Wednesday, March 1, 2017

PRESIDENT TRUMP'S 
ADDRESS to CONGRESS
February 28, 2017


I have no criticism of the substance of the speech, itself, 
only of the ENEMEDIA'S generally puerile and jejune 
responses to it. How do you feel about it? 
Please don't answer, unless you took
the time to watch it yourself.

65 comments:

  1. Although I didn't give it my total undivided attention I thought it was a master stroke from the maestro.

    The Trump card: "What would you say to the American family that loses their jobs, their income, or their loved one?"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Albert Einsteinway PianoMarch 1, 2017 at 12:10 PM

      "or their loved one?"

      Well if Trump was a mensch he'd say "I'm sorry Mrs. Owens. I take full responsibility for your hero husband's death in my failed Yemen mission."

      But he's not so he didn't.

      Delete
    2. Well at least you didn't call Trump an anti-Semite.

      Albert, not sure if you'd agree with this rabbi but he picked up a copy of "Mein Kampf" and read it. Says Jews were behind the atrocities of communism, especially in Russia and this terrified Hitler.

      Very surprising what he says ...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTYSv_YQOVo

      Delete
    3. This, of course, is one of the many not-so-clever, highly transparent disguises put on by the Registered Nurse –– or one of his cohorts in malediction ––, Waylon.

      I can always tell by the SMELL. (;-o

      Of course Hitler's main purpose in wanting to rid the world of Jewry was the indelible, undeniable association Jewish Intellectuals and Activists had with the founding and early dissemination of MARXISM-COMMUNISM-SOCIALISM.

      Hitler's attempt at "solving" the problem these ill-intentioned people created was, of course, completely wrong-headed and unacceptable.

      Like ALL fanatics Hitler was more than a touch mad, and brought DEATH and incalculable harm to HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of innocent people worldwide.

      The only way to exterminate a rotten ideology is to PROVE it WRONG CONCLUSIVELY at every turn. Killing the authors and promoters will never get the job done, because once floated into Public Consciousness ideas soon develop a life of their own.

      Unfortunately for mankind SATAN has aways had a way of making himself attractive and often irresistible.

      Delete
    4. Hey Albert...where's your outrage for the 16 ... Seals that Ovomit stuffed into a Chinook one night and were RPG'd by is-SLIME-ist scum?

      Delete
    5. Excellent question, Imp!

      Keep 'em comia.'

      Delete
    6. FT, I was taken by the rabbi's reason for reading the book—he wanted to understand what could drive an individual to become so consumed by hate. He couldn't find any references to understand the question, other than the standard promoted and accepted offerings by those that seek to control the argument.

      I haven't read the book, people are always discouraged by the nature of the evil portrayed in Hitler, as it is portrayed by the so-called gatekeepers. This rabbi actually made a supreme effort to locate the book and find out what could possible evoke such hatred on both sides.

      He strikes me as a very learned and intelligent man. And I found his actions and conclusions very honest and believable. And it makes sense, especially looking back at what occurred in the Twentieth Century. The butchery inflicted on both sides during WWI was soon followed by another scurrilous plot by the Western Allies to impose communism on their former ally in the war, Russia.

      This is another hidden truth since it is pretended that the Russian Revolution was a spontaneous and popular revolution. It was high-jacked by Lenin and Trotsky with much financial assistance from Western banker allies.

      The Russian KNOW this today. Hopefully we can learn it on our side before the next needless conflagration occurs.

      Delete
  2. It was worse than I imagined it could be.

    A trillion in infrastructure and the largest military budge increase in U.S. history(his words) all paid for by tax cuts
    thanks to the Laffer curve, I guess. Yes, their going to try that one again.

    The new special department to investigate crimes by immigrants seemed a nice touch to the evening's general paranoia.

    Other than AOW and Lisa, I don't know who would fell for that crap!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's patently obvious that you must be DEAF, DUMB and BLIND as well as MENTALLY RETARDED, Anon.

      Therefore you are totally unqualified even to HOLD an opinion much less express yourself in a forum that strives to be sober, thoughtful, reflective, honest, literate, nuanced, and wise.

      I am leaving your comment intact, however, to serve as a HORRIBLE EXAMPLE of exactly the kind of rhetoric we do NOT want to see at this blog.

      Delete
    2. The hallmarks of Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) are grandiosity, a lack of empathy for other people, and a need for admiration. People with this condition are frequently described as arrogant, self-centered, manipulative, and demanding. They may also concentrate on grandiose fantasies (e.g. their own success, beauty, brilliance) and may be convinced that they deserve special treatment. These characteristics typically begin in early adulthood and must be consistently evident in multiple contexts, such as at work and in relationships.

      People with narcissistic personality disorder believe they are superior or special, and often try to associate with other people they believe are unique or gifted in some way. This association enhances their self-esteem, which is typically quite fragile underneath the surface. Individuals with NPD seek excessive admiration and attention in order to know that others think highly of them. Individuals with narcissistic personality disorder have difficulty tolerating criticism or defeat, and may be left feeling humiliated or empty when they experience an "injury" in the form of criticism or rejection.

