So as noted, Biden will not run for the party nomination for
president. He claims he will serve out his term and he has given his
blessing to the someone nobody wanted for president, Kamala Harris.
What
this announcement brought to my mind, after watching a few hours of
FoxNews reports, was something I've been trying to get Trump-haters,
especially the leftist/marxist/progressive/Democrat (same things)
Trump-haters, to provide for me. I've asked...almost pleaded...these
people to provide which lie Trump told which has any significance.
Trump says lots of things which aren't 100% accurate. No honest person
would say otherwise. But that's not the same thing as suggesting he
plays fast and loose with the truth. Self-promotion always is less than
100% truthful, no matter who the politician is. There's an old song
which preaches, "You've got to ac-cent-tchu-ate the
positive...E-lim-i-nate the negative". All politicians do this to one
degree or another about themselves and their records when seeking
support from the electorate. Trump does this and I'm not ignorant of
him doing it and never have been. His particular style is a bit more
blatant than the typical politician, but his "lies" have never been
anymore than some manifestation of this "rule" of self-promotion. None
that I've ever seen or have been provided to see by Trump-haters.
Somehow,
Trump-haters believe this behavior is "conning" the Trump supporter, as
if his "lies" are clouding our judgement when choosing between him and
the..."alternatives"... offered by the other party, or even those of his
own during the primaries. But like providing an example of a serious
lie which has actually misled anyone, no prog who's bleated about Trump
being a con man has yet to explain the con itself...how his supporters
have been fleeced and how Trump has profited without delivering. Yet
the grace-embracers bleat on.
In the meantime, how can the
haters defend themselves against the very same charge they project upon
Trump? So far, all they're doing is lying. And the lies of the
administration and the party are swallowed as truth by the Dem
constituency. Gullible is a word which doesn't quite describe the
abject stupidity of those who insist that Trump is a threat to us, for
the sake of this essay, on the strength of the "lying con man" charge.
Yet
Biden's announcement reveals who the true lying con men are and who are
the marks who have bought in hook, line and sinker. Some especially
idiotic of useful idiots suggest that Biden's condition can be difficult
to assess. That's of course bullshit, especially given the access to
the very best of medical and mental health professionals at their
disposal. The only way this nonsense comes close to making sense is
noting when an absolute moron whose entire career is loaded with
examples of his imbecility crosses over into senility. Indeed, I have
no doubt that even professionals are burdened in such cases with making
that judgement. When one is intelligent and honest, senility is far
easier to determine because both those qualities can be impacted and
usually are (though the honesty thing can as often be simply no longer
perceiving what is true---which will be a boon for Dan in his later
years as he'll then have an excuse).
But the point is that we're
talking about the alleged leader of the free world (one pundit said he
didn't even "lead from behind" as Obama was described, but simply not
leading at all). One would think a higher standard would be in play by
which someone like Sleepy Joe will be pushed out sooner because of the
incredibly greater threat a now senile imbecile would be. Of course,
there is also the possibility that those in charge have been so stupid
and self-deceived as to actually believe the putz was the man for the
job. There's no way Obama ever believed that.
So for months at
the very least...and I insist it's been since before Nov 2020...this
Party has been conning their constituents about themselves and those
they put forth for voter consideration. Now they're pretending they
actually think Harris is the new "One" despite so many of them
suggesting Joe find another VP for 2024.
Of course, as far as
the voters are concerned, it's more than merely possible they are
conning themselves, knowing what they're seeing and hearing from their
overlords is crap, but because there's a piece of it by which they think
they will profit, they play along. Who can believe the shit the Party
spews but the terminally stupid and those who have something to gain by
getting behind it all? Trump's in the way of that, too.
So how's the true con proceeding now? Well, with the addition of another marxist to the ticket, we have further evidence to confirm a con is being run.
First, is the notion that anyone voted for Harris. The lie is that because 14 million voted in the less than ethical Dem primaries (RFK Jr. being denied participation) for the Biden/Harris ticket, it counts as 14 million voted for Harris...as if there would have been that many voting for her had she not be Biden's VP pick, but a prospect competing for those votes against him. Said another way, it suggests that no one was supportive of Biden until he picked Harris for VP and decided to keep her on the ticket for a second term. Both are absurd and no one votes for VP. We vote for the person running to be POTUS. For example, I felt much better about my support for John McCain when he was running against Obama when he selected the wonderful Sarah Palin as his VP. But I wasn't voting for Palin. I was voting for McCain because he was the candidate and party nominee running against the empty suit no Democrat voter actually vetted. (They went for the con that Obama being half-black meant something.)
