist. I deconverted on the spot. I stopped being ashamed of myself, a lot of things changed about the way I see myself and the world. Ironically, I stopped seeing every situation as a men vs. women or race vs. race binary. SJW's insist their goal is to make everyone equal, and for a long time I believed it, but their communities actually enforce factionalism and division.
I know this post makes me look bad, I cringe every time I think about the things I used to believe and say. I feel bad about the good people I insulted and wrote off. The good news is, I'm not the same person as I was in my mid-late teens. My life actually functions and has a purpose now, so that's nice. I try to see every situation in terms of individuals now, not sides. I'm not depressed any more, I have a regular decent paying job, I'm developing a game on the side, and I'm about to marry my wonderful fiance'.
Sorry for the tl;dr, it ran way longer than I expected. Once I started typing I felt like I needed to get it off my chest.
I had some weird views before; I think in a lot of ways I was a stereotypical white knight. I was depressed at the time, and being applauded for being progressive definitely was an ego boost. Fighting people I perceived as bigoted made me feel better about myself. My SJW tendencies were based mostly out of self loathing- I felt weird, like an outcast, had never had a girlfriend, hated myself, and thought that I was fixing myself by jumping deep into feminism. I armed myself with a lot of bad statistics (like the 1 in 4 rape stat) and felt smart because of it.
After a while it becomes second nature; you just sort of convince yourself that you're on the right side and see your opponent as a stereotype out of reflex. That can happen here too, but SJW's actively encourage it. You become utterly convinced that you're part of an elite, enlightened group fighting an aging generation of uneducated racists and sexists.
But eventually I started to realize that I had incomplete information. I lost a lot of arguments to people I'd stereotyped as being dumb. The people I called allies just jumped to ad hominem attacks and semantic arguments, and that made them secure in their beliefs. That's how they operate; when they lose, their mental gymnastics aren't supposed to convince you. It's to convince themselves, to justify not changing their sources or beliefs. And it's very effective at that. It worked for me for a while.
But eventually it wasn't enough for me. I started trying to revise feminist arguments with new, accurate sources. I'd correct people on my own side on forums and whatnot. They hated that, and jumped right to calling me a rape apologist and a woman hater. I was blown away, it contradicted my notion that we were the logical side.
At the same time I started college, my grades were pretty awesome and college was way less stressful for me than high school had been. I had so much more time I took an active interest in learning some real skills for the first time. I'm making my own indie game now in between my regular job, based on the skills I learned my first couple years of college in my free time. I also got a girlfriend for the first time. She was (and is) amazing, best thing that ever happened to me.
This stuff gave me a little bit of pride that was extremely harmful to the communities I was in. Whereas before when someone generalized most men as rapists, it had given me an opportunity to feel superior to other men while still hating myself, now all of a sudden it offended my new-found self worth. Their communities thrive on self loathing disguised as elitism. And then the womens' studies class I took in college cited people absolutely insane- like Andrea Dworkin. Even as indoctrinated as I was at the time, I still knew that class was too far.
I still find it funny that, though most of the class started out conservative and was roped into SJW mentalities, I started out SJW and by the end of the class it had practically ruined feminism for me. Because I'd been a part of it before. I knew when the professor was wrong. I knew how hollow the "peace and acceptance" spiel they preached was. I knew the counter points to their sources. It felt like a bad joke to me at the time; I knew how my classmates felt, I'd felt the same way months earlier. But I was powerless to actually explain that to anyone, they just demonise and talk in circles until the argument goes away. As I had done months earlier. At first I felt bad, ashamed, for going against everything. I wanted to be convinced again, I wanted to be a good SJW again. And all of a sudden I realized it wasn't going to get better. I was in a university class about feminism, overrun with SJW's, and they had worse arguments than I'd seen online. There was no smarter next level to feminism that I was just too stupid to see. That was it. I was at the top and our arguments still sucked.
The last straw was when I made a desperate, ditch effort to convert my brown female girlfriend to feminism with me. It failed; she said feminists in her country were crazy. We argued a bit. Finally it felt like a curtain was being pulled back and I realized the ridiculousness of it all. I was a stupid white knight arguing with a brown girl that she should be more feminist. I deconverted on the spot. I stopped being ashamed of myself, a lot of things changed about the way I see myself and the world. Ironically, I stopped seeing every situation as a men vs. women or race vs. race binary. SJW's insist their goal is to make everyone equal, and for a long time I believed it, but their communities actually enforce factionalism and division.