      Delete
    3. FT, looks like you smoked out the real "anonymous" above. LOL

      Delete
    4. Canardo,

      You have fooled a good many of our decent-but naive blogging colleagues into accepting you with your spurious character, specious logic, rebarbative, perennially antagonistic disposition, and pretentious, pseudo-intellectual balderdash as a worthy opponent, but I do not.

      I tried to find common ground with you for many years, but because you are such a colossal fraud, and have been cursed wth such a bilious personality the common ground I hoped we'd found now and then always shifted beneath my feet, and caught me off balance.

      You are nothing but a Sado-Masochistic GAME PLAYER, Canardo.

      After nearly twenty years of observing your conduct in the blogosphere, and trying unsuccessfully now and then to interact productively with you I have regretfully come to the conclusion that YOU are not worth one more SECOND of MY precious time.

      Your counterfeit presence is not welcome here.

      Delete
    5. Ducky...why bore us with the personality disorders of our past jug eared ½ white lawn jockey and professional caddy? He's no loner the divider in chief. The only thing this louse was successful at. I mean...look at you....still having a stick in your eye.

      Delete
    6. He would tell you he thought he was describing ME, Imp. In fact he tried to do just that, but I zapped him as soon as i found his snide comment.

      It made me laugh to see him post again immediately after I'd told him "your counterfeit presence is not welcome here."

      He is nothing but an Attention Hog with all the character of a juvenile delinquent –– i.e. an impossible shit ––, so the less we hear from him –– or say about him –– the better.

      Delete
    7. LMAO..."an impossible shit"...Perfectly stated.

      Delete
  3. While the majority of attendees during last night’s speech stood up and applauded Ms. Owens, as she can be seen crying and looking up towards heaven, several top Democrats disrespectfully remained seated, including Debbie Wasserman Shultz, and Keith Ellison who remained in their seats during Trumps tribute

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. WhileI have nothing but the deepest sympathy for the young widow, entirely TOO MUCH has been made of her part in last night's stellar Event.

      Delete
  4. You can hate Donald Trump all you like, and I know how some of you do, but last night he proved that Donald J. Trump is really the 45th President of the United States. Even that self proclaimed Communist degenerate Van Jones from CNN saw it and said so.. These Democratic sore-losing, crybabies must be doing MAJOR damage control this morning, trying real hard NOT to look like the idiotic Morons that they were last night.

    And some of them like Nancy Pelosi, and UpChuck Schummer be must suffering from some severe case of hemorrhoids, because of the way
    that they were sitting on their hands and making those hilarious, horrible faces when everyone else was applauding.
    And those itiots who did not stand for Mrs. Owens and the sacrifice that her Heroic Husbans made for this country, are beneath contempt. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and Ellison are beneath pond scum! . Democrats, these are your people. THIS is the Pond Scum that you represent?

    Now get the hell out of the way, and let Mr. Trump do his work!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Late Breaking News!

    Dow breaks above 21,000 as stocks hit all-time highs after Trump´s speech (CNBC


    ReplyDelete
  6. Well, first, the tone of the speech was far less dark and defensive than his usual. Almost happy. So, I thought that was nice. He said a few broad things that were more uniting than dividing, which is also a nice change. The way he opened was very nice, if a little awkwardly organized.

    A few critiques, but not anything that surprised or concerned me any more or less:

    First, yes, he used the expression "radical Islamic terrorism," though it is reported his NSC had strongly advised him not to. So, I'm sure they were celebrating over at "The Caliphate" for that one, nice to be recognized for one's hard work ruining the name of a religion. Perverted Priests must be sleeping much easier these days, anyway. Between Milo and this, they just got two breaks, with conservatives.

    Then, he made a kind of a weird/touching moment out of a young military widow. Maybe he feels a little guilty? Maybe it's just the weight of it all? Hopefully the latter. It was the first military death of his new administration, after all. But the soldier's father is furious with Trump for the raid, which he feels may have been politically rather than strategically motivated, and Trump's initial reactions - It was Obama's idea! It was a military mistake! - didn't help (the buck is stopping where in the new administration?... shouldn't be a question). Making an easy ovation, then heaping on that he thought the applause may have broken an applause record which in turn would be very appreciated by this fallen soldier, was a little squirm-inducing. As for Ms Owens, though, I think it was very nice, so I give Trump a pass on this. That moment when she looked up and seemed to be talking to her late husband was very touching. She's a powerful presence. Ryan Owens must have been a very impressive man.

    Then there was the "great, great wall," Trump's Spruce Goose, that at this point would have the practical effect of keeping in more "illegals" than it would keeping anyone out. I guess he's stuck with that silliness. But he was being soooo good about avoiding silliness in the speech overall, it would have been nice if that gag had been left out too.

    ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good things too!