Then, with this crowning of Harris as the "winner" of all Biden's delegates, as if she debated other candidates for the privilege of having those delegates behind her, Dem voters sit quietly being told who their candidate will be, rather than being allowed to select one for themselves. The Dem voters are conned into believing the party which bores us constantly with talk about "saving our democracy", clearly demonstrated with this clearly undemocratic move what a con job that truly is.
After bullshitting their constituents on that score, they now are engaged in conning America that all we know about both Harris and Walz are somehow not true. Her crappy record as DA and AG in California (a state which didn't give her any votes for her previous attempt at winning the presidency), her crappy record as US Senator and her crappy record as Biden's VP are all being whitewashed while we still have no idea what her plans are for her presidency. And they're doing similar with regard to Tampon Tim, a guy who lies about his background in order to lure voter support just as Biden's done all his political career.
In light of this very short list of examples of Democratic bullshit shoveling, only Democrat voters, Trump haters, "progressives" and fake Christians from Louisville, Kentucky could dare suggest Trump is the con man of whom one must be wary! But is even the Dem Party operatives the worst con artists?
I insist the worsts con artists are the Dem voters themselves. No mildly intelligent person...much less an actually intelligent person...could ever buy and willingly eat the crap sandwiches the Party has been selling! There remains the Dem voters themselves who are a mix of abjectly ignorant/stupid and those who are conning themselves. To an extent, that's all of them. They tell themselves they believe all the lies told to them by their Party overlords. Here's a very recent example:
Trabue has now contrasted his side from ours by speaking of the Harris/Walz duo as projecting "joy" and "fun", as opposed to how Dan chooses to paint the better choice as bitter or angry or fear mongering and the like. It's bad enough to imagine anyone so stupid as to think that's a basis for choosing a president and vice-president over the shit records of the current administration and those of these two morons Dan is now supporting. But then, I saw a montage of lefty "journalists" and "analysts" speaking in those very same terms! It's the new party line! "They're 'fun', 'joyful'!" "Walz is like your favorite uncle!" (Sounds like what they've said about Biden!) Now Dan cons himself into perpetuating these clearly dishonest descriptions. There's dozens of former Harris staffers who would roundly disagree!
Between the Democrat Party operatives and their truly dumbass supporters among the American electorates, it's clear who the truly dangerous con artists are. Not a one of them is named Donald Trump.
32 comments:
I don't know who's posing as Dan to submit comments which are clearly not from him. Stop doing this. Be a man and submit comments under your own name, instead of being a cowardly little bitch.
It might have been the same guy who pretended to be me that one time. I prefer being able to comment without logging in, but I believe you can turn off that option if you absolutely have to.
Let me know if you want me to develop some sort of secret code to "authenticate" myself with my comments. I have an initial idea or two...
But on the other hand, it's probably overkill. :-)
Bubba
It IS funny, though, that a fake commenter chimed in on a thread about con artists. Reminds me of a U2 video where -- quite appropriately! -- they had a cover band pretend to be them for a scene or two.
Obama ran the entire Biden campaign as well as his entire presidency. He is now running for his fourth term controlling Kamala, and every Demokrat knows it. They KNOW they are voting for Obama again. It's just another way to cheat the system and win.
So much of politics recently is about over promising and under delivering. It's probably worse on the left side of things, especially with their promises to black voters and failure to provide what they promised. I'd argue that Trump following through on appointing justices who'd overturn Roe is the exception not the rule in politics.
I agree that much of political discourse is to some degree a con game. Some of that is because presidential candidates promise what they can't deliver (because of congress). Some of that is that they are cynical and realize that they can get away with not delivering on the promises they make. Some of that is because people want political leaders who'll promise to give them stuff, yet won't hold those leaders accountable for their failures to do what they promised.
I think the heart of the problem is that we have an electorate on both sides that is looking for politicians who'll promise them things instead of politicians who'll espouse policies that will provide the best ways for people to do things for themselves.