I know this post makes me look bad, I cringe every time I think about the things I used to believe and say. I feel bad about the good people I insulted and wrote off. The good news is, I'm not the same person as I was in my mid-late teens. My life actually functions and has a purpose now, so that's nice. I try to see every situation in terms of individuals now, not sides. I'm not depressed any more, I have a regular decent paying job, I'm developing a game on the side, and I'm about to marry my wonderful fiance'.
Sorry for the tl;dr, it ran way longer than I expected. Once I started typing I felt like I needed to get it off my chest.
Friday, January 1, 2016
Katrina Pierson
Katrina Pierson is spokesperson for Donald Trump. Gathered from a few too brief videos, some with men speaking over her, dominating time, interrupting, and gathered from the titles of search results, the reaction she causes, she appears the analog of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Michelle Malkin combined, a woman of fierceness, brains and looks. It appears Donald Trump has chosen a very capable spokesperson. Don't tell anyone, it appears I'm in love.
YouTube titles by searching her name:
Earlier tonight, Katrina Pierson, Bob Beckel and Rick Wilson with Don Lemon on CNN December 21, 2015
Katrina Pierson Drops MASSIVE Truth-Bomb on MSM Narrative
Katrina Pierson goes thermonuclear winter on Hillary Clinton
Katrina Pierson w/Hysterical Muslim; Don Lemon; CNN; 11-23-2015
Donald Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson vs David Brock, a Hillary Clinton surrogate, battled on CNN
Trump Spox Katrina Pierson Battles S E Cupp on Muslim Ban Proposal ‘So What They’re Muslim!’
Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson destroys CNN's Brian Stelter
Doesn't she sound fun? I'll show the last one, now that I know his name, he's in the earlier one but unnamed. He's a dope. They're pulling the Journolist thing of agreeing to hammer a point so he stays stuck on an issue only he and they previously agreed to linger on and when finally unproductive with her then he says that he doesn't want to go down a rabbit hole, after he dragged us all through it and stayed there in Wonderland.
Other journalists do the same thing with the same specific insistence that one element is important. Katrina attempts to get across it's important to people with no intention of voting for Trump and can never have traction with anyone else. Those days are gone. At this point the attempt to use Trumps own faux pas against him helps Trump. But they cannot see that. Being C students it's their one go-to. The titles say, crushes and destroys, and obliterates and such but Katrina is actually simply rejecting their premises and providing her own, the ones well discussed on Trump's circuit, and going from there. None of that is new to Trump's supporters, but the reporters and the activists are not used to being presented with completely different paradigm by having their language dropped and Katrina providing her own. The effect is her lifting a template up to their faces and spray-painting her bold colors across them and it is glorious to behold.
Searching her name through regular browser shows Journalst style approach to destroy her.
Trump's spokeswoman is an unemployment cheat AND an 'Agenda 21' conspiracy theorist
Katrina Pierson, Trump spox, catches flak for bullet necklace: 'Next time I'll wear a fetus'
The Katrina Pierson Bubble Bursts - The Texas Observer
Pete Sessions rival Katrina Pierson says '97 shoplifting ...
Trump spokeswoman accessorizes with bullet necklace ...
Katrina Pierson, Trump spox, catches flak for bullet necklace ...
Ha ha they love her too. They're doing it again, the fixation on the bullet necklace is the give, it sends them off the edge, to them it's a killer but it doesn't matter to anyone without such obsession.
The first minute that ran reminded me of Brian's risible concern for truth.
Without listening again, they were on about reading Teleprompter. Trump speaks from the heart and things come out in the excitement of the moment, some of it not so factually provably accurate.
Journ-o-lister types would like to latch on mistakes made during campaign and make hay of it but nothing they bring up matters and it's frustrating for them.