      Paid leave, more protections and benefits for moms, the American family desperately needs a bolster right now. Great idea. Every other developed country does it. It's plain decency. It's so very important children bond with their moms in that first year. It's so very important their moms aren't losing their entire income just when their babies need them most. Anything to help with that. He's going to need the Dems for it, so he should knock it off with the Al Bundyish Pelosi-bashing on that stupid Twitter (I have an account, but I've never used it nor care to).

      Love infrastructure anything, at this point, and with super-low interest rates, and a crazy guy who loves negotiating contracts and then using them to bend you to his will, and a moment when we have a lot of loose inexpensive labor arbitrarily spaced out all over the place, interstate connectivity - in utilities, transportation, resources - is both needed and perfectly situated for doing right now. If he could do something big there, I'll build a full statue of him on top of Mount Rushmore, with really big hands. But he has to keep it federal. If he turns it into grants, or devolves it or delegates it, to the states and localities, the money will disappear, nothing good will happen, the debt and deficit go up, etc. Obama found that out the hard way. Trump has to control it. Also, he'd better turn around on Net Neutrality, or increased connectivity will be for naught. Again, he'll need Pelosi for all of that.

      Tax cuts for the middle-class are a good idea, but tax cuts on the rich would be a huge mistake. The effective rate of corporate taxes in America are about average internationally, but the rates are high. May as well just lower them and make them simpler. But it has to help the little guy too. It can't just be reductions with no change in design. My wife and I had a really hard time with our tax bills back when we lived up North and had an upper-middle income on the national average, but only an average for where we lived. Unless you have kids, you get hit hard if you're in that 50-100k range but live in an area where that's pocket change. But the higher paying jobs tend to be closer to the more expensive places to live. We could get some real equity raised out there if we could ease the burden on that roughly 50-100k group. My wife and I were investing back then, and would only have invested more were it not for the taxes. We have to increase the size of the investment class again, get more people and therefore accountability and stability. It is now a very small group, which is why the Dow Jones is so unrepresentative of real economic growth these days. As well, real growth would mean inflation, which would mean higher interest rates, which would mean more conservative and stable investing. All good stuff.

      I could go on, but I'm now officially exhausted... ;) Be back soon!

      JMJ

      Delete
    2. Wow, thanks. Lot. For Nothing

      Delete
    3. Please don't say that, TOM. Jersey has made an effort to be decent and cordial in voicing his concerns and objections. I think he's been much fairer than most of the rabid partisan bigots and bitterly antagonistic personalities –– on BOTH sides –– who do nothing but spew hatred and insults to no constructive effect.

      President TRUMP has set a much more conciliatory, even-tempered tone than ANY of his adversaries –– not that he will ever get CREDIT for it from the ENEMEDIA, but as Skudrunner said just blow, the ENEMEDIA in its unholy alliance with the Democrats has succeeded in making themselves less and less relevant. Their once powerful grip on Absolute Power has been BROKEN at last.

      It has taken DECADES to accomplish, but the America Public has had the binders removed from their eyes, and are beginning to see how badly they have been deceived for DECADES.

      It's a great cause for rejoicing,

      Delete
  7. The MSM has to take a negative tone in what DJT says and does. For eight years they had a president they elected and gushed over. He played to the press in everything he did and the only thing he cared about was his legacy. He got that, the first black president.
    Now they have a president who they have attacked from day one, they campaigned for -H- saying DJT would lose by a landslide so if you are going to vote for him don't bother and now they feel on the outside looking in.
    The press is now focusing on how to get the loony left to protest against everything he does.
    The democrats are backing themselves into a corner with their actions and a radical leftist as their chair. They do face being as insignificant as the MSM.

    Yes we do live in interesting times

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do believe, Skud, that the populace are now seeing that the "Emperor Enemedia" has been strutting around BUCK NAKED for DECADES. People have seen this, of course, but have been afraid to say so, because they were afraid of being thought "incompetent." That is the kind of SWINDLE the Poison Ivy League has perpetrated n the country.

      THEY have virtually mesmerized most into believing themselves ignorant, foolish and unfit if they failed conform to the dictates of the "advanced thinking" dreamt up by the wicked charlatans who populate the Professoriat.

      Donald Trump is giving us a chance to REJECT all that, and throw off the intellectual and spiritual CHAINS that have bound us ever more tightly since the Progressive Era began.

      Delete
    2. Well, playing with the media is always playing with fire. Trump had better keep his nose obsessively clean or that media will end his Presidency. He's an odd one, though, in that for all his kooky excesses, none of them ever seemed to be illegal or really morally offensive (the personal lives of celebs and American businessmen do not set a very high bar, though).

      The best response from the professional press is to do their jobs well. Stop chasing tweets. Stop making everything right/left, conservative/liberal, black/white, Republican/Democrat. Ignore that. Do not engage in that. You know that old expression, "everything has two sides," well, in reality, it's three (physics jokes, anyone?), no really, for the vast majority of things, it's many, many, many. Even a grain of sand is vastly more complex than a partisan political argument.

