Trump's words! "“Yeah. If they do this, and they’ve already done it, but if they follow through on this, yeah, it could certainly happen in reverse.” LOL
I'm glad this is finally getting out there, "Civilians must do better than just repeating Thank You for Your Service." As a Vet I've long hated this phrase. While the sentiment may be genuine, it feels little different than if someone were to "Bless Me" when I sneeze. Perfunctory at best, even if heartfelt.
I'm not sure. And I'm not sure anything is needed. To some extent "Thanks for Your Service" feels like a leftover of the "false guilt" everyone was supposed to feel over the treatment of Vets returning from Vietnam. It is true not all Vets were welcomed home from Vietnam with societal love (as opposed to the familial and fraternal love they did receive). It's false that they were spit on or (as my uncle likes to tell me) had dog crap thrown at them.
The other response I have is a little more difficult to articulate - though Will Selber almost gets there. If you want to "Thank me for my Service," then "Serve." In some way, shape, or fashion, serve the country. Military, AmeriCorps, Peace Corps - it really doesn't matter. I think the "Thank you for Yor Service" is, on one hand a way to individually give appreciation to what (if anything) we have done, but on the other hand, a way for people to feel "let off the hook," from not serving because our service is somehow "extraordinary."
True, it's been over 80 years since the entire country mobilized to fight in WWII, but up until recently (the Boomer generation) it wasn't rare to find men (and to a lesser extent women) who had served due to the draft, or active or reserve enlistment. Those of us with military service weren't so rare in the population.
One of the reasons we spent 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan was due to the fact that there were so few American families clamoring for the return of their sons and daughters. The American public was able to have an impact on ending our participation in Vietnam because the threads of that participation ran throughout society. The all volunteer Military has severed that link.
You, "Thank us for Our Service," because military service is now special and rare. It isn't. Moreover, it shouldn't be.
Reading Jack Smith’s clear and eloquent filing made my blood boil. That his team’s time needed to be wasted responding to the defendant’s utterly baseless and frivolous objections gives the former guy so much more respect than he deserves. Yet Mr Smith, playing by the rules of the game, demolishes every one of the defendant’s whiny claims, and will, I hope, thoroughly trounce him and his lawyers in court, thus bringing an end to our nightmare.
Why haven't Republicans and former Republicans proclaimed - repeatedly and continually - that Donald J. Trump is a RINO?
So, he registered as a Republican (at some point). What actions, statements, or policies has that jerk ever taken, stated, or undertaken that align him with the Republican Party?
So-called Republicans in the U.S. House of Mistrepresentatives consistently and loudly proclaim the lie that the entire Democratic Party and Democrats elected to national office are radical and left-wing. That's not a message; it's "messaging" (a.k.a. Propaganda).
Stop arguing the perceived strengths of weaknesses of the various legal cases that have been brought against the jerk. Leave that to the prosecutors in the courts.
Instead, combine the message that the jerk is not and has never been a Republican such as Lincoln, Roosevelt (Teddy), Taft (Mr. Republican), Eisenhower, or Goldwater with messaging his status as a RINO.
If, between now and November 2024, images of Trump carry the caption "RINO!" and if Republicans and former Republicans who speak often to the press continually refer to the jerk as "That RINO", it could have a significant affect, even on the Republican base.
This has the added benefit of being true.
I admit (?) I'm not now and never have been registered as either a Republican or a Democrat.
True, but the crazies in the base doesn’t care. That’s why they vote for MTG, Gaetz, etc and kick out the Liz Cheneys. The “No Labels” party should call itself the Business Party.
If Trump thought he could win in the Democratic Party, he’d be a Democrat. The man has no core principles. He’s guided by instinct, more animal than human.
Trump is a Republican, because he represents what R voters want. I don’t understand why old-school R’s think they have a monopoly on what the party really stands for? They don’t. This bat-shit crazy, misogynistic, zenophobic group of leaders and voters…they ARE the Republican Party in 2023.
