Wednesday, May 4, 2016

Field of Bad Dreams

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, indiana, primaries, cruz, trump, corn
They've already had an earful.
The voters of Indiana have spoken, in their measured, uninflected Midwestern dialect, and it wasn't good news for Ted Cruz. By a significant margin, Hoosiers went to the polls to declare that they found The Donald to be outstanding in the field. Which is indeed another Indiana joke, albeit not one with a very pleasing punchline: shortly after the results came in, Cruz said "enough" and dropped out of the race. This is clearly not the political year for either conservatives or the sane.

Not that we're saying the people of Indiana are nuts for voting for Trump. Far from it! They're just understandably angry with the status quo and wanted to show it in a manner which didn't involve actual thinking.

Now that might sound like a slam on Indiana - but we can get away with it, because we happen to be Hoosier ourselves (albeit living now in Texas). So we enjoy the same comic immunity that allowed Larry Wilmore to stand on a stage with the president of the United States and call him a niggah after earlier referring to Dr. Ben Carson as a jigaboo.  Which unfortunately proved only that whether you're hiring a president or a comedian, you really shouldn't do it based solely on skin color. A color which, if witness protection allows, Larry Wilmore is probably trying to change even now.

But back to Indiana. It's a beautiful state with endless and abundant fields, rolling hills, trees with astonishing color every Autumn, friendly people, and (unlike Texas) basements where you can actually hide from tornadoes. And if our fellow Hoosiers overwhelmingly decided to vote for The Donald, who can really blame them considering the persuasive quality of his reason and rhetoric...?

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, lee harvey oswald, rafael cruz, cruz, national enquirer
"I wrote a book about Lyin' Ted's father. Big bestseller. Huge. It's called "The Art of the Dealey Plaza!"
Frankly, the certainty that Trump will now win the GOP nomination would normally worry us. Only now that we know he's feeding the shrieking voices in his head with opposition research gleaned from supermarket tabloids, we at least expect it to be fun to hear him unload on Hillary...

Not only are we not making these up - we believe them!

obama, obama jokes, political, humor, cartoon, conservative, hope n' change, hope and change, stilton jarlsberg, will ferrell, reagan, alzheimer's, movie
In this hilarious scene, Ted Kennedy tells Kopechne he's found an air hose for her to suck on, then unzips his fly...
Although the story is a few days old, we can't resist commenting on Will Ferrell's now-aborted "comedy" in which he intended to play an Alzheimer's-riddled Ronald Reagan who thought he was only playing the President in a movie.  Because losing your mind, memories, and every loving relationship to a nightmarish terminal disease is funny in Ferrell's world.

Then again, unlike Ferrell, maybe we need to show some empathy here. Obviously he lost his mind when he decided to produce and star in this travesty.


John the Econ said...

Drinking. Heavily. Good night America.

Tucci said...

The voters of Indiana have spoken, in their measured, uninflected Midwestern dialect, and it wasn't good news for Ted Cruz.

And there's no further need to discuss Senator Cruz' inability to meet the "natural born citizen" qualification specified in Article II, Section 1.

Fine U.S. Senator, and perfectly suited to nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court if the Republicans in the Senate will only keep Borking our Indonesian-in-Chief out of his scrabbling effort to replace Antonin Scalia with a flagrant "Liberal" fascist.

Could be one of President Trump's best policy decisions, don'tcha think?

Fred Ciampi said...

But what about Kasich? No one even mentioned him. He should have dropped out many moons ago but his puppet master told him not to. Hmmmmm..... So, how do we really feel about Trump? And why?

TrickyRicky said...

Not to avoid politics, actually in a desperate need to avoid politics until I enter the voting booth in November, I must say that I loathe Will Farrell. IMHO he had one funny persona years ago as the male cheerleader alongside Molly Shannon on SNL. Especially the swim team cheer "Taco, Burrito, What's that in your Speedo?" Everything since has been smarmy, insulting crap. His proposed hit job on Reagan fits his style perfectly, and as one whose dear Mother is suffering from Alzheimer's I find the whole premise of the aforementioned movie repugnant.

Liberty Card said...

I hear The Bern has proposed taking half of every conservative's brain and giving it to Liberals so that all Americans can be half wits.

james daily said...