      We do not live in a strictly bipolar universe. There are bipolarities, and they have their uses, but important and complex questions among a republic of 320 million or so people shouldn't be reflexively assigned bipolar answers.

      The American press has always been partisan, not all of it, but most. Through most of the history of the press, they made no pretense about it. It wasn't until WWII that we saw this new "non-partisan" press, and it wasn't until the big corporate mergers in the last quarter of the twentieth century, that it became big business and what we media savvy folks refer to as the "commercial media."

      Funny, that same commercial media that everyone says hate, loathe, and detest in polls, makes a lot of money. That's nothing new either. You gotta "get their goat," and you gotta give 'em their "Dirty Laundry." Trump did this for a living on TV, but instead of news, it was messing around with tabloid fallen heroes.

      I see a better professional press coming out of this. With Trump, it's still far too early to predict anything.

      JMJ

      Delete
    3. Klarabel the Klown said

      Do I hear the church bells ringing?

      You're beginning to sound more like a CONSERVATIVE each day Jersey

      Keep up the good work, and we'll be glad to welcome you into the fold any time you're ready.

      - Howdy Doody, Buffalo Bob, Princess Summerfallwinterspring, Mr. Bluster, and the Kids

      Delete
  8. MARKET ENDS the DAY at a NEW ALL-TIME HIGH

    21,115.55 up 303.31 pts (1.46%)

    Very high, indeed, isn't it?

    Of course this welcome upward move had nothing whatsoever to do with President Trump and the splendid speech he made last night, did it?

    Of COURSE NOT!

    Heh heh heh!

    ];^}>

    ReplyDelete
  9. Replies
    1. Thanks again, Kid. Your contribution has added substance and much improved the quality of this thread.

      I wish I had your talent for succintness. ;-)

      Delete
  10. Thanks, KID I love Charlie Hurt.I'm going to print this in two parts for other lazy link-hating SOB's like me.

    PART ONE

    The president opened by celebrating Black History Month. Lady Democrats wore white.

    Donald Trump delivered the most finely crafted speech of his political life Tuesday night in what will go down as one of the best speeches delivered to a joint session of Congress in the past two decades.

    He hit stirring emotional high notes. And he laid out his vision for his presidency.

    Mr. Trump stole the issue of affordable health care from Democrats. He unabashedly owned the fight against illegal immigration.

    “Obamacare is collapsing — and we must act decisively to protect all Americans,” he said. “Action is not a choice — it is a necessity.”

    In other words, Democrats led by President Obama swindled poor Americans into this disastrous program with their usual host of lies and false promises and now these good people are stranded. But Mr. Trump and Republicans are not going to leave these innocent Americans to dig themselves out of the mess Democrats put them in.

    “So I am calling on all Democrats and Republicans in the Congress to work with us to save Americans from this imploding Obamacare disaster.”

    (CONTINUED)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. PART TWO

      When the camera panned to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — who, inexplicably, is still the Democratic leader in the House — she looked like she had been sucking on the bitterest of lemons.

      Strategically, it was brilliant. It completely cuts Democrats out of the debate.

      And then the president’s salute to Megan Crowley, who is alive today because of the Herculean efforts by her father to find a drug to combat Pompe Disease, sealed the deal.

      Mr. Trump then laid out the broad brush parameters of a health-care law he would like to see Republicans hammer out to replace Obamacare.
      On illegal immigration, Mr. Trump held firm.

      “To any in Congress who do not believe we should enforce our laws, I would ask you this question: What would you say to the American family that loses their jobs, their income, or a loved one, because America refused to uphold its laws and defend its borders.”

      Another question he might have asked those in Congress who do not believe in enforcing immigration laws: “If you don’t like the immigration laws, why don’t you change them? You are the only branch of government that can.”

      Mr. Trump also deplored the hellfire violence in Chicago and called education “the civil rights issue of our time.”

      The senator from Illinois and other Democrats offered only the most paltry, perfunctory applause.

      The entire speech was supremely presidential. But it wasn’t without humor. After excoriating both Democrats and Republicans for spending $6 trillion in the Middle East, he said, “we could have rebuilt our country — twice.”

      He waited two beats. “And maybe even three times if we had people who had the ability to … negotiate,” Mr. Trump said, dropping into his finest ‘Apprentice’ tone of voice.

      The camera panned to Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who was exchanging perplexed glances with an equally befuddled senator. They didn’t get the line. Apparently, Ms. Warren never achieved her merit badge for reading smoke signals.

      In the end, Donald Trump so dominated the entire night that Democrats were left nothing but sullen protests.

      The ladies wore white, but nobody was exactly sure why.

      In a shocking development, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not doze off during the hour long address. At least not on national television. She did not show up.

      And in another development that absolutely nobody cared about, Rep. Eliot Engel, New York Democrat, announced he would not shake Mr. Trump’s hand. It was not clear at press time if Mr. Trump even knows who Eliot Engel is.