I was so incensed at the WaPo article about the editorial page editor taking down the cartoon that I wrote a letter to him. First, in response to Shipley's defense of taking the cartoon down, "Our section is aimed at finding commonalities, understanding the bonds that hold us together, even in the darkest times. In this spirit, we have taken down the drawing”, I said that that was nonsense. That is not the purpose of any publications' editorial page. It is certainly not the purpose of editorial cartoons.
Then I acknowleged the exaggerated features of its Palestinian subjects are likely racist. In fact, they resemble the exaggerated features of a Jew in a 1919 Austrian postcard showing the Jew stabbing a German Army soldier in the back with a dagger. This of course was Hitler's Big Lie about why Germany lost WWI.
I went on to contrast the image with the message. I said the message is not racist. The message was accurate. This was based on my Jewish friend's word. But I checked my facts first. It turns out it is only the Israelis who have claimed Hamas hides behind civilians. That has not been confirmed by neutral reporting.
So I decided not to send the letter. However, I still think claiming the editorial page "is aimed at finding commonalities, understanding the bonds that hold us together" is nonsense.
I don't see that cartoon as "racist." After all, that's a terrorist, not a generic Palestinian, or at least one hopes so. But I DO see it as vastly oversimplifying an complex situation. There is in fact a question of how many civilian deaths are "acceptable" in the current war. If 1100 are not, what about north of 10K?
Political cartoons by their nature oversimplify. We either grunt in approval or disapproval, depending on our attitude towards the subject. But they DO by their very oversimplification cause far too many people to oversimplify themselves. And that way lies chaos. We are seeing it in the poison pills that are going to trash the ability of this government to keep going.
I’m not saying this would be a good idea, but just speculating. Could Manchin be considering a challenge to Biden, as a Democrat? A 3rd party run is a loser, which he surely knows. The rationale could be that, assuming Trump is the nominee, Haley primary voters would vote for him instead of Trump and that progressives would stay with the party. Plus he’s got name recognition. And the (dare I say) age issue would go away. And he doesn’t have a son named Hunter. And and and. Just trying to figure out what’s in his mind.
After reading that Atlantic feature, one thought came to mind: "Wow, Peter Thiel is a really stupid man". It's amazing such a clueless idiot managed to make so much money in his life.
My thoughts, too. And the sci-fi themes applied to his life are just sad. The American oligarchy is largely made up of these men children, many of whom gained way too much wealth and power from dumb luck in timing.
A stupid, dangerously nihilistic, petulant toddler of a man who apparently never matured enough to grow out of the libertarian obsessions of a random idiot college freshmen.
If Manchin is going to 'travel the country' to test out a presidential run, he is delusional and I suspect he will find out what many Dems really think about him (spoiler: he's not as popular as he thinks he is).
We should make a pact that if he comes to any of our towns, we will go and tell him loudly and enthusiastically that the way to strengthen the middle is to support Joe Biden.
My middle name is Fluctuate. One day I'm high, think Wednesday morn, and the next I'm low, think Joe Manchin. Not much in between. Joe "pipeline" Manchin looking for the middle is hysterical. It is just another grift albeit a dangerous one. I'm out the door to pick up our wine club case of wine. It will come in handy.
Trump's words! "“Yeah. If they do this, and they’ve already done it, but if they follow through on this, yeah, it could certainly happen in reverse.” LOL
Sonny and Charlie, thanks for publishing the cartoon that WaPo chickened out on. It's a masterpiece, and a probably classic.
Politico picked it up for their Friday roundup too.
https://www.politico.com/gallery/2023/11/17/the-nations-cartoonists-on-the-week-in-politics-00127684?slide=3
Oh please!