Bubba...what do you mean you have to "log in" to comment? I've not had to do that at other blogs which use Blogger's format. The worst I've had to do is respond to those maddening questions where one must check the boxes of all bridges, mountains, motorcycles, etc. I don't know if that can be turned off without disabling comment moderation to do it. Doing that would allow Dan's anal postule to comment freely. Sure, I could delete him after the fact, but his blather would have seen the light of day. That's what I don't want.
Craig,
Your last paragraph aligns with my sentiment regarding voters conning themselves.
Aside from that, it really isn't so much a matter of what politicians promise versus what they're able to deliver...though that is a concern prior to voting ("is that even possible???")...but whether or not they promote that which is clearly untrue. We can see this promotion of lies in the Democrat platform, and their candidates' rhetoric while campaigning promotes those and other lies. The Dem voters, and this is confirmed for many of them, buy in, either because they're truly abjectly stupid, or they want to believe. It's not easy to discern which it is, as it can be both.
Given the Dems and their supporters work on feelings and emotion, the tough job for the conservative is to speak the truth in a manner which appeals to their feelings and emotions. This is why those who consider abortion will reject that option when they see their child on an ultrasound, or see pictures of aborted babies. It hits them emotionally and in doing so, their eyes are opened to the truth. Until then, they were conned...or they conned themselves...that the conceived wasn't a person.
Art,
The reality is that both parties are now campaigning on some form of what they'll "give" voters. The recent tax free tips thing is a great example. Everyone with half a brain knows that it's bad policy, and was a non issue to those who pay with plastic anyway. It started as Trump trying to buy votes from servers, and now Harris' has doubled down. This is a great example of an appeal to emotions (on both sides) in support of a bad policy.
The problem is that the GOP sees the DFL strategy of convincing people that the government owes them things as a winning strategy, and is adopting it.
Craig,
That doesn't matter as regards the notion of "conning" the voters. While some promise simply to bribe and without any concern for whether or not the deal can be done, all campaigns promise the voters something will be done which will entice support.
As to the tax on tips thing, I don't know if it's bad policy so much as a departure from the notion that earnings/income is taxable. There was a time not so long ago when no income was taxed.
I always regarded gratuities as income, but at the same time, it also is as much a gift. The tipped are getting paid to do a job. A tip is because the customer appreciated the manner in which the waitress or bellhop did their job. For my part, if the tip isn't automatically added to the bill, I always leave a cash tip if I pay the bill with plastic. My widowed mother raised five kids by working as a waitress, so I have an understanding of what that's like. Cash means less taxation for the waitress, as they can choose whether or not to claim every penny.
Ending taxes on tips is indeed a bribe, but it's a good one given those who work at places which due to the work itself cannot pay big bucks. Harris stole the idea because she wasn't smart enough to think of it first. Trump having done so shows he does have sympathy for the lesser of the common man who've been struggling the most in the Harris/Biden economy.
The government DOES "owe" us things. We can find what things by studying the Constitution.
Marshall, what I mean is that, when you comment, you have a "Comment as" pulldown menu with three options:
1. Marshal Art (Google) -- actual name varies by user
2. Anonymous
3. Name / URL
I prefer option 3, and I've recently started using the URL field for my own amusement, but I'm pretty sure you can disable options 2 & 3, forcing everyone to post by their own names, using their own Google accounts.
---
Glenn, if I understand Mark Steyn correctly, he doesn't think the real power in government is anyone we would recognize: Obama is certainly radical enough to cause this kind of havoc, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's always been a lightweight figurehead.
---
Craig, I've read that Biden's SCOTUS proposal is vaporware, that he and the Dems intend to get credit merely for proposing the radical changes their base wants.
As is often the case, there's a very apt quote from Thomas Sowell:
"When you want to help people, you tell them the truth. When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear."
...but DFL? Democrat-Farmer-Labor Party, or does that acronym mean something else?
---
About taxes on tips, I'm quite happy to see tax cuts proposed generally, particularly when it helps the lower and middle classes for whom every dollar counts. Sowell again would note that the politicians seeking election have very different incentives than, say business owners seeking repeat business, and they often act on those incentives in corrupt ways, but I'm fine with this.