      There were so many protests on the Democratic side of the aisle, it was hard to keep track. Even the Democrats seemed confused about what they were protesting.

      Rep. Joseph Crowley, New York Democrat, wore a giant pin protesting, well, not sure exactly what. It simply featured a large question mark.

      In all honesty, that pin could be the party’s entire platform in the next election.

      • Charles Hurt can be reached at churt@washingtontimes.com; follow him on Twitter via @charleshurt.

      Delete
  11. From the link that Kid left:

    Mr. Trump stole the issue of affordable health care from Democrats....

    “Obamacare is collapsing — and we must act decisively to protect all Americans,” he said. “Action is not a choice — it is a necessity.”


    Very effective to turn the healthcare tables on the Dems.

    Fact: the deductible of the truly affordable ObamaCare plans is not affordable. If someone truly has a real need for the subsidized monthly premium, just how can that person afford the $6500 deductible?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sorry, AOW, but here we disagree.

      If it were up to ME, insurance would exist SOLELY to cover MAJOR MEDICAL problems, that is to say CATASTROPHIC illnesses.

      Costs would soon PLUMMET were the the case.

      Colds, flu, hangnails, sprains, stomach aches, diarrhea, vomiting germs, ordinary aches and pains, etc. SHOULD be taken care of by those afflicted, themselves. They always were –– for THOUSANDS of YEARS.

      Because of the Progressive mentally we have quickly developed into a race of weak, whiny, helpless, overly dependent INFANTILE beings after being steeped now for several decades in the erroneous belief that we need constant "AID" from government-sanctioned agents outside and :far removed from ourselves, our families, our immediate circle of friends and our local communities.

      ALSO, who the hell are WE to think that WE are so important that we OUGHT to be able to draw unlimited support from the Public Trough every time something goes wrong in our itty bitty lives?

      Delete
    2. FT,
      You might not feel exactly that way if you couldn't pay up front to get a scan done or to be admitted to the hospital.

      Today, because of ObamaCare and its high deductibles, people have to pay up front.

      For example, before my kidney surgeries last summer, over that period of a few months, I had to pay $5000 up front just to get access to the scans and the surgeries. For one surgery, I had to pay $1100 up front to get on the surgical schedule. Had I not had the money, where would I be today? On Medicaid, I suppose.

      Delete
    3. Addendum:

      For the record, I have never gone to the doctor for colds, flu, hangnails, sprains, stomach aches, diarrhea, vomiting germs, ordinary aches and pains, etc. -- even when I had gold-plated health insurance.

      A few times, my reticence to seek medical attention has cost me dearly -- most recently, this kidney ailment. Had I not had that outrageous deductible, I'd have sought medical attention months earlier.

      Oh, and one more thing....TMW has health insurance via ObamaCare. But her insurance is no good here in Virginia -- only in Florida. Sheesh. She really does need to see a doctor for her recent back trouble.

      Delete
  12. I missed the moment of the entrance of various people to the Congressional chamber (I was at the local library's book discussion group last night). But I did watch very minute of Trump's speech last night. I found the speech effective -- particularly in tone.

    He stated flat out that America's problems can be solved. That's a much more optimistic note than we've heard from him in the past.

    What he left unsaid, IMO: "It's now or never."

    Another observation: it was damning that the Democrats in the Congressional chamber vocally disapproved of Trump's announcement of a fund for those who have been the victims of crimes perpetrated by illegal aliens. As I said my blog post today: Why was that statement from Trump particularly objectionable? Since when has helping the victims of crimes become objectionable?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have always maintained that helping victims of criminal activity put their lives back to rights SHOULD be the PRIMARY GOAL of official power. PUNISHING perpetrators should be considered of SECONDARY importance.

      Instead it appears to be the other way 'round.

      Delete
    2. FT,
      I think that both should be the goals. Usually, there is the matter of multiple offenses, and in such cases "rehabilitation" has little chance of success. Furthermore, there is the strong possibility that punishment can serve as a deterrent for others.

      Delete
  13. I saw this comment elsewhere and think it's worth sharing here:

    President Trump delivered a masterful, thoughtful, sober address to Congress. He repeatedly looked at the Democrats, pointing to them, gesturing to them, waving a welcoming, sweeping arm to them…. they gave him nothing. They’re bitter, hostile, hate-filled… totally unacceptable behavior from them.

    They just don’t want to accept they’ve totally screwed up the country and our lives and we’ve fired them. They thought the power belonged to them and they’re enraged that we’ve taken our power back.


    Well said, IMO.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, AOW. I do have an objection, however, to the METHODOLOGY with which these "speeches" are produced.

      Former Press Secretary for GWB, Dana Perino, now of The Five, confessed that these messages are NEVER written by the president, himself. Instead, they are meticulously crafted by a COMMITTEE of of ten or more writers and consultants, although the president, whoever he may be, retains editorial power over the project.

