The Rose Garden and White House happenings: Listening to voters’ concerns

What's being said in the Rose Garden is Trump talking trash about the late Senator McCain. 

"It ain’t counterpunching if the guy you’re attacking has been dead for seven months."

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1108490459922468864?s=21

One of the few times I agree with his daughter: Trump's deeply resentful of the pedestal we've put McCain on, despite his many flaws. And, clearly, most of the eulogies had a subtext about the difference between McCain and Trump.

But the label "hero" does apply to a guy who wouldn't leave a prison camp if his fellow soldiers had to stay. It's a step up from labeling anyone who dies in war or terrorist attack as hero rather than victim.

Quick question for you NJ folks: I used to teach summers at Newark Academy. Is the school across the street the one founded by Charlie Kushner? I'm reading Kushner Inc. That's why I ask.

South_Mountaineer said:
What's being said in the Rose Garden is Trump talking trash about the late Senator McCain. 
"It ain’t counterpunching if the guy you’re attacking has been dead for seven months."
https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1108490459922468864?s=21

 Is it possible that when he does his late night Tweeting that he forgot McCain is dead?

GL2 said:
Quick question for you NJ folks: I used to teach summers at Newark Academy. Is the school across the street the one founded by Charlie Kushner? I'm reading Kushner Inc. That's why I ask.

 Yes it is.

And their "teardown McMansion"  was one of the first in Livingston, and dwarfed the 2500 sq ft raised ranches on either side.

wharfrat said:

GL2 said:
Quick question for you NJ folks: I used to teach summers at Newark Academy. Is the school across the street the one founded by Charlie Kushner? I'm reading Kushner Inc. That's why I ask.

 Yes it is.
And their "teardown McMansion"  was one of the first in Livingston, and dwarfed the 2500 sq ft raised ranches on either side.

 Thanks wharfrat. I was interested in Livingston details in the book and Charlie's role in the community.

Chapter One: Rules Are Dangerous

The town of Livingston had not yet become a Jewish enclave when Charlie and Seryl moved there in the early 1980s, in part because there was no interstate to the town until 1973. But as he got richer, Charlie almost single-handedly transformed the town. He turned an industrial building into the Joseph Kushner Hebrew Academy and Rae Kushner Yeshiva High School. He built the local mikvah—Jewish ritual baths—and named it after Seryl’s grandmother Chana. (It is still run by one of his daughters.) “He created the Orthodox community in Livingston, in my opinion,” said Hammer, who added that back then, “[Charlie] wasn’t that flawed. He was doing everything right. He really was a model citizen.”

Anyone taking bets on this potential x-ray? 

Bob Kerrey, former senator and SEAL, who lost part of a leg in Vietnam:

“While John McCain was flying combat operations in Vietnam, you were, I think, falsifying that you had bone spurs in order not to go to Vietnam,” said Kerrey, a 1992 presidential candidate who retired from the Senate in 2000. “Now, I know lots of people who avoided the draft, but this isn’t what he’s saying. He said ‘I physically couldn’t go.’ Well, Mr. President, get your feet X-rayed and let’s see those bone spurs. I don’t think he has them.”

McCain's daughter:

“Even if you were invited to my dad’s funeral, you would have only wanted to be there for the credit and not for any condolences,” his daughter said. “Unfortunately, you could not be counted on to be courteous, as you are a child in the most important role the world knows.”

Trump:

On Wednesday, at a tank manufacturing plant in Lima, Ohio, Trump said: “I have to be honest. I’ve never liked him much. I really probably never will.”

Does Trump like anyone besides himself?

His daughter.

lord_pabulum said:
If the only goal of a politician is beating an opponent and winning elections, there is no time to govern and no appetite for constructive compromise.  
ETA:  An academic view

 That's an argument against Democracy. Politicians are supposed to beat their opponents by offering better policies and better governance.

Your statement is like a socialist criticism of Capitalism. If the only goal of a business is to beat the competition there is no time for offering quality goods and services.

STANV said:

lord_pabulum said:
If the only goal of a politician is beating an opponent and winning elections, there is no time to govern and no appetite for constructive compromise.  
ETA:  An academic view

 That's an argument against Democracy. Politicians are supposed to beat their opponents by offering better policies and better governance.
Your statement is like a socialist criticism of Capitalism. If the only goal of a business is to beat the competition there is no time for offering quality goods and services.

No it isn't. Don't be silly.   Which politicians do you know actually put good policy into action?  And have you seen good governance lately?

lord_pabulum said:
No it isn't. Don't be silly.   Which politicians do you know actually put good policy into action?  And have you seen good governance lately?

 Hmmm, none that comes to mind. The political arena resembles a school playground at recess.

lord_pabulum said:
No it isn't. Don't be silly.   Which politicians do you know actually put good policy into action?  And have you seen good governance lately?

 Congress has passed some good laws. So has the Legislature and the Township Committee. We can debate for ever what is good and bad policy in the US.

However if you want to broaden the discussion to all politicians the new Gun Laws in New Zealand are good policy. OTOH the UK is a mess.

The ACA is far from perfect legislation.  But as policy it's better than what came before.  The facts that kids can stay on family policies after college, and people can't be turned down for coverage due to pre-existing conditions are generally good ideas.  And the fact that millions of families have coverage that they didn't have before is a good thing.

There's still a long way to go in this country to make medical care more affordable.  But covering more people with health insurance is good policy.