...I'm personally opposed to taxing income at all, on the notion that, if you tax something, you get less of it, and society has no good reason to disincentivize productivity.
1. Instead, let's tax consumption: let's have a national sales tax.
2. Sales taxes are notoriously regressive, so let's also allow for a tax credit or rebate to account for the cost of living, maybe at the level of some percentage of the median income.
3. But government would work better if politicians weren't beholden to the votes of people who are a drain on the treasury, so being a net taxpayer should be a requirement to vote, potentially one of several requirements that echo the old requirement of being a property owner and "having skin in the game."
a. Net tax contribution
b. Veteran status per Heinlein, possibly a short duration of service (two years?) in the military or in the civil service for conscientious objectors, and possibly with a longer commitment in the National Guard made available for those who cannot set aside X solid months of active duty
c. Gun ownership, having made the hurdles to gun ownership and casting a vote exactly equivalent
d. And possibly being married with at least one kid, including through adoption
(We can grandfather in existing voters while making these requirements for new voters, which is, I believe, how selective service was introduced.)
Dan rails against that last requirement at his blog, which may indicate that it's an idea whose time has come!
Art,
The government owes us what the constitution outlines. The notion that the government "owes" us anything beyond that smacks of vote buying. Yes Harris' stole the no tax on tips thing from Trump. There's a graphic going around which rips Trump for what his proposal would "cost", while praising Harris for the same proposal. I guess I'm old school enough that I mostly want the government to stay out of the way and allow citizens to function with as little interference as possible.
Bubba,
Up here in the people's republic, the most common term used is DFL. At this point it's a combination of habit, and less typing. (I guess it could stand for something else)
The DFL is big on proposing things (student loan forgiveness, SCOTUS reform) that they know can't be accomplished, while also knowing that their minions will given them credit for it happening even if they don't follow through. So much of what the DFL does is performative in this sense.
Given the fact that so many on the left oppose even the notion of "the truth", Sowell's quote certainly makes sense.
I have no objection to tax cuts in general, my objection is more that this seems to be more about buying votes, than concern for the low income voters. Of the two, Trump is much more likely to actually push this policy, yet I haven't heard him say anything that leads me to conclude that it's a move based on principle.
I do have concerns about employers switching wages to tips, and failure to report tip income. My primary concern stems from some conversations I'm having with my niece. We're exploring the possibility of her buying a house as a way to increase her income and net worth. If enough of her income becomes "tips" and/or is not reported, it harms her ability to qualify for a mortgage (or limits how much of a mortgage she can qualify for). Like so many of these campaign promises, there doesn't seem to be anything there except the concept. I'd want to see some detail before I draw conclusions.
Right now, it looks like Trump trying to buy votes from voters who are traditionally DFL supporters, and Harris trying to buy them back.
Marshall,
We also leave cash for the tip if we use a card, for the same reason as you. I think income tax is too high to begin with, so let THEM decide how much to claim.
Bubba,
Obama is certainly at least ONE of the many behind the lines. He's always up in front. He is easy to manipulate, as seen in his first two administrations, and he is probably being manipulated by higher ups for THIS administration as he will be with his fourth presidency!
This article seems to say that Obama is indeed running the show.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/08/the_obama_effect.html
Glenn,
While I understand your concern, I think even bad policies should be obeyed until they can be changed. In the meantime, one can take advantage of whatever tax law provides for them to reduce the possibility of paying more than the law demands.
I fully agree that Obama is a player, to say the least. Whether or not he's fully in charge seems unlikely, because I don't believe that the Dem establishment every regarded him as "the One", but simply a useful tool. He may have made himself more than that since he was first elected, and it seems so, but I don't know. What I do know is there is no benefit to the nation to allowing Dems control of either House of Congress or the White House. The value in not totally eliminating the Democrat Party is in leaving them around to contrast between what's preferred (not them) and what is an abhorrent danger to the republic (them and any who looks like them).
Craig,
Even sticking to what the Constitution mandates, any candidate who promotes that notion is "buying votes" as well by doing so. I think we're both good with being "bought" in such a manner. But if, for example, we prefer less taxation, then even this tip angle is representation of our desire for the preference. That is, it's a "bribe" by advocating what we think is proper from a Constitutional standpoint. That's not the case with all pandering by candidates.