      Frankly, I would MUCH prefer to hear STRAIGHT from the PRESIDENT, himself, without these "filters."

      Donald Trump WON the presidency by speaking plainly and DIRECTLY to the Public. His campaign was NOT choreographed and stage-managed by a large committee of advisors, although I'm happy to give Kellyanne Conway all the credit she deserves for the role she played in helping Mr. Trump achieve victory over the ENEMEDIA.

      Did Washington, Jefferson, Adams, or Lincoln have "speechwriters" –– i.e. virtual GHOSTWRITERS –– crafting their public utterances FOR them?

      I think not, so WHY should we have to put up with this phenomenon today?

      Do you know when the practice began?

      If a president is mot capable of speaking FOR HIMSELF, I don't think he deserves to BE our president.

      Many who would admire a more polished, erudite, highly-literate style may dislike Donald Trump's characteristic bluntness and often painfully limited diction, BUT I accept it, even though I often cringe at his inelegant use of the language. I accept it, because it has about it an aura of AUTHENTICITY –– something canned, artfully contrived, overwrought rhetoric does not –– and could NEVER have.

      I'm talking about the vast difference between a PAGEANT and a well-acted DRAMA.

      Delete
    2. FT,
      Former Press Secretary for GWB, Dana Perino, now of The Five, confessed that these messages are NEVER written by the president, himself.

      I'm not sure that I trust her -- completely, anyway.

      That said, I have no doubt that speech writers are employed today -- sometimes to fine tune what the POTUS has written on his own and sometimes to direct the POTUS as to exactly what to say.

      I don't know when the practice began. Perhaps with JFK? It was during that era that television gained such power to shape people's opinions.

      Delete
  14. Replies
    1. Nanny Pelousy is a pathetic excuse fr a human being. Her apparent death grip on Power, however, is more an indictment of her constituents than of her vain, childish, incredibly obtuse self.

      Delete
    2. San Fran Nan is looking crazier by the day. Have you noticed her eyes, FT? The wild look in them!

      Delete
  15. Thanks, AOW, for iour lively contributions. It is good to see you here "up and about" once again. We've missed you.

    Whatever it is that makes the Marxicrats tick confounds me.

    The Parallel Universe theory takes on more credibility each day. Whatever world THEY think THEY inhabit bears little or no resemblance to MY world, I can tell you that.

    And yet, I still believe we are all HUMAN beings.

    I do believe the ENEMEDIA has had a LOT to do with fomenting the divisiveness that has bought us to our present impasse.

    As most should realize, there are far more FOLLOWERS than LEADERS among the people. Most of us are probably more susceptible than we know to self-designated "Trend Setters."

    TELEVISION has the capacity to TEACH and TRANSFORM the lives of huge numbers.

    IF TV had been used for CONSTRUCTIVE purposes –– as it seemed to be doing when it first started –– it could have produced great marvels. Instead the Master Baiters and Manipulators [call them "demons" if you,ilke, for that is precisely what they are] got ahold of it, and used the powerful medium as a tool to BEBASE the culture.

    Some like to call this "pandering to the lowest common denominator," but I see it as a DELIBERATE PLOT to "IGNORANTICIZE" the culture in order to make the populace more malleable and thus more docile in accepting their assigned role as virtual GALLEY SLAVES to The Oligarchs.

    I'm sure most would designate this as a "CRACKPOT NOTION," but I am morally certain I have diagnosed the situation correctly.

    I'm hardly alone. E.M. Forster, Aldous Huxey, George Orwell and the Canadian novelist, poet and environmental activist, Margaret Atwood (née 1938), have perceived this and written about it in excruciating detail in their profoundly disturbing works of dystopian fiction. The Machine Stops (1909) - A Brave New World (1931) - Animal Farm (1945) - Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) - and The Handmaid's Tale (1985) should have provided us with all we would ever need to comprehend what we've been doing to ourselves for the past hundred or or more years, but who takes BOOKS seriously? Aren't they written just to help entertain us –– pass the time with a little less boredom?

    I find it highly ironic that most of these eminent authors considered themselves members of the Left, and were eager to indict Capitalistic, profit-oriented INDUSTRIALISTS as the culprits, while I –– even as a very young person –– realized that the Lust to obtain Absolute Power and Control over the lives of Others was at the root and heart of the matter.

    But who bother to THINK anymore? And who has time to READ BOOKS now anyway? Don't we all have TV, Computers hooked up to the internet, iPhones, iPads, iTunes,Netflix, etc. to distract us –– to say nothing of 24-hour-seven-days-a-week NEWSCASTS on at least THREE cable channels. So who needs BOOKS anymore, eh?

    ];^}>

    ReplyDelete
  16. FT,
    I'm out and about intermittently.

    ...IF TV had been used for CONSTRUCTIVE purposes –– as it seemed to be doing when it first started –– it could have produced great marvels. Instead the Master Baiters and Manipulators [call them "demons" if you,ilke, for that is precisely what they are] got ahold of it, and used the powerful medium as a tool to BEBASE the culture.