This is about to get very interesting to watch. Nitwit McConnell practiced a little fence mending last week, Priebus is eating his words, the GOP elite do not whether to sh** or go blind with their non support and the Senate will probably lose at least five seats because of this riff. Cruz supporters will vote for Clinton by staying home. Yep, hide and watch, most fun in a while. But what I am really looking forward to is Trump hammering the bejeezes out of Clinton's baggage.

REM1875 said...

Will ferrell and comedian do not belong in the same sentence.
If comedy was a capital offence and they hung will ferrell, he would die a totally innocent man.

We need to unite now ---lest ka-sick sneaks up and snatches the nomination.
(the media says he has momentum.)

American Cowboy said...

@Liberty Card

I heard he plans to take half the ambition of citizens who work fast and give it to the lazy who are slow.
That way we will all be half fast.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- It was a great country while it lasted.

@Tucci- So you think that a president Trump would get traction nominating a potential justice named "Lyin' Ted" whose father was a JFK assassination co-conspirator? I'm seeing that as a hard sell. Moreover, in any confirmation hearing Dems would surely ask Cruz about his statements that the new commander-in-chief was a pathological liar and moron. Besides, I think Trump has already suggested that the next Justice should be his sister or sister-in-law or some such. You know, make the country into a good old fashioned family business.

@Fred Ciampi- There are a lot of things I like about Kasich, but he's really GOT to drop out now. Besides, his assignment to hand The Donald victories by splitting the conservative vote with Cruz has been completed. Time for him to collect his VP reward.

As for how I really feel about Trump, I currently think his nomination is a disaster and highly indicative that the canary in America's cognitive coal mine isn't just pining for the fjords. At this point, all I can do is hope (sigh...) that at some point Trump will start speaking and acting in a rational manner.

More than ever, we need a president who can persuasively reshape our culture and inspire our better selves. I'm afraid I see Trump as someone who simply intends to force people into doing what he wants rather than make the clear and coherent case for initiative, personal responsibility, and a unifying American spirit which goes deeper than jingoism.

As I've said, I don't intend to bash Trump on these pages. But in the near future, you may find that I'm publishing a lot of recipes, gardening tips, and knock-knock jokes to fill space.

@TrickyRicky- For many years, I've considered "Saturday Night Live" to be a haven for unfunny performers who get popular purely because of the SNL imprimatur. It's the comedic equivalent of the Emperor's New Clothes - all of the hipsters laugh because they're afraid to admit that the show isn't funny, and they fear that they're the only ones who don't "get" it.

And I'd already disliked Ferrell, but his despicable and unfunny performance as George W. Bush put him permanently on my "F this guy and every project he's ever in" list.

@Liberty Card- Well, I'm willing to donate half of mine. It could make the next 4 to 8 years a lot easier...

@James Daily- The art of the deal, as Trump would say, is to be holding all the cards - and The Donald is doing just that. So I expect the backroom GOP types will be working closely with Trump from this point forward. And sadly, I currently expect a negative down-ballot effect with Trump heading the ticket. The GOP will lose seats, while Dem voters are energized.

And personally, I'm not looking forward to the Trump/Hillary debates. She'll eat him alive on policy specifics, and while there are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Hillary, I foresee the contest ending when this boob blurts out "She killed Vince Foster! And I've got a list of 89 other people she killed. It's on the Internet, folks. Look it up. Very bad."

Very bad indeed.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@REM1875- As I said, there are things I genuinely like about Kasich...but at the moment he's The Guest Who Would Never Leave when the party is over, everyone else is gone, and the hosts are yawning, checking their watches, and turning off lamps.

@American Cowboy- Thank you for the much appreciated first smile of the day.

Geoff King said...

Evidently our next president will either be a criminal or a clown since no one believes a third party candidate has a chance.
I, for one, do not care if the Libertarian candidate hasn't got a chance. He gets my vote regardless of if that helps Hillary, because the alternative is just as distastful to me. At least I will sleep well knowing I did not vote for who is likely to be our nation's last president before the total collapse of society occurs and he or she blames everyone else.

DaughterJarlsberg said...

Oh Indiana, bless your poor misguided little heart.

On Will Ferrel - for those of you who don't know, I'm a speech therapist. In the past I worked in nursing homes, where STs are closely involved with Alzheimer's patients working on both their cognitive and feeding skills. I would like to see Will Ferrell using his sense of humor to try and convince those with dementia (or any other number of ailments) that drinking water thickened to pudding consistency is not disgusting and not at all like someone blew their nose in a cup. Better, yet, why don't I assign him a pudding texture diet for one year, and then he can enjoy the comic hilarity for himself. Endless jokes!