Is this possible legislation a “slippery slope” for the disabled?

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/disability-rights-activists-protest-assisted-suicide-bills-as-dangerous-discriminatory-40651

mtierney said:
Is this possible legislation a “slippery slope” for the disabled?


https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/disability-rights-activists-protest-assisted-suicide-bills-as-dangerous-discriminatory-40651

 no.

The intent of these laws is very clear, even if the first draft of the legislation isn't.  The example in that article can be easily fixed by making the wording more precise to exclude someone with a chronic treatable disability.

ml1 said:

mtierney said:
Is this possible legislation a “slippery slope” for the disabled?


https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/disability-rights-activists-protest-assisted-suicide-bills-as-dangerous-discriminatory-40651

 no.
The intent of these laws is very clear, even if the first draft of the legislation isn't.  The example in that article can be easily fixed by making the wording more precise to exclude someone with a chronic treatable disability.

Exactly.  This is similar to the ranting about "death panels" back when the ACA was being developed.  Too many people would rather assume the worst intentions, instead of trying to understand the actual purpose of legislation.  Or, more precisely, they do understand and would rather use their distortions to defeat the legislation instead of being constructive, to protect the people they claim they are protecting.

[Edited to add]  I'm in the middle of reading a book by Fr. James Martin, "The Jesuit Guide To (Almost) Everything", and there's some advice I recommend to any poster.  

The Spiritual Exercises begins with some good advice.  In what he calls his Presupposition, Ignatius says that we "ought to be more eager to put a good interpretation on a neighbor's statement than to condemn it."

Always give people the benefit of the doubt.  What's more, says Ignatius, if you're not sure what a person means, you should, says Ignatius, "ask how the other means it."

GL2 said:
His daughter.

 He's hot for his daughter.  That isn't the same thing, necessarily, as liking her.

nohero said:

 Thank you, Nohero, for those words of St. Ignatius — a lift to the spirit and a goal for sure.

The next poster quickly killed off any goodness.

mtierney said:
Is this possible legislation a “slippery slope” for the disabled?


https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/disability-rights-activists-protest-assisted-suicide-bills-as-dangerous-discriminatory-40651

Ah, the old "slippery slope" argument surfaces again. Always used by conservatives to explain why they are against something when they cannot really explain why they are against it, so they"ll just say: well it's the slippery slope to something really bad.

Here is my slippery slope argument: being an alcoholic is bad, every alcoholic started by drinking milk, so therefore drinking milk is bad.

lord_pabulum said:
No it isn't. Don't be silly.   Which politicians do you know actually put good policy into action?  And have you seen good governance lately?

How about the ADA (H.W. Bush) and the ACA (Obama)? The latter was in 2010, so yes, I have seen good governance lately.

Bears repeating - thanks, nohero!

[Edited to add]  I'm in the middle of reading a book by Fr. James Martin, "The Jesuit Guide To (Almost) Everything", and there's some advice I recommend to any poster.  

The Spiritual Exercises begins with some good advice.  In what he calls his Presupposition, Ignatius says that we "ought to be more eager to put a good interpretation on a neighbor's statement than to condemn it." Always give people the benefit of the doubt.  What's more, says Ignatius, if you're not sure what a person means, you should, says Ignatius, "ask how the other means it."

mtierney said:

nohero said:

 Thank you, Nohero, for those words of St. Ignatius — a lift to the spirit and a goal for sure.
The next poster quickly killed off any goodness.

 Do you honestly think that Twitler likes anyone other than himself?

Thanks for the few examples of good policy/governance.  Unfortunately it is only a few and the results are debatable.

I feel pity for the atheists who don't believe in heaven and hell. Where do they think Trump and all Trump voters are going to burn?

https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/27/61-hacks-peddled-russian-collusion-never-trusted/

Wait until lunchtime, or after dinner, to digest (or not) this compilation. Heady stuff.

mtierney said:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/27/61-hacks-peddled-russian-collusion-never-trusted/


Wait until lunchtime, or after dinner, to digest (or not) this compilation. 

Or, given the role of Russian money in the continued operation of thefederalist.com,  just skip it entirely.  

Klinker said:

mtierney said:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/03/27/61-hacks-peddled-russian-collusion-never-trusted/


Wait until lunchtime, or after dinner, to digest (or not) this compilation. 

Or, given the role of Russian money in the continued operation of thefederalist.com,  just skip it entirely.  

 We get it.  You hate MT and you think she is an idiot

lord_pabulum said:

 

 We get it.  You hate MT and you think she is an idiot

 Hate the sin, not the sinner.  I hate the way she supports a system that has resulted in the rape and abuse of untold numbers of children.  I hate the way she would prefer to simply cover up those crimes, even if covering them up meant that many more children would be raped and abused.  I hate the way that she defends any rapist or abuser who happens to have conservative credentials.  I hate the way she supports a man that she surely must know is evil simply because he furthers portions of her conservative agenda. I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

As for her intelligence, it would be easier if she was an idiot.  If she was so stupid that she didn't realize the real harm that she does to innocents in the course of supporting these individuals and institutions, that might excuse her actions in some way.  I don't think mtierney is an idiot.  I think she knows exactly what she is doing and that makes it all the more depraved.

lord_pabulum said:
 We get it.  You hate MT and you think she is an idiot

 While I won't comment on idiocy, constantly citing the federalist doesn't speak highly of one's intellectual integrity.