    Ray Bradbury would agree with you.

    Most readers of Fahrenheit 451 think that the Bradbury's intent in writing the book was to decry book burnings and the tyranny behind book burnings. Not so! Bradbury himself stated that one of the main purposes in his writing that dystopian novel was to warn of the dangers of television.

    One of Bradbury's statements:

    “The television, that insidious beast, that Medusa which freezes a billion people to stone every night, staring fixedly, that Siren which called and sang and promised so much and gave, after all, so little.”

    And THIS:

    Bradbury has decided to make news about the writing of his iconographic work and what he really meant. Fahrenheit 451 is not, he says firmly, a story about government censorship. Nor was it a response to Senator Joseph McCarthy, whose investigations had already instilled fear and stifled the creativity of thousands.

    This, despite the fact that reviews, critiques and essays over the decades say that is precisely what it is all about. Even Bradbury’s authorized biographer, Sam Weller, in The Bradbury Chronicles, refers to Fahrenheit 451 as a book about censorship.

    Bradbury, a man living in the creative and industrial center of reality TV and one-hour dramas, says it is, in fact, a story about how television destroys interest in reading literature.

    “Television gives you the dates of Napoleon, but not who he was,” Bradbury says, summarizing TV’s content with a single word that he spits out as an epithet: “factoids.” He says this while sitting in a room dominated by a gigantic flat-panel television broadcasting the Fox News Channel, muted, factoids crawling across the bottom of the screen.

    His fear in 1953 that television would kill books has, he says, been partially confirmed by television’s effect on substance in the news. The front page of that day’s L.A. Times reported on the weekend box-office receipts for the third in the Spider-Man series of movies, seeming to prove his point.

    “Useless,” Bradbury says. “They stuff you with so much useless information, you feel full.” He bristles when others tell him what his stories mean, and once walked out of a class at UCLA where students insisted his book was about government censorship. He’s now bucking the widespread conventional wisdom with a video clip on his Web site (http://www.raybradbury.com/at_home_clips.html), titled “Bradbury on censorship/television.”

    As early as 1951, Bradbury presaged his fears about TV, in a letter about the dangers of radio, written to fantasy and science-fiction writer Richard Matheson. Bradbury wrote that “Radio has contributed to our ‘growing lack of attention.’ .?.?. This sort of hopscotching existence makes it almost impossible for people, myself included, to sit down and get into a novel again. We have become a short story reading people, or, worse than that, a QUICK reading people.”

    HE SAYS THE CULPRIT in Fahrenheit 451 is not the state — it is the people. Unlike Orwell’s 1984, in which the government uses television screens to indoctrinate citizens, Bradbury envisioned television as an opiate....


    Just imagine what Bradbury would say about today's internet!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Add Bradbury to the list including Forster Huxley Orwell and Atwood.

      by the way the insertions into that article you quoted telling us that Joe McCarthy was a VILLAIN who "stifled creativity" is one of the memes harped on incessantly by the LEFTISTS who control the ENEMEDIA.

      McCarthy was NOT a villain at all instead he was a HERO. So was NiXON who has been treated similarly by the ENEMEDIA.

      The degree to which most people younger than SEVENTY blithely and blandly ACCEPT the Leftist PROPAGANDA rushed up by most of today's "sources" is all the proof I need to know that my perception of realty is accurate.

      Once my generation is gone, it's all too ,likely that much of the times wisdom of the gages will be discarded, discredited and forgotten,and so Civilization will have to begin its long slow climb yet again.

      HOWEVER, I have great faith in our capacity to produce "Civilization." The undeniable instinct to learn, improve, refine ourselves, and and delight in living comes, I believe, from the Holy Spirit, who promised NEVER to DESERT us.

      In that regard we are like the PHOENIX (Stravinsky's FIREBIRD!) of myth and legend. We shall ALWAYS rise from the ashes we have made of ourselves, and continue to live and try again and again and again to find TRUTH , to raise our sites, and to EXPAND our capacities.

      Delete
    2. FT and AOW, most people blindly accept the idea that America is a "free country". After all how much blood has been shed across the globe to make sure that every sentient being on the planet sees and understands this idea.

      You both make good point about television which in and of itself is electronic technology and does have the potential for being a tremendous asset for the development of humanity. But as you both say it's been high-jacked. And this perversion of the technology begins early in life. How many parents just mindlessly toss their young kids in front of a television to be "entertained" by cartoons and other schlock? And it continues in later life as most adults mindlessly flop in front of the television daily.

      The end result is that one can only escape the hold of television with a superhuman effort. Maybe one needs to come to the point of recognizing that to block the sewage it needs to be done at the door. I don't know if there is a kinder and gentler way to do it, but today there is too much sickening and satanic evil assaulting our tender sensibilities.

      But it's a controlled argument by those that deliver the product. And in their domain certain topics remain beyond the pale.