Brian suggests Teleprompter is more truthful, more honest because statements read from it are carefully crafted whereas speaking directly human to human heart to heart soul to soul is carelessly off the cuff and less factual less trustworthy less truthful. Two models of honesty and truth asserted for your assessment. Brian didn't care much for Teleprompter presidency but regards it more honest.
And that's why I regard Brian a dope, completely outclassed, and Katrina no one to mess with. How she tolerates patiently the men's rudeness in the other videos ganging up on her is beyond me. They treat her as unreal object. I look at her face in the key frame above and swoon, compare the capture to his.
YouTube titles by searching her name:
Earlier tonight, Katrina Pierson, Bob Beckel and Rick Wilson with Don Lemon on CNN December 21, 2015
Katrina Pierson Drops MASSIVE Truth-Bomb on MSM Narrative
Katrina Pierson goes thermonuclear winter on Hillary Clinton
Katrina Pierson w/Hysterical Muslim; Don Lemon; CNN; 11-23-2015
Donald Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson vs David Brock, a Hillary Clinton surrogate, battled on CNN
Trump Spox Katrina Pierson Battles S E Cupp on Muslim Ban Proposal ‘So What They’re Muslim!’
Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pierson destroys CNN's Brian Stelter
Doesn't she sound fun? I'll show the last one, now that I know his name, he's in the earlier one but unnamed. He's a dope. They're pulling the Journolist thing of agreeing to hammer a point so he stays stuck on an issue only he and they previously agreed to linger on and when finally unproductive with her then he says that he doesn't want to go down a rabbit hole, after he dragged us all through it and stayed there in Wonderland.
Other journalists do the same thing with the same specific insistence that one element is important. Katrina attempts to get across it's important to people with no intention of voting for Trump and can never have traction with anyone else. Those days are gone. At this point the attempt to use Trumps own faux pas against him helps Trump. But they cannot see that. Being C students it's their one go-to. The titles say, crushes and destroys, and obliterates and such but Katrina is actually simply rejecting their premises and providing her own, the ones well discussed on Trump's circuit, and going from there. None of that is new to Trump's supporters, but the reporters and the activists are not used to being presented with completely different paradigm by having their language dropped and Katrina providing her own. The effect is her lifting a template up to their faces and spray-painting her bold colors across them and it is glorious to behold.
Searching her name through regular browser shows Journalst style approach to destroy her.
Trump's spokeswoman is an unemployment cheat AND an 'Agenda 21' conspiracy theorist
Katrina Pierson, Trump spox, catches flak for bullet necklace: 'Next time I'll wear a fetus'
The Katrina Pierson Bubble Bursts - The Texas Observer
Pete Sessions rival Katrina Pierson says '97 shoplifting ...
Trump spokeswoman accessorizes with bullet necklace ...
Katrina Pierson, Trump spox, catches flak for bullet necklace ...
Ha ha they love her too. They're doing it again, the fixation on the bullet necklace is the give, it sends them off the edge, to them it's a killer but it doesn't matter to anyone without such obsession.
The first minute that ran reminded me of Brian's risible concern for truth.
Without listening again, they were on about reading Teleprompter. Trump speaks from the heart and things come out in the excitement of the moment, some of it not so factually provably accurate.
Journ-o-lister types would like to latch on mistakes made during campaign and make hay of it but nothing they bring up matters and it's frustrating for them.
Brian suggests Teleprompter is more truthful, more honest because statements read from it are carefully crafted whereas speaking directly human to human heart to heart soul to soul is carelessly off the cuff and less factual less trustworthy less truthful. Two models of honesty and truth asserted for your assessment. Brian didn't care much for Teleprompter presidency but regards it more honest.
And that's why I regard Brian a dope, completely outclassed, and Katrina no one to mess with. How she tolerates patiently the men's rudeness in the other videos ganging up on her is beyond me. They treat her as unreal object. I look at her face in the key frame above and swoon, compare the capture to his.
"Emails Show Coordination Between Chicago PD, Mayor’s Office Over Laquan McDonald Shooting"
[A]ccording to the AP, there was email correspondence between Emanuel’s office, the police, and the independent police review board Emanuel set up in which there were concerns about how bad it would be for the city if this became a story.
The head of the Independent Police Review Authority emailed in March about sending witness interview transcripts to the law department so they could use them for settlement negotiations.