To anyone who's still tuning in to this thread, and still thinking about the Washington Post cartoon, here's CNN's interview with the cartoonist.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/world/2023/11/11/wapo-deletes-editorial-cartoon-smerconish-vpx.cnn
Two things to notice:
(1) What it says about the cartoon
(2) Role model of a person who's had some harsh accusations thrown at him and how he responds. (Spoiler alert: like a grownup.)
Especially recommended to anyone who has lately been calling for more Context and Nuance.
Read a big portion of 79 page filing in Opposition to Defendant’s motion to dismiss, the gist being that TFG is a lying-all-day-long liar! 🤥
I'm glad this is finally getting out there, "Civilians must do better than just repeating Thank You for Your Service." As a Vet I've long hated this phrase. While the sentiment may be genuine, it feels little different than if someone were to "Bless Me" when I sneeze. Perfunctory at best, even if heartfelt.
I'm not sure. And I'm not sure anything is needed. To some extent "Thanks for Your Service" feels like a leftover of the "false guilt" everyone was supposed to feel over the treatment of Vets returning from Vietnam. It is true not all Vets were welcomed home from Vietnam with societal love (as opposed to the familial and fraternal love they did receive). It's false that they were spit on or (as my uncle likes to tell me) had dog crap thrown at them.
The other response I have is a little more difficult to articulate - though Will Selber almost gets there. If you want to "Thank me for my Service," then "Serve." In some way, shape, or fashion, serve the country. Military, AmeriCorps, Peace Corps - it really doesn't matter. I think the "Thank you for Yor Service" is, on one hand a way to individually give appreciation to what (if anything) we have done, but on the other hand, a way for people to feel "let off the hook," from not serving because our service is somehow "extraordinary."
True, it's been over 80 years since the entire country mobilized to fight in WWII, but up until recently (the Boomer generation) it wasn't rare to find men (and to a lesser extent women) who had served due to the draft, or active or reserve enlistment. Those of us with military service weren't so rare in the population.
One of the reasons we spent 20 years in Iraq and Afghanistan was due to the fact that there were so few American families clamoring for the return of their sons and daughters. The American public was able to have an impact on ending our participation in Vietnam because the threads of that participation ran throughout society. The all volunteer Military has severed that link.
You, "Thank us for Our Service," because military service is now special and rare. It isn't. Moreover, it shouldn't be.
Reading Jack Smith’s clear and eloquent filing made my blood boil. That his team’s time needed to be wasted responding to the defendant’s utterly baseless and frivolous objections gives the former guy so much more respect than he deserves. Yet Mr Smith, playing by the rules of the game, demolishes every one of the defendant’s whiny claims, and will, I hope, thoroughly trounce him and his lawyers in court, thus bringing an end to our nightmare.
Why haven't Republicans and former Republicans proclaimed - repeatedly and continually - that Donald J. Trump is a RINO?
So, he registered as a Republican (at some point). What actions, statements, or policies has that jerk ever taken, stated, or undertaken that align him with the Republican Party?
So-called Republicans in the U.S. House of Mistrepresentatives consistently and loudly proclaim the lie that the entire Democratic Party and Democrats elected to national office are radical and left-wing. That's not a message; it's "messaging" (a.k.a. Propaganda).
Stop arguing the perceived strengths of weaknesses of the various legal cases that have been brought against the jerk. Leave that to the prosecutors in the courts.
Instead, combine the message that the jerk is not and has never been a Republican such as Lincoln, Roosevelt (Teddy), Taft (Mr. Republican), Eisenhower, or Goldwater with messaging his status as a RINO.
If, between now and November 2024, images of Trump carry the caption "RINO!" and if Republicans and former Republicans who speak often to the press continually refer to the jerk as "That RINO", it could have a significant affect, even on the Republican base.
This has the added benefit of being true.
I admit (?) I'm not now and never have been registered as either a Republican or a Democrat.
True, but the crazies in the base doesn’t care. That’s why they vote for MTG, Gaetz, etc and kick out the Liz Cheneys. The “No Labels” party should call itself the Business Party.