AmyH said...

Hats off to you Daughter Jarlsberg. People with dementia & Alzheimer's can be/are very difficult to take care of. My grandfather had dementia. So difficult to see his mental status decline.
I worked a local precinct yesterday and was able to see the majority of the people either voted for Trump or Sanders, depending if they declared R or D. I also witnessed many people from our precinct and the other 2 complain that they had to declare and didnt want to declare a party. They dont understand a Primary. They wanted a free for all. I have worked this same precinct for 20 years so I recognize the 'normal' voters for each one. Some only come out every 4 years, some every single election day; local, State, Fed and special. There were a lot of "who is that?! They are either new or never voted." And 99% of the ones that came out in droves in '08 did not come out yesterday. Their Main Man isn't running anymore. And Hill & Burn are not representing them like their skin color should.

DaughterJarlsberg said...

AmyH - I'm so sorry for your loss. I think that watching someone you love struggle with dementia is one of the hardest things in the world. Hugs.

That was one of two reasons that I left my work in nursing homes. It was incredibly difficult to lose people I deeply cared about on a weekly, sometimes daily, basis. The other reason is because of the medicare system in nursing homes. Corruption and unethical behavior seem to be requirements to getting the job done due to INSANE medicare rules (wait..wasn't that supposed to be fixed by now?), and I wasn't willing to toe that line anymore. There were other challenges, but those were the main ones.

CenTexTim said...

Repubs nominate unstable egomaniacal hypocritical loon.

Dems can't decide between a communist and a felon.

Time for bourbon, America.

Paladin said...

Ben Shapiro made what I thought was an insightful observation. He was far more articulate, but it's basically this: There are plenty of people on both sides of the aisle that want someone who appears untouchable. The more rules they break or outrageous things they say without being held to account, the better they appear. What is desired is someone with the power to get things done for "their side" who can break all the rules and not be held to account.

A lot of people don't want freedom, that's too hard. So we get the most conservative candidate in reach of the presidency since Reagan, and the people choose Trump.

DaughterJarlsberg said...

CenTexTim - I prefer whiskey, or sometimes I get my Irish friend to make me a shot of baby guinness (coffee liqueur and Bailey's Irish cream). Ok, it's becoming clear to me that this election season is bad for my health for many reasons :P

Anonymous said...

OK folks you voted for this moron Trump, you can now be sure that Hillbilly gets in. The Vaginaut wins!

Or who knows, moron Trump wins. What's the difference?!

This is true evil; all conservatives, so-called, who voted for this moronic populist have just sunk the party. You should be ashamed. Trump is a loud-mouth, boorish, ass - he has no philosophy except self-agrandisemnet.

How you could have been so fooled I don't know - but maybe you are all as dumb as those other morons, the "liberals", say you are....

A pox on all of you.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Geoff King- Peggy Noonan referred to the match-up as the Criminal versus the Crazy Man. She also admits that she wept after coming to this conclusion.

@DaughterJarlsberg- As anyone who reads "Johnny Optimism" knows, I'm not averse to sick jokes. But not about real people and real personal tragedies. Ferrell crossed a line, and he did so because he believes that people who disagree with him ideologically deserve no compassion. His "jokes" stick in my throat much like the "pudding water" you describe.

@AmyH- Near the end of her life, I couldn't even visit with my Grandmother because all she knew was that I was a strange man, and my presence frightened her. Hardly comedy gold, Mr. Ferrell.

And interesting to see the way people who've never voted coming out of the woodwork to drive off the furriners or collect their free stuff. Not to mention all the people who have no idea how primaries, delegates, and superdelegates work - and assume it's all some sudden conspiracy.

@DaughterJarlsberg- Nothing good comes out of the terrible triad of Government, money, and medicine. You put up with so much, and I'm so glad you're in a less traumatic work environment now.

@CenTexTim- You are the definition of a "glass half full" person. (grin)

@Paladin- Exactly. As I kinda sorta said somewhere above, what we needed was someone who could articulate conservative values and - by making demonstrable improvements to our country and economy - start winning over hearts and minds. A rule-breaker may get things done, but at the price of undermining our very system of government. I'm not ready to accept a "new normal" in which media-lobotomized voters seeking handouts simply swap out their tinpot dictator "flavor of the month" every four years.