And in May, when a spokesman for the review board asked Emanuel about doing interviews (since there was some media interest in the case), an Emanuel spokesman said that they need to “tread lightly” if the focus is on the specifics of the case.
That same spokesman also sent out another email expressing his frustration with how the––again, independent––review board didn’t go along with what he said about one particular media inquiry.How is Benghazi like Chicago?... Bonus if you can put it in Samuel L Jackson words ;)
"Turkish President Erdogan cites Hitler's Germany as example of an effective presidential system"
"Asked on his return from a visit to Saudi Arabia late on Thursday whether an executive presidential system was possible while maintaining the unitary structure of the state, he said: "There are already examples in the world. You can see it when you look at Hitler's Germany."
"There are later examples in various other countries," he told reporters, according to a recording broadcast by the Dogan news agency.
Erdogan wants to change the Turkish constitution to turn the ceremonial role of president into that of a chief executive, a Turkish version of the system in the United States, France, or Russia.Elsewhere in the news... "Obama to impose new gun control curbs next week"
President Obama will meet with Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch on Monday to finalize a set of executive actions on guns that he will unveil next week, according to several individuals briefed on the matter... according to those familiar with the proposal, who asked for anonymity because it was not yet public, the president will expand new background-check requirements for buyers who purchase weapons from high-volume gun dealers.
The president will also use his executive authority in several other areas...
Clinton email: Merkel despised ‘Obama phenomenon’
The Hill: Sydney Blumenthal sent Clinton a memo on Sept. 30, 2009 with background information on John Kornblum, who was at the time taking over as Germany’s foreign minister.
“Kornblum strongly suggests you try to develop your personal relationship with Merkel as you can,” Blumenthal writes. “He says she dislikes the atmospherics surrounding the Obama phenomenon, that it’s contrary to her whole idea of politics and how to conduct oneself in general. She would welcome a more conversational relationship with you.”
Obama had only been sworn into office eight months earlier.
Obama had only been sworn into office eight months earlier.
Obama Berlin 2008
Has the Obama phenomenon given rise to the Trump phenomenon?
Trump Dallas 2015
Nick and Nora Charles figured out the right way to live among the Woo!ers decades ago.
That is a comment by Aaron Miller to an article by Jon Gabriel published on Ricochet about not liking New Year's eve because it's mostly people who go, "Woo!"
I had no idea Nick and Nora were such lushes. The compilation has them appear quite unattractive. I heard of them a million times but never saw them once. I know their dog is Asta only because of crossword puzzles. It's a gimme. And any combination of those names can crack a recalcitrant corner. But if you told me it was really Asta and Charles Nora and their dog Nick, I'd have to believe you.
Anyway I still don't get it. It doesn't make sense. The answer is Nick and Nora deal with the Woo!ers by staying drunk and giving each other the short shrift?
The comments are negative about New Year's as the post. They indicate a mature readership. Somewhat fuddy-duddy. Not at all like the kids having fun.
Others compare it with Halloween and with Martin Luther King Day and with St. Patrick's Day. Others specify what they are drinking quietly at home and what specific cigars they are smoking. One commenter first kissed his wife on New Year's, so...
Interesting reading people studiously avoiding reveling.
None of them mentioned themselves aging and none of them mentioned MADD.
Police used to stop drunk drivers on amateur night, even involving accidents, and give it a pass because, New Year's.
But then as baby boomer generation matured and lose a couple thousand loving husbands and fathers to drunks, on a night in particular, lose a few thousand mothers, beloved sons and daughters to drunk driving and all of a sudden there's gotta be a law shutting down all the carefree drinking on that special arbitrary night, and come to think of it all nights, and there goes the fun. All the fun. It's dependent on alcohol. That is singularly the main change from the fun times of yore. I blame MADD because they changed the laws.
Now, if it were such fun and if revelers were not so old presently and had MADD not changed laws and subsequent attitudes then Uber could stand a chance of resurrecting the fun, but all that did happen so Uber cannot resurrect the truly drunken fun of days gone by. Too bad. Drunks lose. You'll have a toned down version and that will involve forced Woo!s. Be thankful the reveling doesn't involve vuvuzelas.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)