      Delete
    3. Waylon,
      The end result is that one can only escape the hold of television with a superhuman effort.

      I escape by reading books or by listening to audio books on CD.

      Delete
  17. Replies
    1. Comment to the above link:

      Discombobulate for sure. Even Van Jones is saying President Trump will be in office for 8 years. Now that's an endorsement! I can understand if democrats want to refrain from upvoting me here. Especially those who were stuck to their seats during last evening's Presidential address to the joint session of Congress. I bet that was painful!

      Not my comment, BTW.

      Delete
  18. Krauthammer:

    ...I think it’s the sense of stability and sobriety which is what helped the markets to say well, this is it presidency we can count on and we don’t expect to see carnage."

    ReplyDelete
  19. _____ Battling in the Darkness _____

    Irrationality combined with spite
    Laced with paranoid self-righteous zeal
    Makes a combination hard to fight,
    Since adversaries treat with nothing real.

    Projection of self-doubt with willfulness
    Combines to seal out decent, common sense.
    So, even virtue shown with skillfulness
    Can’t penetrate Obduracy’s defense.

    Alas! The joy of honest thoughts exchanged
    Is lost midst warring egotists stalemated ––
    Entrenched by suppositions oft deranged ––
    Employed to see all mutually berated.

    Thus trapped in darkness blindly on we fight
    Afraid to see our faults exposed to light.


    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
  20. _____ On Friday the Thirteenth _____



    Fools to nonsense eagerly lend credence.

    Reality they shun; it’s too complex.
    Instead vacuity will take precedence.
    Divorcing thought from action often wrecks

    Any hope of living ruled by Reason.

    Yet, it’s easier to follow than to lead.

    This laziness makes for a crazy season

    Harming our best chances to succeed.

    Ignorance we cling to with great pride

    Resisting solid knowledge with great strength.

    The narrow we respect, reject the wide,

    Enjoy old wives’ tales we’ve been told at length.
    Enraptured by Tradition’s constipation 

    Nurtures comfort in stultification.
    



    ~ FreeThinke

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simple question, is it even possible anymore to find common ground in the American political pasture?

      America is deeply divided and we are fracturing a bit more with each passing year. It may not end well.

      Delete
  21. DISGRACED News anchor Dan Rather wrote on Facebook that the scandal over Pres. Donald Trump’s personal and political connections to the Russian government and those of his aides is like a bomb with a lit fuse.


    Let me think, isn't Dan Rather the "news anchor" who got fired for using fake documents to create fake news
    One thing seems quite clear now. Obama created a network of people to sabotage our President and government. This needs to be investigated and the guilty sent to prison

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That seems patently obvious to all but those twisted or deluded souls who perpetuate the Big Lies and False Memes generated by the operatives you mentioned.

      Delete
  22. Hey Alllllbert....I was thinking about your comment again...


    If this was the standard than Eisenhower, Patton, Bradley, MacArthur then FDR and Truman would have been brought up on the same charges. Many many failures occurred in the normal conduct of that war and all wars. And "civilians"....so what? We didn't care about Nagasaki or Hiroshima, Tokyo nor Dresden or Berlin's civilians...did we? Perhaps because we valued American lives more and perhaps knew that these civilians if left to their allegiances ...we'd be fighting another day in uniform?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct me if I'm wrong,Imp. I think it was Ulysses S. Grant, but it might have been Cicero, Clausewitz, Lord Acton, or Patton –– one of those guys like that ––who said, "The most brutal war is the kindest war, because it ENDS more quite quickly and decisively than any other kind of war, and usually winds up destroying less property and fewer lives."

      What we've been doing with our stupid, self-defeating Rules of Engagement is prolonging AGONY to levels I doubt we've ever seen before in modern times.

      That's not a direct quote, but I got the sentiment right..

      Delete
    2. Indeed you did...once again FT and well researched and clarified for an impudent cur like me. I'm always grateful for your incredibly high IQ and your years of knowledge and learning. However....I do like some of the quotes Patton was know for saying about the his enemies...and indeed today should be remembered for and applied to them. As fas as I can see our President has taken the gloves off of ICE, The Border patrol who supported him overwhelmingly....and now our combat troops in the ME. I was especially delighted to see an illegal who after giving a speech about his illegality...was arrested right after that speech. As all these twerps need when they openly and flaunt their disrespect for our laws and our country.

      Delete
    3. Please...scuz the typos...I wish you allowed edits here. ;-(

      Delete
    4. You and me BOTH, Imp! My tai g is getting worse by the day. can't see with a damn, and I have arthritis –– that's my excuse.

      Old age ain't for sissies that's for sure!

      Blame BLOGGER. I wish they would put it an edit feature, but ...

      Oh well!

      Carry on.

      Delete

IF YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE FOLLOWING, YOU DON'T BELONG HERE, SO KINDLY GET OUT AND STAY OUT.

We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––
We WILL use COMMENT ERADICATION.


IN ADDITION

Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.