@DaughterJarlsberg- Where in the world did you pick up such dreadful habits?! Oh, yeah...

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Anonymous- I largely agree with you. However, a pox won't be necessary...sounds like Zika virus will nail everyone anyway.

Judi King said...

So now the Republicans can once again choose between the lesser of two evils. The last two times we got 0bama, now we'll most likely get Clinton. I just can't do it again. By rights, they both should be in prison, not the WH. If Clinton gets indicted, as she should, it won't be before Nov. and Trump is facing many lawsuits this summer and is no more than a con artist. What a great choice! This country, as we knew it, is over.

John the Econ said...

Now that I'm awake and more sober...

The one and only upside will be watching Trump thoroughly decimate Hillary. Do remember that Hillary has yet to be traditionally "vetted". There's a whole generation of people out there who aren't familiar with more than a few years of the Clinton slime trail. The pliant establishment media isn't about to do it on their own, and the feeble Sanders never took his gloves off even to the extreme of actually covering for her regarding the private server issue. If Trump is only half as crass as he's been over the last year, it should be fun watching him tear her apart as she always should have been.

Of course, there's always the possibility that that won't happen. Remember Republicans, you just nominated a life-long Democrat for President! You may have already lost.

Speaking of weirdness: Did anyone else catch John Boehner's support of Trump the other day? We went as far as to call Cruz “Lucifer in the flesh”, and reveals that Trump is one of his "texting buddies". Nice.

Hey Boehner: You never got that animated when dealing with Obama, who was actively working to dismantle America. Go back you your golf game, fool.

Will Ferrell and the laugh-riot that is Alzheimer's: We all know well how disconnected Hollywood is from reality. And yet, is it really possible that Hollywood is so off-the-scale tone deaf that there were people who literally thought that a comedy about the suffering of one of the greatest Presidents of the last century was a great idea? Did these idiots really think that The Iron Lady would have been a better movie had gone for more laughs?

As someone who has personally watched loved ones slowly drift away to Alzheimer's, I could easily claim morally superiority "victim status" as Progressives are wont to do. And yet, I find this no more despicable that most of the other societal diarrhea that Hollywood continually dumps on us. It's just another example of the crass hate that Hollywood has for conservatives and America itself.

Look at it this way sick leftists: A Reagan with Alzheimer's still kicked all your asses, and deep inside you all know it. That's why you hate so much.

Judi King said...

@ Mr. Econ: Thanks for that post, especially the last paragraph.

KdW said...

Americans and Republicans, remember: You asked for this. Given the choice between a dozen solid conservatives and one Clinton-supporting con artist and game-show host, you chose the con artist. You chose him freely. Nobody made you do it.

DougM said...

Your corny humor is amazeing.
[taps mic]

Rod said...

So who is Trump most likely to forgive all (& vice versa, and name for VP?
I surely don't know.
But I too am really looking forward to him ripping into Clinton & D administration.

Anonymous said...


Though I supported him at the beginning and earlier thought he would be a good choice as SCOTUS Justice, the more I learned about "Lyin' Ted" the more I realized he would be EVEN MORE VULNERABLE than Justice john Roberts, who bucked under pressure (blackmail?) to support ObamaCare.

That talk about Trump suggesting that the next Justice should be his sister is garbage and you are smart and honest enough to know it. Trump merely said she’d make a great justice, after someone asked him. You think he’d say “she sucks”?

Of course Trump will start speaking and acting in a MORE rational manner…he has already, now that the “elimination combat” is over.

You write, “More than ever, we need a president who can persuasively reshape our culture and inspire our better selves.” SEE: Scott Adam’s Blog (the Dilbert cartoonist); he is a former businessman and has a fascinating series called “The Master Persuader.”

You say you’re afraid Trump is someone who “will force people into doing what he wants rather than make the clear and coherent case for initiative, personal responsibility, and a unifying American spirit which goes deeper than jingoism.” Well, after decades of limp-wristed Republicans and neo-fascist Dems, I FOR ONE welcome a Republican with BALLS and a SPINE…which may “scare” those all too accustomed – and comfortable - to Right Wing Eunichs.

You expect a negative down-ballot effect with Trump heading the ticket….and you are DEAD WRONG! Trump will ENERGIZE those on the right to vote for those who say they will bring together the Republicans. It’s the GOP Establishment that is quaking.