I would also keep in mind that most, if not all jobs which allow tips to workers are such that their ability to stay in business requires such an allowance. The profit margins of restaurants are slim. Most owners seem to be on the job constantly. To keep prices low enough to attract customers, wages must also be low, and thus to get workers, tips are extremely important. The fetching Mrs. Marshal Art and I like to do breakfast at a local diner every Saturday before we run errands and such. Our average tip is usually $5-$7, depending on exactly what we choose from the menu. Call it $5 and for the hour we're taking up at our table, that's an extra $5 per hr for the waitress. If she handles four tables every hour she works, that's an extra $20 per hr added to her wages. But of course, that's not fixed in any way, as she can't control how busy the place is and how generous her customers. If she were to painstakingly track every red cent of gratuity she takes in, it might be far lower than that $20/hr. In any case, any waitress would be inclined to report a lower total to the tax man, but then be frustrated when dealing with the bank in applying for the loan. She'll need her tax statement to verify her income. A conundrum. Is she better off being able to keep all of her tips from the tax man, or having the better looking tax statement in the eventuality she might need a loan? What's the actual benefit in amount no longer given to the feds? Is it substantial? If one can survive at all being taxed, couldn't one then take the difference and save it for a bigger downstroke?
With all that said, to convince Trump to 86 the idea seems like pandering in the other direction.
As with the abortion issue, the prime directive is to get elected. The real issues are more likely to be resolved by Trump and any decent conservative who succeeds him, and resolved in such a way that results in a better economic climate with more opportunity for more people. As such, the "pandering" for votes is what I'd call better, more principled pandering which aligns most closely with both the Constitution and what best promotes the general welfare.
In any case, the issue of who's conning whom is not specifically pandering at all, but on what basis is the pandering founded? The Dems and their supporters among the electorate promote so much which isn't true, it takes a con job to advance their policies. Honest people object and don't support them because what isn't true is obviously the wrong things to promote. Here's an article from yesterday which gives a short list of things lefties must pretend are true (it comes in about half way through):
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2024/08/media_lapdogs_argue_trump_s_tax_proposals_could_make_things_worse_suggesting_that_kamala_is_the_safer_bet.html
Pandering for votes is only a problem when the pandering it pushing lies and falsehoods. That's what a con is and the left does more of it than Trump ever has.
Art, which is my point exactly. If owners can replace wages with tips to a greater extent than they do now, that will eventually hurt the servers.
The problem with both this and the abortion move is that they are going to push some voters away from Trump. We don't know how many or if they'll attract enough different voters to generate a net positive result.
If lower taxes on servers is a good things, then why stop at tips? Why not just pick certain jobs and declare those jobs to be tax free.
Once again, I don't particularly object to this policy in and of itself. I'm more objecting to this notion of using the tactics the left has used. By this logic why not "forgive" student loans?
Bubba, I have no problem with this. I agree that taxing income is not the most effective way to tax, and that it opens up the door for this sort of "vote buying". People need to have skin in the game, and under our current system too many don't.
To your point, anyone who believes that government is going to give them exactly what they've been promised is a victim of a con, it's just that they've conned themselves.
It might have been Matchstick Men, but I seem to recall that some movie about con artists made the point that the best "marks" are people who want to be conned!
"No one is blinder than he / who will not see."
Difficult to identify the truly gullible from the self-deceived. But yeah...I'd say those who want to believe what they know deep down can't be true are the best marks for the con artist.
Bubba,
There's a good book about Absacam that made the same point. Mel Weinberg was an expert at using people's greed and ignorance against them. I think it was made into a movie as well.
What this announcement brought to my mind, after watching a few hours of FoxNews reports, was something I've been trying to get Trump-haters, especially the leftist/marxist/progressive/Democrat (same things) Trump-haters, to provide for me. I've asked...almost pleaded...these people to provide which lie Trump told which has any significance.
So FoxNews convinced you that none of Trump's lies are significant even though it had to pay Domininion Voting Systems three quarters of a billion dollars because of election lies that it promoted. Sure sounds to me like you are the one being conned.
Shall we speculate whether Vinny here still trusts the New York Times despite Walter Duranty, Stephen Glass, and Jayson Blair?