If Trump thought he could win in the Democratic Party, he’d be a Democrat. The man has no core principles. He’s guided by instinct, more animal than human.
Trump is a Republican, because he represents what R voters want. I don’t understand why old-school R’s think they have a monopoly on what the party really stands for? They don’t. This bat-shit crazy, misogynistic, zenophobic group of leaders and voters…they ARE the Republican Party in 2023.
Trump is not, as you noted, a Republican. So, by definition, he is not a RINO.
The jerk claims he is a Republican; the RNC claims he is a Republican. My point is that he's a RINO. Amongst other things.
Good ! That was definitely my intention 😊
I was so incensed at the WaPo article about the editorial page editor taking down the cartoon that I wrote a letter to him. First, in response to Shipley's defense of taking the cartoon down, "Our section is aimed at finding commonalities, understanding the bonds that hold us together, even in the darkest times. In this spirit, we have taken down the drawing”, I said that that was nonsense. That is not the purpose of any publications' editorial page. It is certainly not the purpose of editorial cartoons.
Then I acknowleged the exaggerated features of its Palestinian subjects are likely racist. In fact, they resemble the exaggerated features of a Jew in a 1919 Austrian postcard showing the Jew stabbing a German Army soldier in the back with a dagger. This of course was Hitler's Big Lie about why Germany lost WWI.
I went on to contrast the image with the message. I said the message is not racist. The message was accurate. This was based on my Jewish friend's word. But I checked my facts first. It turns out it is only the Israelis who have claimed Hamas hides behind civilians. That has not been confirmed by neutral reporting.
So I decided not to send the letter. However, I still think claiming the editorial page "is aimed at finding commonalities, understanding the bonds that hold us together" is nonsense.
I don't see that cartoon as "racist." After all, that's a terrorist, not a generic Palestinian, or at least one hopes so. But I DO see it as vastly oversimplifying an complex situation. There is in fact a question of how many civilian deaths are "acceptable" in the current war. If 1100 are not, what about north of 10K?
Political cartoons by their nature oversimplify. We either grunt in approval or disapproval, depending on our attitude towards the subject. But they DO by their very oversimplification cause far too many people to oversimplify themselves. And that way lies chaos. We are seeing it in the poison pills that are going to trash the ability of this government to keep going.
I’m not saying this would be a good idea, but just speculating. Could Manchin be considering a challenge to Biden, as a Democrat? A 3rd party run is a loser, which he surely knows. The rationale could be that, assuming Trump is the nominee, Haley primary voters would vote for him instead of Trump and that progressives would stay with the party. Plus he’s got name recognition. And the (dare I say) age issue would go away. And he doesn’t have a son named Hunter. And and and. Just trying to figure out what’s in his mind.
After reading that Atlantic feature, one thought came to mind: "Wow, Peter Thiel is a really stupid man". It's amazing such a clueless idiot managed to make so much money in his life.
My thoughts, too. And the sci-fi themes applied to his life are just sad. The American oligarchy is largely made up of these men children, many of whom gained way too much wealth and power from dumb luck in timing.
A stupid, dangerously nihilistic, petulant toddler of a man who apparently never matured enough to grow out of the libertarian obsessions of a random idiot college freshmen.
If Manchin is going to 'travel the country' to test out a presidential run, he is delusional and I suspect he will find out what many Dems really think about him (spoiler: he's not as popular as he thinks he is).
We should make a pact that if he comes to any of our towns, we will go and tell him loudly and enthusiastically that the way to strengthen the middle is to support Joe Biden.
I'm in!
Another day of exhaustion. But fight on we will.
My middle name is Fluctuate. One day I'm high, think Wednesday morn, and the next I'm low, think Joe Manchin. Not much in between. Joe "pipeline" Manchin looking for the middle is hysterical. It is just another grift albeit a dangerous one. I'm out the door to pick up our wine club case of wine. It will come in handy.