Trump/Hillary debates?!? You’re DELUSIONAL! HE'LL eat HER alive with balls of fire, FINALLY attacking Democrats as they have attacked us. NO ONE wants “policy specifics” in debates in 2016…they’re demolition derbys, NOT cotillion balls!

Shelly said...

There's a lot of blame to go around here regarding Cruz. I am definitely in mourning about it, for sure. But I'm trying to see the silver lining here. Cruz rose up out of a crowded field to be the last man standing against the Oompah Loompah despite fierce opposition from the press, including the formerly fair and balanced Fox News, and his OWN PARTY. This gives me some hope there is a large conservative base out there fighting mighty headwinds. Had Kasich the dope dropped out when he should have, Ted might have been able to squeak through until the convention. If the primaries were limited to actual Republicans, that would have probably helped too. Who knows? This is truly a heart-wrenching situation we are facing. I want to defeat Hillary more than anything, but I despise Trump. The only thing that will keep me from sitting on my hands is the VP pick as there is a strong likelihood Trump wouldn't serve a full term.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@Judi King- Happily, we don't have to make our choice today. Between now and November, we may see Trump assemble an inspiring team which we could vote for willingly. I'm not saying it will happen, but it's too soon for any of us to give up hope or close our minds. Or stop drinking.

@John the Econ- I don't see Trump decimating Hillary in debate. Mind you, I'd love for it to happen, but Hillary is smart, shrewd, and has her lies and deceptions honed to gleaming perfection. Trump, on the other hand, is a blunt instrument. There's plenty of dirt he can throw Hillary's way, but he only needs to blurt out one cockamamie accusation of the "Cruz's dad was Lee Harvey Oswald's buddy" to lose all credibility.

Regarding Boehner, if he's such a butt-buddy with Trump, why didn't he solicit his help in all those failed deals with the Democrats? Or DID he - and the deals failed? Either way, I'd like to know.

As far as Ferrell/Reagan go, I wish the Left would eventually discover something like human dignity and compassion. But it will never happen.

@Judi King- Agreed.

@KdW- Actually, I think what really launched Trump was the fact that 15 reasonable candidates all had to split the (overwhelmingly large) non-Trump vote - thus netting small numbers - allowing Trump to win contest after contest because he was the one non-conservative on the stage. In later contests, it was all about voter anger. I understand that anger, but it's not exactly the best method of selecting a president.

@DougM- Aw, shucks. (rimshot)

@Rod- Trump will "forgive" all his victims...the question is who we can respect if they forgive him? Lyin' Ted? Little Mario? Ugly Carly? Not much of a doctor Ben Carson? Kasich the "disgusting eater?"

And I'm sorry, but when Trump tries his oafish bombast on Hillary, she'll laugh him off the stage.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

Anonymous- You make some decent points (which would still be decent WITH FEWER CAPS) but I disagree with a number of things. For starters, why should you be happy that now "elimination combat" is over, you expect Trump to start presenting himself as someone other than the persona he ran on? Jesus Christ, didn't you get your fill of that with Obama "the great unifier?"

I do predict a strongly negative down-ballot effect because Trump has already said that he doesn't care about unifying the fractured GOP ("Sure, it would be nice. But I can win without it.") Trump is Trump, by God, but he's neither Republican nor conservative, so how the hell can anyone down-ballot identify their candidacies with his? He's running on being Trump and that's not something anyone else can do. But the Dems will be unified in coming to the polls, and they'll likely see a big uptick in their down-ballot wins.

Your last point is perhaps the most troubling- and not because you're wrong, but because - in a sense - you're right. You say "NO ONE wants “policy specifics” in debates in 2016…they’re demolition derbys, NOT cotillion balls!"

Exactly. You and millions of others just want to whoop it up while watching a demolition derby rather than struggling with boring, polysyllabic policy specifics. By the way, have you ever seen the film "Idiocracy?" It shows how political squabbles are settled with demolition derbys in the future when the world has become populated entirely with morons.

@Shelly- Cruz wasn't perfect, but I could have voted for him in a heartbeat. And he truly had staggering odds against him: the Dems, the Don, the GOP, the media, etc.

My fear - and it's too early to know - is that actual conservatives may realize that they're outnumbered, Idiocracy has arrived, and that we no longer have a media even capable of reporting on things like Benghazi or a failing economy - at least, not if there's a juicy story about the size of Donald Trump's fingers, Kim Kardashian's ass, or Caitlyn Jenner's tucked pecker. We conservatives did so much in the last two midterms - and this is our reward?