Is that the same Dominion Voting Systems that lied about their voting machines being able to be hacked?
Shall we speculate whether Vinny here still trusts the New York Times despite Walter Duranty, Stephen Glass, and Jayson Blair?
If speculation about the sources I read is the best you've got, go ahead.
I find it interesting that you had to go back almost a century to dig up Walter Duranty. I wasn't familiar with his name before. I don't know why Stephen Glass should affect my opinion of the New York Times, as he wrote for the New Republic.
As far as Jason Blair goes, I was not surprised to read that the New York Times followed journalistic standards by thoroughly investigating Blair's wrongdoing as well as its own failures and reporting on both in front-page stories. https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/11/us/correcting-the-record-times-reporter-who-resigned-leaves-long-trail-of-deception.html
It should be noted, not that it ever is by lefties like Vinny, that settling a case does not equate to an admission of guilt. It's a limited surrender, in that one side pays off the other to avoid a more costly process which might still result in an unjust verdict. Oftentimes, settlements are just to be done with the issue so as to move on. It's often far easier to pay off the plaintiff than to weather the constant false attacks which would harm reputation more than the settlement itself, even assuming there's an honest judge and jury and prosecutor.
When it comes to cases involving right-leaning people or organizations, as is always the case in the vile hearts and minds of lefties like Vinny, Dan, Dan's troll and others like them, the accusation itself is proof of guilt. Should the plaintiffs and prosecutors succeed in judge shopping, the odds of a successful defense diminish, and the cost of pursuing justice may be too crippling. We've seen this in many cases brought against those who dared align themselves with Trump in any way. We've seen this in most all of the outcomes related to Jan 6 protesters. We've seen this in how parents are attacked for objecting to filth taught their kids in schools, and people of faith defending life in front of baby butcher shops.
People like Vinny and Dan don't care about truth. They care about disparaging the opposition. We like to do that, too, but we do it with actual facts and evidence. Those like Vinny and Dan satisfy themselves that an accusation was made, an allegation was floated out there and leftist hacks deny and affirm angelic qualities and behaviors. No amount of harm inflicted by their own, nor benefits bestowed as a result of opponents' actions matter.
https://amgreatness.com/2023/03/13/dominions-lawsuit-against-fox-news-is-unfounded/
This next link is from Victor Davis Hanson, suggests the claims of Dominion rigging their machines were all false or unproven (not that the trial went the distance to confirm or disprove anything) and also state only one poll showing widespread knowledge of the Hunter laptop story would have altered the election (I had seen three different surveys which suggested that). In any case, it clearly demonstrates the double standards of not just the media, but of their useful idiot sheep like Vinny and Dan.
https://amgreatness.com/2023/04/27/dominion-vs-russian-collusion-and-disinformation/
This next link describes the nature of the beast in an article speaking to the move to reverse a court ruling which is seen as necessary to "level the playing field", but points out that's not possible given the vileness of the left half of the nation. It's easier in this day and age for a conservative to be made to suffer for that which the left does more often and with greater harm inflicted:
https://amgreatness.com/2023/05/01/the-conservative-case-for-getting-sued-into-oblivion/
This last article clearly demonstrates that concerns which led to FoxNews being sued by Dominion haven't gone away and likely were legit concerns which should have seen the light of day. Those like Vinny and Dan don't care. They won't believe any evidence 2020 was stolen from Trump, because they hate Trump and the nation and prefer shit like Biden and Harris instead. They, and lefties like them, are the true enemies of the United States:
https://amgreatness.com/2023/11/13/federal-judge-in-georgia-orders-trial-for-case-against-dominion-voting-machines/
Finally, Vinny, it's frightened liars like you who need to believe that right-leaning people, Trump supporters and such, ever "need to be told" anything by anybody, as if we're just as stupid and sheep-like as you are. Apparently you need to believe such ludicrous bullshit to help you sleep soundly in your crib.
Sorry, Vinny, I thought Glass wrote for the NY Times as well, but Duranty and Blair can be seen as indicators that the Times has never grappled with its history of lying -- but never mind, it seems you're willing to overlook that for news sources you like.
For myself, I don't trust Fox News: they have more conservative commentary, but the news division has made its fair share of mistakes that aided the narratives of the left.
Post a Comment