We must try not to become demoralized. But I'm going to need a few quiet days to figure out how...or even why.

John the Econ said...

"Hillary is smart, shrewd, and has her lies and deceptions honed to gleaming perfection."

Is she, and are they? Remember, Hillary has never been in what I'd call a "real" debate. Everyone she's ever been up against has either been afraid of her, or scared to get tough because they were scared of being seen as "beating up on a woman". Like Bernie, they've all held their real punches and have never gone after her obvious vulnerabilities. We all know that Trump has no problem with that. She's rarely been seriously challenged by the media, and even when they've pushed only mildly in any forum, she's flustered. Heck, she just got rolled by a coal miner the other day. And her temper is legend. Bill Clinton had unbelievable natural charm to BS his way out of this kind of stuff. She has none. (If anything, anti-charm) If I was to debate her, (and I'd love the opportunity) I'd deliberately get her pissed off by pushing every single button, (and there are so many to push) and then let her do the rest.

There's over 40 years of toxic sludge in that woman that she's worked hard to keep contained. To date, she's been able to insulate herself enough from sharp objects to prevent a rupture. Cruz was capable of doing it. Trump certainly is...

...unless, he really is still a Democrat...

Anonymous said...


Style is merely that...STYLE!
I think it's appropraite to moderate it for the needs a circumstance demands.
EXAMPLE: imagine a Kennedy "ask not" speech, or a Reagan "Mr. Gorbachev" speech spoken in a near-bored, pedantic manner. FAIL!

The downticket issue: not on style, but others would win by glomming onto Trump's on POLICY (as appropriate per State...e.g. WV = coal, TX = border).

Yes I've seen Idiocracy. Do you remember the Biden/Ryan VP "debate"?! Dems generally don't "debate"; they attack. A rare few will wonk away, but I don't think that will fly in this "unsettled" era. Don't blame me for the situation we live in; I only read the tea leaves pretty successfully...and therefore have a pretty good feel for when one approach is likely to be more successful than not in the arena of politics.

I DO hear your concerns, but I suspect you might be hoping/wishing our climate (political, economic, international, etc) were other than it is...and are making your choices and wishes on such a faulty basis. It's not 1980 anymore, Reagan is dead (bless his soul), and that's a GOOD thing (i.e. accepting where we are today, warts and all): we need a much more active "fighter" in this era.

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- An interesting perspective, and perhaps correct. But I wasn't thinking of Hillary's performance at the inconsequential Dem debates but rather her being questioned by committees while under oath. She's good with words, especially deceptive words, and she will be training specifically for ugly, personal, (accurate) attacks from Trump. IF he could make her mad it might change the equation - and believe me, I'd give one of anything I have two of to see it happen. But at this vulnerable moment (give me time to realign my thinking) I'm not seeing Trump come out the winner in such a contest.

@Anonymous- First and foremost, although we're debating some points I consider you a friend and ally if you're here. And I invite dialogue in hopes of either convincing others or having my own opinions altered. So tell the bartender in the HnC lounge that I said to give you a free drink (grin).

Per your points: Yes, Style is merely Style. And it IS important. The problem is that Style is what makes substance compelling, as in the cases you cite. Unfortunately, I've seen a ton of Trump's style but virtually no substance. Moreover, as much as I loathe Obama, the sumbitch drips with style. It's not enough.

Downticket: I haven't heard real policy from Trump that downticket candidates can embrace...only goals. "Deport 11 million illegals and their families" is a goal, but without a realistic plan for implementation it's simply not policy. Again, that's a problem for me and others who haven't yet warmed to Trump. He doesn't say how he's going to accomplish his miracles. And when he does, it opens up new problems: rebalancing trade and bringing back American jobs by putting a 35% tax on every item that comes in from China? How is that going to play when every American family that shops at WalMart suddenly finds prices 35% higher than they are today. Will Trump then increase welfare? Which will necessitate a rise in taxes?

This is why Trump avoids discussing policy, and instead delivers platitudes like "we'll be winning so much we'll get tired of winning."

On debates, I've got to agree with you. They've become bloodsport and professional wrestling. Trump didn't "win" a single debate, because he never made a single, salient point. But boy, he could insult and bloviate and make people laugh with his rudeness. So popularity polls gave him "wins" because he was the least substantive but most entertaining.

So yes - that may be a winning strategy in debate, if our goal is to eventually select a witless churl with no social boundaries or complexity of thought. And I'm pretty sure that's the culture we're now living in - which makes much of this conversation moot: if boobs want to elect a boob because he seems like the biggest boob of all, then it's going to happen because they outnumber everyone else. Although in fairness, I'm certainly including as "boobs" all those idiots who vote for the Dems.

So as we arrive at your last paragraph, we're in agreement. I DO wish this was another time, and that our nation's future would be decided by those who still see a difference between news, politics, and entertainment. Perhaps I label myself as an anachronism with that opinion. Sadly, for all of us, that still doesn't make me wrong.

John the Econ said...

@Stilton, Oh, I do agree that she's good in a legal setting, which is undeniably her turf. But in a no-holds-barred debate, her legaleeze weaseling won't help her:

Clinton: I'll be the first woman President. My opponent is a misogynistic oppressor of women.

Trump: You know who I'd call an oppressor of women? A lawyer who runs a "bimbo eruption squad" that attacks and tears down victims of sexual assault just to save her husband's (and her) career.

Clinton: I'll fight corruption in Washington. I served in the case against Richard Nixon.

Trump: Nixon got fired over 18 minutes of tape. You deleted tens-of-thousands of e-mails. You'd think you'd know better.

Clinton: I'll run a government that fights for the little guy.

Trump: The government only wastes 70-cents out of every dollar. The Clinton Foundation spends 90.

Clinton: I'll reduce the budget deficit.

Trump: How? With crooked cattle futures trades?

Clinton: My opponent will risk American lives.

Trump: What difference does it make?

True, it will be a content-free debate. But then again, we're talking about two content-free candidates who will say absolutely anything to whoever they're talking to with little consciousness as to what they'll be saying, or voting on tomorrow.

CenTexTim said...

@Judi King

"So now the Republicans can once again choose between the lesser of two evils."

The lesser of two evils is still evil. This is a classic 'no win' scenario.

@Everyone Else - just from reading the comments, it seems like someone's 'divide and conquer' strategy is working. I'm not a tinfoil hat conspiracy guy, but if we're arguing among ourselves it doesn't bode well for the future.

Boligat said...

For the next 4-8 years, it appears that most of the commenters here at least will find solace in their choice of beverages. But what about us teetotalers? Life is not fair! I guess I'll have to sign up to be a permanent Uber driver. At least I'll make some cash.

Anonymous said...

Stilton, three more thoughts for your consideration:
1 of 3

Anonymous said...

2 of 3

Anonymous said...

3 of 3
(funny but true and effective!)

Dan said...

@Anonymous -- please start signing your entries (at least for continuity's sake). I don't care if you use your name, or a pseudonym, but at least some identifier, even something like Anonymous2016 (again for continuity's sake).

I just go down to the Name/URL choice in the identity section and add my name. I don't have any associated URLs, so I leave that blank.

Continuity is really kinda neat. And I realize that, being this the Internet and all, it's easy to pretend to be someone else, at least a specific identifier would help (me, at least).

Stilton Jarlsberg said...

@John the Econ- Oh, I'd love for a debate to go the way you've described. I just don't think it will happen. Then again, maybe I really am the one who is out of touch by hoping or expecting for a debate that is something other than the equivalent of professional wrestling. Inanity and insults may well carry the day. After which, we can all watch a TV show about being kicked in the balls.

@CenTexTim- I can bring myself to vote (reluctantly) for the lesser of two evils. Now if Trump can just prove that he is the lesser of two evils...

@Boligat- Screw Uber, how about becoming my chauffeur?

@Anonymous- Interesting reads, but the first article had "no there there" as Dorothy Parker once said. There was no substance for me to cling to.

Similarly, the second article was a total hypothetical about how Trump beat Hillary. A pleasant fiction, but nothing for me to work with either emotionally or intellectually right now.

As for the "Game of Thrones" parody, it was funny and well done. No complaints there.

@Dan- Glad you mentioned that. There really IS no need for anyone to be "Anonymous" here. Just click that Name/URL button and write in any name you'd like to use.

Popular Front said...

Long ago, somebody somewhere told Will Ferrell that he was funny. That person should be identified, hunted down and beaten to death with old rolled-up scripts of 'Animal House'.

Liberty Card said...

Glad to see there's someone else who can see what I have always thought of Ferrell.